Steven Carr

Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right.

In the very same chapter, the author of 1 Peter says Jesus was insulted and suffered.

By the same people who the author has just declared punish those who do wrong?

Surely not. Not even a Christian would be so dumb as to claim that governors punish those who do wrong, and then immediately claim that governors punished Jesus.

dog-on

Does 1 Peter actually claim that Jesus was insulted, suffered, etc. as the result of the actions of the governors?

Is he even talking about Jesus, or is he simply alluding to Isaiah?

Steven Carr

No, 1 Peter does not claim Jesus insulted, suffered as the result of the actions of the governors.

It goes without saying that in his massive book 'Jesus Remembered (or via: amazon.co.uk)', a mainstream Biblical scholar like James Dunn simply doesn't even look at the question.

It takes an awful lot of scholarship to ignore elephants in rooms.

dog-on

Maybe one just gets used to the elephants after a while and then starts to them for granted.

neilgodfrey

Poor Peter must have thought God was a bit of a jerk when those same authorities crucified him upside down.

andrewcriddle

The passage seems to be saying that governors are supposed to punish the guilty and support the innocent. That is their intended function.

I'm not sure that it is contradictory to say that governors are supposed to punish the guilty but in practice sometimes do otherwise.

Andrew Criddle

Steven Carr

But the author of 2 Peter does neither. He does not say that governors are 'supposed' to support the innocent, but that Pilate had Jesus flogged, beaten, mocked and crucified.

It is like Branch Davidians claiming the government only punishes wrong-doers, so members should submit to the authorities and then explaining how David Koresh was incinerated by the government. Branch Davidians don't write like that....

rhutchin

Paul, in Romans 13, says the same thing as Peter adding that those in authority are ordained by God. The issue is not whether those who serve God should submit to those whom God has placed in authority over them (recognizing also that they are to submit to God, so where there is a conflict between the two, they are to submit to God over the governing authorities).

The issue is the anomaly that seems to exist with the treatment of Christ by those governing authorities. The conclusion we draw is that God ordained the governing authorities to punish Christ. If this is true, then God viewed Christ as a wrongdoer.

This is the argument made by Paul in Romans and by the writer of Hebrews -- Christ was punished for the sins of others; sins that He did not commit but which were ascribed to Him.

So, Christians do claim that governors punish those who do wrong and then immediately claim that governors punished Jesus as though He had done wrong. As we read in 1 John 2, Christ was offered as a propitiation for sin.

show_no_mercy

These two statements are in contradiction.

rhutchin

I don't see a contradiction. Any chance you can explain what you have in mind?