1 Peter 5
LenskiCHAPTER V
The Elders, Examples of the Flock, v. 1–5a
1 Peter 5:1
1 When Peter admonishes the elders he does not at this late point in his epistle deal with them as a group that is comparable, to the groups mentioned in 2:18 (houseslaves); in 3:1 (wives); in 3:7 (husbands); then “all” in 3:8. These elders do not constitute such a group, for they are over the entire flock, not because of their age, but because of their office. In the persecutions that are about to come their conduct and their care of the flock would be of the highest importance. That is why Peter now singles them out.
Elders, then, among you I urge, the fellow elder and witness of the sufferings of Christ, the partaker also of the glory about to be revealed: shepherd the flock of God in your care, overseeing it not constrainedly but voluntarily in accord with God, nor yet in a way out for shameful gain but eagerly, nor yet as lording it over the allotted charges but as being examples to the flock.
The absence of the article from the noun has it refer to “such as are elders” among the readers, and they are named πρεσβύτεροι, “elders,” (presbyters) because of the dignity of their office whereas the word ἐπίσκοποι (1 Tim. 3:1, 2; Titus 1:7, but “elders” in v. 5) would give them a title that is more in conformity with their work as “overseers.” We have discussed this office in the passages cited; see also Acts 11:30. These were the pastors of the New Testament congregations, and each congregation had several who were chosen and called by the congregation; they were nearly always older, experienced men who, however, received no salary or pay. We may regard οὗν as transitional (B.-P. 945); the idea that it always deduces is unwarranted. Παρακαλῶ = to urge, to admonish or to exhort.
“I urge, the fellow elder and witness of the sufferings of Christ, the partaker also of the glory about to be revealed,” adds two appositions (each with ὁ) to the “I” of the verb. Peter describes himself by means of these, and they show that what Peter urges upon elders he exemplifies in his own life and office. John, too, calls himself “the elder” (2 John 1; 3 John 1); Papias, too, calls John “the elder” and speaks of the apostles as being elders. As apostolic elders they exercised oversight over many flocks; congregational elders exercised such oversight over the one flock that had called them. “Fellow elder” and John’s simple “elder” state that the apostolic office was the same office as that held by the congregational elders. We are right in saying that when Jesus called the Twelve as apostles as recorded in Matthew 10 he instituted the office of the ministry.
Although these two offices are the same in substance, when he is identifying himself Peter adds the detail: “witness of the sufferings of Christ,” not so much in order to indicate that there is a great difference between himself and the congregational elders, for he combines this noun and the other noun under one article, but in order in a direct way to connect him with the sufferings of Christ, which have been so repeatedly mentioned as our example in this epistle. Peter himself was an eyewitness of these sufferings. All Christians are to fellowship these sufferings (4:13, see this passage; 2:21). Peter himself saw them and is able to testify accordingly. To say that this means only that he is preaching these sufferings, that, if Peter intended to state more, he would have to write “the sufferings of Jesus” and not “of Christ,” implies stressing one word unduly and taking the force out of another, the word μαρτύς, “witness.” In 4:13, as in 1:11, Peter has written “the sufferings of Christ,” exactly as he writes here. Christ suffered, 2:21; 4:1; in fact, Peter always writes Jesus Christ or simply Christ and never simply Jesus.
The second apposition: “the partaker also of the glory about to be revealed,” places the glory of Christ beside his sufferings; it is not our sufferings and our glory as in Rom. 8:18 but Christ’s. As to Christ’s sufferings, in 4:13 Peter has already mentioned our fellowshiping them (κοινωνεῖν) and thus adds κοινωνός, one who fellowships Christ’s glory. In 1:11 Christ’s sufferings and his glory are placed side by side just as they are here. We see why Peter adds these appositions: they are to make all these elders most ready to hear what Peter urges upon them. Now, they, indeed, like Peter, may have to suffer much, but, like Peter, they, too, are to be partakers of Christ’s glory. Peter knows how to touch upon the right motives just as we see this done so vividly by Paul. Μέλλω with the infinitive is a periphrastic future; here we have the present infinitive to express durative future revelation.
1 Peter 5:2
2 The hortation follows: “shepherd the flock!” do everything that shepherding requires. We have an effective aorist imperative. Peter passes on to his fellow shepherds the order which Jesus gave him in John 21:16: ποίμαινετὰπρόβατάμου, “shepherd my sheep.” In John 21:15, 17 Jesus added βόσκε, “feed,” which some regard as having the same force as “shepherd.” The shepherding includes the feeding or pasturing (teaching the Word) but extends beyond that to the whole care on the part of a shepherd. Shepherding should not be reduced to preaching. In fine Greek style Peter inserts ἐνὑμῖν between the article and the noun, the phrase means “the flock in your care.” This is. not the case with regard to the ἐνὑμῖν occurring in verse 1, which is not placed between the article and the noun. The “you” referred to is the “you” implied in the imperative.
In John 10:14 and 21:15, etc., Christ calls the sheep “mine”; in Acts 20:28 Paul writes “the church of God.” We meet such genitives quite regularly; in 4:17 we have “the house of God.” “Flock” brings to mind all the shepherd imagery found in the Scriptures: the sheep gentle, defenseless, liable to stray, needing a shepherd, happy, peaceful under his care, pitiful when lost, scattered, etc. This is “God’s flock” that was bought at a great price (Acts 20:28), that is exceedingly precious in his sight, a great trust placed into the hands of human shepherds who are to pattern after Yahweh, the Shepherd (Ps. 23:1), and Christ, the Archshepherd (v. 4). What shepherd could have the care of any part of God’s flock and treat it carelessly! Peter’s words are sparing but overflow with tender and serious meaning.
Some texts omit ἐπισκοποῦντες, but it is singularly appropriate, especially also for introducing all the following adverbial modifiers. This participle introduces the other designation for “elders,” namely ἐπίσκοποι, “overseers” (Latin episcopus, our “bishop”). “Overseeing” is often taken to be an activity that is different from “shepherding” (ποιμάνατε) as if the latter were the preaching and the teaching and the overseeing the practical management. Some sheep (congregations) even want to do the latter themselves, the pastor is only to conduct the services. Strange sheep! Both terms have the same meaning, the figurative “shepherd the flock” is explained by the literal “overseeing.” To oversee is to shepherd, and vice versa.
Thus the main point appears in the adverbial modifiers which are negative and positive. “Not constrainedly but voluntarily,” not because they must but because they want to; not like drafted soldiers but like volunteers; not needing to be urged to every task but as running to put their hands to it, delighted to do it. Some texts, one of which is quite important, omit κατὰΘεόν as do the A. V. and Luther. We are inclined to accept the phrase as being genuine, as casting light on “voluntarily,” this being not a mere human eagerness but an eagerness “in accord with God” who by his Spirit has made the elders overseers of the church of God (Acts 20:28). Fleshly willingness will not do.
“Nor yet in a way out for shameful gain but eagerly” adds another point. We have the adjective αἰσχροκερδής in 1 Tim. 3:8 and Titus 1:7; the adverb occurs only here in Peter (G. K. 190). The idea is that any personal gain which is sought in a selfish way is shameful; the ministry is not intended for that purpose. The “for filthy lucre” of our versions is expressive, for filth is shameful. In our day shameful gain generally consists in eagerness to get a large salary and rich perquisites by prostituting the ministry to such low aims, but we should remember that in apostolic times elders were not salaried or paid. They could, however, abuse their office in a mercenary way, not necessarily by pilfering from eleemosynary funds, but by seeking and getting the trade of the church and in other ways. Πραθύμως means “eagerly,” with inner devotion.
1 Peter 5:3
3 The final contrast is not stated with adverbs but with participles used adverbially; like the preceding adverbs, it is dependent on ἐπισκοποῦντες: “nor yet as lording it over the allotted charges but (as) being examples to the flock” (objective genitive). The shepherds are not to be little popes or petty tyrants. Matt. 20:25; 2 Cor. 1:24. The use of κλῆροι as well as the fact that this is a plural have always caused some difficulty, and we thus have various suggestions as to the meaning. When it is stated that Peter might have said “nor as lording it over the flock but as examples to it,” this would be introducing a rather strange figure; it seems somewhat incongruous to speak of lording it over a flock of sheep! On the other hand, too much is put into this word when it is made to emphasize entrusted possession which is God’s (C.-K. 604).
Israel is called λαὸςἔγκληροςτῷΘεῶ, Deut. 4:20; κλῆροςτοῦΘεοῦ, Deut. 9:29, and since Israel alone was this, there was no plural for these expressions. In Acts 17:4 we have προσεκληρώθησαν: some of them were persuaded and “were allotted” to Paul and Silas. So we deem it safe to make οἱκλῆροι “the allotted charges.” The elders of each congregation had received that congregation as their allotment. The participle and the object agree: one may deem it in his power to do as he pleases with what has been allotted to him. We still have preachers who act in this way.
The opposite is: “being τύποι to the flock,” models for the flock to pattern after; as a die is struck, and its impress made by a blow, so the die makes the counterstamp and impress on the material.
Peter mentions three common sins of preachers: laziness, greed, popishness, all of which are especially objectionable in days of persecution. Peter demands voluntariness, unselfish devotion, models fit to be patterned after.
1 Peter 5:4
4 And the Archshepherd having been manifested, you will bring away the unfading crown of the glory. With a beautiful analogy Peter calls Christ “the Archshepherd,” which recalls Jesus’ own word about “the good Shepherd.” He is the supreme Shepherd of the flock, all others are undershepherds, who must learn their shepherding from him. We may translate “having appeared” (not “shall appear”) or “having been manifested,” the aorist participle denotes a single act. His Parousia or epiphany at the last day is referred to. Then these true elders and shepherds “shall bring away for themselves (future middle) the fadeless crown of the glory,” fadeless or amaranthine as in 1:4, and στέφανον refers to a chaplet that encircles the head (on this word see James 1:12). The genitive “of the (heavenly) glory” is appositional like “of the life” in James 1:12. Here, where the context speaks of neither war nor kingship but of shepherd and flock, Stephanos, like “the glory,” denotes only the highest honor and distinction.
5a) Likewise, younger men, be in subjection to elders! This rounds out what Peter has to say regarding the elders during these troublous times. While elders are not to act as lords of the congregations, younger men are not to despise the elders and act as if they amount to nothing. Peter shields the standing and the authority of the elders. Younger men are to be in proper subjection to the elders of the church. The second aorist passive imperative is like the other aorist imperative, direct and to the point.
The view that Peter only bids the younger people to be subject to older people on the mere score of age is out of the line of the thought that precedes. “Likewise” connects with the foregoing. Peter “likewise” has a word for such as are not elders and pastors, whom he calls νεώτεροι, “younger.” These are not deacons or younger church officers; there is nothing in the context that would suggest such a thought. The youths mentioned in Acts 5:6, 10 are not deacons or officials but simply young men.
The Final Exhortations to All Church Members, v. 5b–11
5b) Moreover, do you all with respect to each other apron yourselves with lowly-mindedness. The dative ἀλλήλους puzzles some interpreters. This cannot be translated as a reflexive, “gird yourselves” (R. V.). In order to construe this dative as a reciprocal pronoun one text and some versions (also A. V.) insert ὑποτασσόμενοι, and the same effect is secured by some editors and some commentators by placing a period after ἀλλήλοις.
These procedures connect the words with the preceding: all are to be subject to one another. Hence the R. V. makes no break at this point but retains v. 1–11 as one paragraph. We feel, however, that the sense calls for a division at this point. With 5a Peter concludes what he has to say as pertaining to the elders. With πάντες he begins a new paragraph which pertains to “all.” There is then no difficulty regarding the dative ἀλλήλοις.
It is placed emphatically forward, exactly where it belongs after Peter has said something about the “elders.” It is the dative of relation: “All of you in your relation to each other tie on the apron of lowly-mindedness!”
Some also have difficulty with ἐπκομβώσασθε. Does this word mean to tie on a girdle or to tie on an apron or to fasten on a stately robe? Some commentaries offer long discussions regarding this verb. When all is said, and especially when we note the object to be tied on, namely “lowly-mindedness,” we think of a slave’s apron that is tied on with its attached strings; and it may even be possible that Peter had in mind that act of Jesus’ in the upper room when he tied on an apron and washed the disciples’ feet and performed this slave’s service to which none of them would stoop. Remember, too, how Peter behaved on that occasion. Then he had an example of the lowly-mindedness which he now urges upon all.
The article used with ταπεινοφροσύνη=“the due lowly-mindedness.” The word has the active sense of minding something, namely the superiority of others and our own unworthiness, minding this so that we act accordingly. M.-M. cannot list this noun; it does not appear in the Old Testament or in secular Greek, in Josephus and in Epictetus it is used only in the base sense which the adjective ταπεινός has: “pusillanimity,” which is a fault and not a virtue. The pagan and secular idea of manhood is strong self-assertion, imposing one’s will on all others. When anyone bowed to others, it was done only under compulsion and hence was ignominious. The pagan mind did not have the idea of ethical humility; it lacked the spiritual soil for such a concept. Christ and his ethics were required to make lowly-mindedness a great Christian virtue. Matt. 18:1–3; 20:25–28; the word occurs in Phil. 2:3; Col. 3:12.
When he states the reason for tying on due lowly-mindedness Peter adopts some words from Prov. 3:34. We have already seen that Peter does not always quote but in some cases only alludes and in others just adopts. Here he follows the LXX and simply changes Κύριος into ὁΘεός. James 4:6 quotes this passage from Proverbs and makes the same change. The Hebrew of this passage reads: “Surely, he scorneth the scorners, but he giveth grace unto the lowly.” Peter writes: because God resists haughty ones, but gives grace to lowly ones.
The word ταπεινοί, “lowly ones,” makes this passage match “lowly-mindedness.” God’s χάρις or “favor” with all the blessings that flow from it is intended for “lowly ones,” is a glorious gift from God to them. Grace is always a gift, one that God loves to bestow. The lowly do not pretend to lowliness; they know all their sinfulness and weakness. Conscious of this, they are never “haughty.” The fact that haughty ones are scorners (Hebrew) is only the manifestation of their overweaning pride. God must scorn or resist their wicked arrogance. See Luke 1:52; 18:14 where Jesus expresses the same thought in other words. The haughty would scorn grace and its gifts; the lowly alone are eager to accept grace.
1 Peter 5:6
6 Accordingly, be lowly under the mighty hand of God in order that he may exalt you in due season, etc. Ταπεινώθητε repeats the idea of ταπεινοῖς and of ταπεινοφροσύνην referred to in v. 5 and should be translated so as to make this evident: “be lowly,” the effective aorist imperative. What folly to act haughtily “under the mighty hand of God,” κραταιά, actively “mighty!” Shall this mighty hand be turned against us? The lowly it will “exalt” with its mighty power. See Matt. 23:12; Luke 14:11. That is the crowning grace that will be given to them. “In due season” implies that God will let the lowly remain in their lowly condition here on earth; the time for their exaltation is the last day, the day of the manifestation of Christ; then they shall receive the crown of the glory (v. 4). Who are we to be thus exalted and crowned? The very realization of what is here promised bows us under God’s mighty hand in deepest lowliness.
1 Peter 5:7
7 But what about the time of our lowliness while we wait for our final exaltation? Must we just worry along under the oppression of the wicked world? Peter answers with a participial clause, participial because this is only a subordinate consideration: all your worry casting upon him because he is caring for you, literally: “there is care for him (impersonal verb) concerning you.” Μὲρμινα = worry or anxiety as when one does not know whether to do this or to do that, “distraction.” We have the verb in Luke 10:41: Martha was distracted by all she wanted to do, not knowing to what to turn her hand and in desperation going to Jesus to have him order Mary to help her.
Everything of this kind we are to throw upon God because he is caring for us, attending to us and to all our needs. This is an allusion to Ps. 55:22: “Cast thy burden upon the Lord, and he shall sustain thee.” Compare Ps. 37:5; also Luke 12:11, 12.
1 Peter 5:8
8 Two incisive aorist imperatives follow: Be sober! Watch! This is the same spiritual soberness that was mentioned in 1:13 and 4:7 (2 Tim. 4:5), a balance in disposition, thought, and action, never to be flighty, carried away by notions of our own or of others. Next, “watch,” be wide awake, not dull and sleepy. The connotation of γαηορεῖν is that of being aroused to watch while ἀγρυπνεῖν connotes merely the absence of sleep.
Without a connective Peter states what certainly ought to keep every one of us sober and wide awake: Your opponent, (the) devil, as a lion roaring walks around seeking to swallow someone. Ἀντίδικος; is the word for an opponent in a court before a judge (Luke 18:3); but here, where we have the imagery of a raging lion, it is used in the generalized sense of opponent or adversary. Because διάβολος has no article, some think that it cannot be an apposition, and that ἀντίδικος is an adjective. But the position of ὑμῶν obviates this; “devil” is minus the article because it is regarded as a proper noun. This is a mere point of grammar that does not affect the sense. “As” is not “like” although “a lion roaring” is figurative; the devil is such a lion.
A good deal is suggested by the term “roaring.” This lion is not silent, stealthily prowling around; he is letting his frightful roar sound forth. At this very time, under Nero, the roar of frightful persecution was being heard by the poor Christian victims. In October of the year 64 the storm broke. Peter himself became a victim of it. See the introduction for the dangerous situation that called forth this letter. Not always does the devil roar thus although when some preach on this text they often state this. Peter does not say what James 4:7b states. Walking about, roaring, “seeking to swallow someone,” picture the danger.
Editors and grammarians are at variance with each other as to whether this is an indirect question with τίνα, which should have the subjunctive (possibly the (infinitive): “whom he may devour”; or the indefinite pronoun: “to devour someone.” This, too, has no effect on the meaning. Καταπιεῖν = to drink down and not to eat up or “devour.” The suggestion is that of drinking the victim’s blood. Did Peter think of martyrs in the arena who were driven out from the dungeons to face actual lions? He must have thought at least of bloody death.
1 Peter 5:9
9 He continues: whom stand against, firm as regards the faith, knowing that the same kinds of sufferings are being executed upon your brotherhood in the world. Στερεοί = firm, hard, unbending, and the dative expresses relation: “as regards the faith”; it is not locative “in the faith” (R. 523). Τῇπίστει is “the faith,” objective faith; “firm as regards the faith,” not denying the doctrine of Christianity for fear of a martyr’s death. This is not the fides qua creditur but quae creditur. The subjective believing is expressed by the adjective “firm.” This standing against the devil means refusal to deny Christ under threat of death. In James 4:7 standing against the devil is resisting his assaults when he comes with temptations; hence also when he is withstood he flees as one defeated. Peter is speaking of dying for the faith.
Therefore he points them to others who are meeting this same ordeal: “knowing that the same kinds of sufferings are being executed upon your brotherhood in the world.” The fact that τὰαὑτά has a genitive is exceptional. The sense is not: “the same sufferings” but “the same kinds of sufferings” (R. 505; 687), the same things in the way of sufferings. We regard the present infinitive as a passive: sind der Bruederschaft auferlegt, “are executed upon the brotherhood.” Others prefer to regard it as the middle. The dative is due to ἐπί in the infinitive or is again a dative of relation. The abstract “brotherhood” is more exact than “brethren” would be. The whole body as such is affected although only some of its members suffer, and a certain number are martyred (1 Cor. 12:26). “In the world” means here among men where suffering is our lot as it was that of Christ. Recall all that Peter has said regarding “the sufferings.” He promises no cessation of these but only to. τὰαὑτά, the same sort of things.
1 Peter 5:10
10 Δέ always adds something that is different; here a great promise is added to the admonition stated in v. 9. Moreover, the God of all grace, the One who called you unto his eternal glory in connection with Christ after having suffered a little while, will himself equip, firm, strengthen (you). To him the might for the eons of the eons! Amen. “The God of all grace,” with its qualitative genitive, characterizes God as the source of all grace (compare χάρις in v. 5), all divine favor for us who do not deserve it. Compare 2 Cor. 1:3, “the God of all consolation.” The apposition: “the One who called’you unto his eternal glory in connection with Christ,” points back to what the God of all grace has already done in grace, namely “called you” effectively. Εἰς states “to” what, and ἐν “in connection with” whom.
This is the gospel call; in the epistles καλεῖν always designates the successful gospel call. It assures us of God’s eternal glory in heaven “after having suffered a little while.” The aorist παθόντας is made clear by ὀλίγον; it is in contrast with αἰώνιον and is an accusative participle because of the accusative ὑμᾶς. We are called unto this glory as our final goal (“the crown of the glory,” v. 4); it is not yet ours so that we suffer “a little while” preceding it. The aorist participle should not be construed with the following future tenses so that Peter would appear to say that after his readers have suffered the God of grace will equip, firm, strengthen them. To be so equipped, etc., is needed now and not after all suffering is over with. God’s equipping will be done for this little while of suffering.
Only “a little while” (ἀλίγον sc. χρόνον) endures the suffering, but the glory is “eternal.” This is comfort. The future tenses are not optatives of wish, A. V., but indicate assurance. They are not merely futuristic: “shall equip,” etc., but voluntative: “will equip.” Αὑτός is emphatic: he, this God of grace, this One who has called you, etc., he will do this for you. A few texts insert θεμελιώσει, “will found,” so that we have four verbs (A. V., “will settle you”). Καταρτίσει (perfective κατά plus ἀρτιζω, from which we have “artisan”) means that God will equip, will outfit us with all that we need for this little while of suffering; στηρίξει (στερεοί in v. 9) that he will firm us, make us unyielding, so that we will hold to “the faith” even unto death; σθενώσει that he will give us strength. If we were alone we could not stand; with this help from God we can do so.
1 Peter 5:11
11 Peter closes this assurance with a brief doxology, compare 4:11. It is exclamatory and needs no copula. Peter does not use a relative “to whom” but αὑτῷ, which matches the preceding αὑτός, “to him.” Since all the verbs denote acts of might, Peter names only κράτος, “might,” and not also “glory” as he does in 4:11. Note the “mighty” hand of God in v. 6. He has “his eternal glory” in v. 10. “For the eons,” etc., has the same force it had in 4:11. “To him the might” is confession and acknowledgment: it is, indeed, his. “Amen” is used as it was in 4:11.
Conclusion, v. 12–14
1 Peter 5:12
12 By means of Silvanus, the faithful brother, to you have I written, as I reckon, in brevity, urging and testifying that this is God’s genuine grace—in which stand! Διά indicates that Silvanus is the means or the messenger for conveying this letter ὑμῖν, “to you.” But we may ask why ὑμῖν is placed next to this διά phrase and given so prominent a position. The answer is that Peter wants “through Silvanus to you” close together in order in this way to indicate that Silvanus is the bearer of the letter “to you.” The combination of the phrase and the dative “to you” is made even more marked by the placing of the apposition τοῦπιστοῦἀδελφοῦ after ὑμῖν, embedding, as it were, the pronoun in the genitives.
That this peculiar position of “to you” should mean: “I have left the composition of this letter to Silvanus and did not really write it myself,” is an assumption that stresses the preposition alone while it ignores the dative. From the very beginning and throughout the letter the readers are left under the impression that Peter alone is the writer that is addressing them. Are they now at the very end of the epistle suddenly to learn that that impression has been false, that not Peter, “apostle of Jesus Christ” (1:1), has been speaking but only Peter’s mouthpiece Silvanus; that Peter himself felt incompetent to address them at firsthand in words of his own composition? That supposition is baseless, to say nothing of the way in which it would be conveyed. The letter brings no salutation from Silvanus while it does convey one from Mark. How can that be done if this διά makes Silvanus the composer instead of the bearer of this letter? See still further in the introduction.
The fact that Peter calls Silvanus “the faithful brother” differs in no way from Paul’s fraternal praise of his assistants, especially when he sends them on a mission as Peter here sends Silvanus with this letter. It is not necessary to speculate as to why “the faithful brother” is added. Silvanus was a faithful brother; Peter would not have had him in his company if he were not.
The difference of opinion regarding this apposition becomes extreme when Peter is thought to say: “The faithful brother as I account him” (R. V.; the A. V. has a similar translation). But Peter would scarcely thus qualify and reduce the statement that Silvanus is a faithful brother. “I have written, as I reckon, in brevity” is to be construed together. Peter thinks that his letter is rather short. Ἔγραψα is the ordinary epistolary aorist (R. 846). Διʼ ὀλίγων uses the preposition διά in the sense of manner, which is an easy transition from the idea of means (R. 583); literally, “by means of few words” (supply λόγων)=“in brevity.” The phrase is not an excuse as though the readers may think the words rather many; they state that Peter purposely intended to write but briefly as the readers may also see.
The participles add Peter’s intent: “urging and testifying (ἐπί, on top of the urging) that this is God’s genuine grace,” all this that he does and will do for us (v. 10). Although it means suffering for a little while, God’s grace supports us, and glory awaits us. Yes, this is genuine grace for us poor sinners. Peter urges this conviction and his own testimony to this fact upon his readers.
“In which stand!” This final imperative στῆτε is an effective aorist. There is no reason to regard it as unusual because it follows a relative, for in v. 9 Peter has the same construction. Some texts have the indicative ἑστήκατε. (perfect in the present sense: “in which you stand”), apparently in order to have the more usual construction with the relative.
1 Peter 5:13
13 There salutes you the one elect with you in Babylon, also Mark, my son. Ἡσυνεκλεκτή is feminine because it refers to ἐκκλησία, the church in Babylon, i. e., the entire churchy which is jointly elect with all the readers of this letter. The word “elect” harks back to 1:1: the readers are the elect foreigners in five Roman provinces; the church from which Peter writes and whose salutation he sends is “in Babylon.” Is this Babylon, the city on the Euphrates, or is “Babylon” an allegorical, symbolical designation for Rome, the capital of the world? Zahn, Introduction, II, 158, etc., 163, etc., traces the view that Rome is referred to back to the second century; not until the Middle Ages did some scholars think that Peter at one time went to Babylon on the Euphrates, and they sought to prove their opinion by a reference to our passage. But Babylon had disappeared already at Peter’s time; this city no longer existed.
This is really not a question that concerns Peter alone. We ask further: “Was there ever a time during the days of the apostles when these three men, Peter, Silvanus, and Mark, were together in the far east, in what was once Babylon or in that territory?” No commentator has succeeded in making this view plausible. Some commentators place Peter there; but what about the other two men?
Again, the question we have to face is this: “Shall we abandon all the reliable data we possess and all that the ancient tradition reports and operate with a blank as far as the records and the traditions go and have nothing to go on save this phrase in this epistle and set up the hypothesis that Peter wrote this letter from Babylon with Silvanus and Mark at his side?” Add the supposition that these men must then have heard in far-off Babylon about the Christians in Pontus, etc., (1:1) and about the imminence of persecution for them, etc. Finally, how could Peter write to churches that belonged to Paul’s field? When these questions are convincingly answered, we shall consider the literal Babylon, but not before that has been done.
It is objected that not until the time when John’s Revelation was written is Rome ever termed “Babylon.” She is given that name here by Peter. In Revelation Babylon does not refer to Rome but is used symbolically for the whole world’s anti-Christian capital. But why did Peter not say outright “in Rome”? The figurative “Babylon” is used because of the personification “the one elect with you” and because of the figurative term “my son” as a designation for Mark. “Babylon” emphasizes the paganism of Rome, the great city of the world, all her pagan idolatry and corruption, and also—quite important—all her hostility to God’s elect. Those living in this Babylon will be the first to suffer, in fact, it seems that their suffering had already begun when Peter writes. This salutation has the sound of: Morituri salutamus!
Since no salutation from Silvanus is added, this implies that he will deliver the letter. Since Mark is the only other person mentioned, we conclude that Peter had only Mark and Silvanus with him at this time. “My son” (υἱός) reminds us of Paul’s τέκνον as a designation for Timothy, his “child.” Mark, it would seem, had been converted by Peter as Timothy had been by Paul. As far as locating Mark in eastern Babylon is concerned, this is difficult to establish. There is a great gap also in his life, but who will synchronize a stay in Babylon with the known data of the life of either Mark or Silvanus?
1 Peter 5:14
14 Salute one another with a kiss of love! See at length on Rom. 16:16a. When this sentence is read to the congregation, each person addressed is to act as a proxy for Peter and is to bestow a kiss on another so that it would seem as though each received the salutation of a kiss from Peter himself. In Rom. 16:16; 1 Cor. 16:20; 2 Cor. 13:12; 1 Thess. 5:26, Paul uses “holy kiss.” Peter writes kiss “of love” even as he has addressed his readers as “beloved.” Peter’s love salutes every Christian who hears this letter read.
Peace to you all that (are) in connection with Christ! This is the same “peace” that was mentioned in 1:2, the condition when all is well with us in our relation to God, the peace that is established by grace. The readers may suffer severely, but God’s peace rests upon them. ΤοῖςἐνΧριστῷ does not distinguish one group from another group which is not “in connection with Christ.” The article with the phrase is an apposition to ὑμῖνπᾶσι: “to you all, those in connection with Christ.” Faith connects all of them with Christ.
Soli Deo Gloria
B.-P. Griechisch-Deutsches Woerterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments, etc., von D. Walter Bauer, zweite, etc., Auflage zu Erwin Preuschens Vollstaendigem Griechisch-Deutschem Handwoerterbuch, etc.
G. Theologisches Woerterbuch zum Neuen Testament, herausgegeben von Gerhard Kittel.
C.-K. Biblisch-theologisches Woerterbuch der Neutestamentlichen Graezitaet von Dr. Hermann Cremer, zehnte, etc., Auflage, herausgegeben von D. Dr. Julius Koegel.
M.-M The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, Illustrated from the Papyri and other Nonliterary Sources, by James Hope Moulton and George Milligan.
R. A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, by A. T. Robertson, fourth edition.