The whole verse is literally “into an inheritance, imperishable, undefiled and permanent, having been kept in heaven for you.” The preposition “into” can either go back to hope (as in Good News Translation), or to new life, or to the resurrection of Jesus Christ (see previous discussion). Most commentaries understand the preposition here as indicating result. If “inheritance” is the result of hope, then one can say “Because we have a living hope, then we can look forward….” If, however, “inheritance” is the result of the new life, then one can say, “Because we have new life, then we can look forward….” Although most commentaries favor the former of these interpretations, a number of modern translations, as we have seen, reflect the latter, either entirely or in a modified sense.

It may not be possible to reproduce the figurative language of we look forward to possessing. The equivalent of this in a number of languages is merely a future, for example, “we will possess.” Sometimes an equivalent may be “we know that we will possess.”

The word “inheritance” is a favorite image to describe God’s gift of salvation to those who trust in him (for example, Gal 4.7; Rom 8.17). This usage has its Old Testament background. The Jews normally talk of the land of Canaan as their “inheritance” from God, since God has promised it to them. Later on, the idea of “inheritance” was spiritualized, with emphasis put not so much on the land itself, but on God’s faithfulness to his promises, together with the rich blessings that he gives (for example, Psa 16.5; 73.26; Col 3.24; 1 Cor 6.9; Heb 1.14; etc.). Since all of these elements are implicit in the use of this term, Good News Translation has restructured the verse to make explicit all these implicit elements. A literal translation would of course give rise to various difficulties arising out of the cultural context of the receptor language. Very often, for instance, “inheritance” is used to describe what someone leaves behind after his death. Since God is the source of this inheritance, then it would logically follow that he died. In most cases, therefore, a restructuring of the metaphor, as Good News Bible has done, is the best way to bring out the meaning of the verse and to avoid misunderstandings.

There may be some confusion in a literal translation of that God keeps for his people, since this might suggest something that God keeps away from his people, that is to say, God protects it all in heaven for his own good and not for other people. It may therefore be better to speak of the rich blessings that God keeps for his people as “the rich blessings which God has promised his people.” The clause that God keeps for his people is an expansion of what occurs in Greek simply as “kept in heaven for you.” The concept of “keeping” is reflected in the following clause, which begins the second sentence of verse 4, namely, He keeps them for you in heaven. It may be important, however, to render He keeps them for you in heaven as “he keeps them safe for you in heaven.”

To make clear that this inheritance should not be understood as material possession, Peter then proceeds to describe them negatively, by using three adjectives. They cannot decay is literally “imperishable” (as in Revised Standard Version; compare Jerusalem Bible “can never be spoilt”; Barclay “immortal”; Knox “incorruptible”). Cannot spoil is literally “undefiled”; in religious language, it has the sense of “pure.” The reference is not to ceremonial defilement, but to the defilement of anything evil, both spiritual and ethical. They cannot fade away is literally “unfading,” which in Greek secular literature is used to describe a flower, the beauty of which never fades. The meaning of all three has been expressed clearly by the paraphrase of one scholar: “untouched by death, unstained by evil, unimpaired by time” (Beare, pages 83-84).

The three expressions which characterize the “inheritance” are not related in the Greek text to the place in heaven, as is suggested by Good News Translation where they cannot decay or spoil or fade away. The location may be implied in the Greek text, but the descriptive phrases are primarily qualifiers of the inheritance and should not be employed in such a way as to suggest that only in heaven the inheritance cannot decay or spoil or fade away.

The expression cannot decay may be expressed in some languages simply as “will not rot” and cannot … spoil may be expressed as “cannot become bad” or “… impure.” Cannot … fade away must often be expressed simply as “cannot disappear” or “will not disappear.”

The last clause in the Greek text “kept in heaven for you” has been transformed by the Good News Translation into an active construction, with God as the agent, and transferred to the beginning of the sentence, indicating the location of the inheritance. As for the word “kept,” two things should be noted. First of all, it denotes the idea that God is watching over the inheritance, and keeping it safe for his people. Some other ways of expressing this idea are “reserved” in heaven (Phillips, Knox “stored up for you in heaven”). Secondly, the word in the Greek is a perfect participle, indicating that the inheritance is a fact that now exists. The Good News Translation captures this idea by using the present tense (compare Barclay “he is keeping”). The word for heaven is plural, and some translations have kept this form (for example, Jerusalem Bible “in the heavens”), however, most commentators agree that the plural has no particular significance here, but simply reflects the Hebrew way of speaking of heaven. Accordingly, most translations simply use the singular form, in accordance with modern language usage.

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The First Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The verse starts with “therefore” (Revised Standard Version), connecting this section with the preceding one, particularly 3.18. Suffered recalls 3.18a, and some manuscripts have tried to assimilate 3.18 more closely to this verse by adding “for you” or “for us” (Revised Standard Version margin; compare Moffatt “suffered for us”; Phillips “suffer physically for you”), but clearly these are scribal additions (see Metzger Textual Commentary 649).

Christ’s suffering is described as “in the flesh” (Revised Standard Version), which recalls 3.18b and pinpoints Christ’s suffering as physical (Good News Translation, Phillips), bodily (Barclay, New English Bible), or in a wider sense, his suffering as a human being (Knox “Christ’s mortal nature”; compare Jerusalem Bible “Christ suffered in this life”). This may be a reference to Jesus’ suffering during his earthly life (compare Barclay, Jerusalem Bible), but since it is related to 3.18, it is more probable that it refers to one aspect of his suffering, namely, his death on the cross (compare Knox “crucified”). The use of the word “suffered” here makes a closer connection between the experience of Christ and the sufferings of the Christians.

As already noted in the discussion of the term physically in 3.18, there may be complications involved in speaking of “Christ’s suffering physically.” It is often possible to say “Christ suffered in his body,” but this may seem quite a redundant expression, since how else could a person suffer. Therefore, in some languages it may be preferable to simply say “since Christ suffered” or “since Christ suffered when he was on earth.” However, in view of the fact that this suffering is probably related to the act of atonement, one may translate “since Christ suffered when he died on the cross” or simply “since Christ suffered on the cross.”

At any rate, the suffering of Christ is now made a reason for further ethical admonitions. Christians are exhorted, first of all, to strengthen themselves with the thinking that he had. Strengthen yourselves is literally “arm yourselves” (Revised Standard Version), a military metaphor which is similar to other military metaphors in the New Testament (for example, Rom 6.13; 13.12; 2 Cor 6.7; 10.4; Eph 6.11-17; compare Isa 59.17, 18). To arm oneself is to equip oneself with the necessary tools in order to be ready for something or to achieve a particular purpose.

You too must strengthen yourselves is not a reference to an increase in mere physical strength. The admonition here is more in line with the concept of “becoming prepared.” Therefore, it may be more appropriate to translate you too must strengthen yourselves as “you too must become prepared to.”

But what must the Christians be prepared to do? In other words, what does “with the same thought” (Revised Standard Version) refer to? To answer this question, it is necessary to look at the next half of the verse, especially the word that connects the two parts together. The Greek word in question can be translated either as because (Good News Translation, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy, Barclay “for”) or as “that” (Moffatt; compare Jerusalem Bible). Taking the Greek word as because, “the same thought” must necessarily refer back to the idea of Christ suffering physically; what the author is saying then is that since Christ suffered physically, Christians must also be disposed and ready to suffer physically (Biblia Dios Habla Hoy; compare New English Bible, Phillips, Barclay). If, on the other hand, the Greek word is taken in the sense of “that,” then “the same thought” must necessarily refer forward; in other words, the content of the second half of the verse is what the Christians are encouraged to bear in mind and appropriate for themselves. The former of these two alternatives fits the context much better, since the suffering of Christ is being singled out as a model, a pattern, an example for the Christians to follow.

With the same way of thinking may be related to the preceding expression of strengthen yourselves or “become prepared to” as “strengthen yourselves by thinking the same way that Christ did” or “prepare yourselves to think in the same way that Christ did.” If one interprets the final clause of verse 1 as being the content of thinking, a less likely interpretation, then one may render the last part of verse 1 as “prepare yourselves to realize that whoever suffers physically is no longer….”

The last part of the verse (whoever … with sin) is probably a proverbial saying, similar to Romans 6.7: “When a person dies he is set free from the power of sin” (Good News Bible). Suffers physically is the same expression used at the beginning of this verse, but as we shall see later, it is possible that it has a different meaning here. Is no longer involved with sin is literally “has ceased from sin” and may convey three meanings: (1) In a general way, he has no further connection with sin. (2) Taking the verb as middle, the expression conveys an urgent resolve and active determination to stop sinning. (3) Taking the verb with a passive sense, the expression may have the meaning of having been delivered from the power of sin. Against this third interpretation is that sin in this letter primarily refers to an act, and not to a state or to a power which controls people and leads them to do wrong (compare 2.22, 24; 3.18).

The whole proverbial saying itself may be interpreted in different ways.
(a) The sense may be that suffering for what is right purifies the sufferer from sin, since it eradicates the desire or the tendency to commit sin.
(b) Suffering may refer to martyrdom, and martyrdom atones for sin. This interpretation faces two difficulties: first, it is not at all clear that suffering here refers to martyrdom, and secondly, it is difficult to get the meaning of “atoning for sins” from the expression “has ceased from sin.”
(c) The whole saying may refer to Christ instead of to the Christian. This involves taking the Greek word as “that” (see above) instead of “because.” Furthermore, this would mean taking “cease from sin” with the passive sense, that is, freed from the power of sin (see above), since to take it in any other way would give the idea that Christ himself committed sin, a notion which is already denied in the letter (see 2.22; 3.18).
(d) The whole proverbial saying may have reference to the Christian’s experience in baptism. “Suffering” is used metaphorically, referring to the Christian’s experience of “dying” with Christ at baptism, an event which is interpreted negatively as no longer having anything to do with sin, and positively as beginning to live according to God’s will (verse 2). Furthermore, “in the flesh” here (compare Revised Standard Version) must also be taken in another sense, not physically or bodily, but in the sense of “sinful nature,” the unregenerated self, or the person before he is converted and baptized. This self is the one that experiences “death” at baptism. Many scholars hold to this fourth alternative. However, it is not at all certain that “suffered” is used here in a metaphorical sense. It is more natural to take “suffered” and “in the flesh” with the same meaning they had at the beginning of the verse, and it is for this reason that the first of these four alternatives seems to be closest to what the author is trying to say.

The proverbial saying then means that anyone who in this life suffers physically has turned his back on sin, and no longer has any desire to keep on sinning.

Whoever suffers physically may be restructured as a conditional clause, for example, “if anyone suffers physically” or “… suffers in his body” or “if anyone’s body suffers.”

It may be very difficult to employ such a highly generic expression as is no longer involved with sin, and therefore one may need to indicate that there is no longer a tendency to sin or no longer a desire to keep on sinning, for example, “whoever suffers in his body doesn’t want to keep on sinning” or, expressed somewhat more figuratively, “… has said no to sinning” or “… has turned away from sinning.”

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The First Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

In the Greek, the conditional clause is stated first before the exhortation (see Revised Standard Version), but the Good News Translation and most modern translations have reversed the order, to conform to better English style.

Instead translates “but,” which is a very strong adversative in the Greek (compare Biblia Dios Habla Hoy “on the contrary”). The model of obedience must not be their former way of life, but the very character of God himself. The strong adversative conjunction in Greek may be expressed as “on the contrary” or “instead of letting your desires shape your life.”

Be holy in all that you do is literally “be holy in every conduct,” which includes all actions, both in the personal and social spheres. The concept of “holiness” is difficult both to analyze and to translate. The following elements may be mentioned as included in the concept: (1) To be holy is to be separated from worldly relations and to be consecrated and dedicated to God. In this sense, “holiness” is primarily a relationship term: people are holy because they are chosen by God to be his people, and they now belong to him. (2) Holiness may also be understood in an ethical sense: to be holy is to be conscious of belonging to God and to act out this relationship in obedience to God’s will. A very important aspect of this ethical understanding of holiness is moral integrity, which includes hatred for everything evil and sinful, and complete dedication to everything that is good and acceptable to God. (3) Holiness, when applied to God, emphasizes God’s moral perfection, his perfect goodness, and consequently his dislike of anything evil. It is this character of God which becomes the basis for the “holiness” of Christians, who are separated from sin and evil, and are instead consecrated to God, in order to do God’s will and be obedient to him.

In the light of the above analysis, it is probably much better to understand “holiness” ethically. To be “holy in every conduct” is to hate evil, to refrain from every evil deed, and to obey God’s will in everything.

One of the most difficult terms to translate adequately is holy. Some translators have endeavored to use a term which means simply “separated,” but it is usually necessary to indicate from what one has been separated or to what one has been separated. One might, for example, translate be holy in all that you do as “in everything that you do, separate yourself from that which is evil” or “… that which is sinful.” In certain contexts one may render holy as “separated for God” or “dedicated to God,” but in this context it would be difficult to employ such an expression since the relationship between holy in the first part of verse 15 and holy in the second part would be difficult to maintain, for one could not speak of God as being “separated for himself.” It is unfortunate that in a number of languages one can only speak of “holy” from a negative standpoint, that is to say, “removed from evil.”

Just as God who called you is holy is literally “according to the holiness of the one who called you.” Called has reference probably to the time that the readers of the letter were converted to Christianity. In the New Testament, the role of calling people to believe in Christ and to become members of the Christian community is assigned primarily to God, and the Good News Translation has made this information explicit. For holy, see discussion above.

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The First Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

You were like sheep that had lost their way quotes Isaiah 53.6, and reminds the readers of their former state before they became Christians (compare 2.10), while you have been brought back signifies their present state as believers in Christ. The verb here is an aorist passive, but with a perfect tense, so that while most translations translate it as active (New English Bible “you have turned”; Jerusalem Bible “you have come back”; Phillips “You have returned”), the Good News Translation has translated it accurately. The implicit actor here is God, and this could be indicated in an expression like “God has brought you back.”

It may be meaningless to speak of “sheep that have lost their way,” since in some languages one cannot speak of “losing a road” or “losing a path.” One can, however, almost always say “had gone on the wrong path” or “had traveled the wrong road.”

The Shepherd and Keeper of your souls refers to Christ. His description as Shepherd fits the metaphor of the lost sheep. Keeper translates a Greek word episkopos, from which is derived the English word “bishop.” It is used here, however, not in its technical, ecclesiastical sense, denoting a high official in church government, but in the sense of “guardian,” that is, one who watches over and protects. Taken this way, it is a further description of Shepherd (compare Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch “the shepherd under whose protection you stand”). Soul, as in 1.9, 22, stands for the whole person (compare Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch).

Brought back to follow is literally “you have been returned upon.” The meaning that is intended is not at all clear from the text, but two possibilities may be suggested: (1) “brought back to the care of,” and (2) as in the Good News Translation, brought back to follow.

There may be a kind of cultural problem involved in the expression to follow the Shepherd, since in so many parts of the world sheep do not follow the shepherd but are driven by the shepherd. However, in the Middle East sheep do follow shepherds, and it may therefore be relevant to have a note at this point indicating that fact.

The reference of the phrases the Shepherd and Keeper of your souls may not be entirely clear in some languages. It may therefore be important to translate to follow the Shepherd as “to follow the one who cares for you as a shepherd cares for his sheep,” and keeper of your souls may be rendered as “one who watches over you” or “one who watches to protect you.”

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The First Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The section starts with My dear friends, for which see 2.11. This address is quite fitting here for three reasons: (1) it is a natural address after the doxology in verse 11; (2) it serves to introduce a new section; and (3) it reaffirms the close relationship between the writer and his readers at a point when the writer is about to discuss once again the problem of suffering.

The Greek term translated by the phrase My dear friends is literally “beloved ones” or “loved ones,” and there may be several different expressions which are equivalent in other languages, for example, “dear ones” or “you whom I love” or “you, my cherished friends.”

The readers are first of all exhorted not to be surprised at what is happening to them. The same word is used in 4.4. It could be that there was an intensification of persecution, which was unexpected by the Christians, in which case surprised here could mean “shocked” (Beare) or “alarmed” (Phillips). But perhaps the persecution being alluded to is already part of the daily experience of the Christians, in which case surprised should be taken more to mean “bewildered” (New English Bible; compare Jerusalem Bible “you must not think it unaccountable…”).

The relationship between the verb surprised and the painful test you are suffering is one of cause and effect. The relationship may be expressed in some languages as “do not let the painful test you are suffering surprise you” or “do not be surprised because of the painful test you are suffering.”

The painful test you are suffering translates a Greek clause which can literally be rendered as “the burning which comes to you to be a test to you” (compare Revised Standard Version). The Good News Translation has combined “burning” with “test” and has come out with a non-metaphorical translation painful test. Furthermore, “which comes to you” has been translated more concretely as you are suffering.

For the purposes of analysis, however, we have to use the literal translation. “Burning” translates an expression which is used in many senses both in the Bible and in extrabiblical literature. Among these meanings are (1) exposure to fire (for example, cooking; compare Prov 21.12); (2) destruction by fire (compare Rev 18.9, 18); (3) testing or purification of metals by fire (compare Prov 27.21). In view of 1.6, 7, this third sense seems to be primary here; the sufferings of the Christians are described metaphorically as similar to the way metals, particularly gold, are heated in order to be purified of their impurities. To describe the sufferings in this manner also fits the eschatological tone of the letter, since the end of the world is very frequently described in terms of the presence of ferocious burning (compare 1.7; 1 Cor 3.13; Rev 3.18). It is probably because of this reason that many translations have retained the metaphor of “fire” or “burning” here (for example, Revised Standard Version “fiery ordeal”; New American Bible “trial by fire”; Jerusalem Bible “tested by fire”; Barclay “Ordeal by fire”). The Good News Translation, however, has opted for a non-metaphorical translation; furthermore, since the meaning of the metaphor is primarily that of testing, the Good News Translation has assimilated the phrase “to be a test to you” into the metaphor itself, and has come up with the non-metaphorical translation painful test. (Compare Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch “difficult trial”; Biblia Dios Habla Hoy “strong trials.”)

It is possible, even only remotely, that the reference to fire here may be connected to the experience of Christians being burned at the stake because of their faith; it is not altogether clear, however, whether the readers of the letters were in fact being burned to death by pagan authorities. It is more likely that the use of fire as a metaphor here can be explained both by the eschatological overtones of the letter and by the function of persecution as a test to the Christian’s faith.

There are certain problems involved in an adequate rendering of the expression at the painful test you are suffering. One difficulty exists in the fact that painful and suffering are essentially equivalent in meaning. In the second place, test must frequently be expressed as a verb, for example, “the way in which you are being tested.” In order to relate the test and the suffering to the expression of being surprised, it may be necessary to restructure the syntactic relations, for example, “do not be surprised because of the way in which you are suffering as you are being tested” or “do not be surprised because of the way in which you are tested, which is causing you such suffering.” In some instances it may be important to specify what is being tested, for example, “the way in which your faith is being tested,” and the expression test must sometimes be expressed more specifically as “the way in which your faith is being proved to be right” or “… true.”

The word translated unusual (Revised Standard Version “strange”; New English Bible “extraordinary”; Phillips “some abnormal experience”) comes from the same root as the verb surprised. Some commentators remark that non-Jewish Christians would find it unusual to suffer for their faith, since that is not part of their experience, in contrast to Jews, whose history as a people is filled with all kinds of defeats, exiles, and sufferings of various kinds (this idea was first suggested by H. Windisch, Die Katholischen Briefe, 1930). The clear message that is being conveyed is that suffering is part of the natural experience of Christians; it is not something foreign to them. To put it in another way, it would be strange and unusual indeed if Christians did not suffer because of their faith.

Because of the complex relationships between the first part of verse 12 and the second part, it may be necessary to break the verse into two completely distinct sentences, so that the clause as though something unusual were happening to you may be rendered as “do not think that what is happening to you is something unusual” or “… is something that shouldn’t be happening to you” or “… is a very rare happening.”

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The First Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

In the Greek this verse is a conditional clause, introduced by “if” (Greek ei). But the ei here clearly introduces not a supposition contrary to fact, but an actual fact; to translate it literally (as Phillips) is to miss this point; a better rendering of the word would be “since.” (For further examples of the usage of this particular kind of conditional clause, see 1.17; Luke 12.28; etc.). Accordingly, translations have either omitted the introductory word (as in Good News Translation, Barclay) or substituted a word which indicates its proper meaning (for example, Revised Standard Version “for”; New American Bible, Jerusalem Bible now you have). For a number of languages there are certain decided advantages involved in the introduction of a statement of “cause”; otherwise verse 3 does not seem to be closely related to verse 2. Accordingly, one may begin verse 3 as “for as the scripture says” or “because as the scripture says.”

The verse is a quotation from Psalm 34.8, with some slight changes. Accordingly, the Good News Translation has explicitly introduced it as a quotation from Scripture. In the Old Testament quotation, “the Lord” clearly refers to Yahweh, or God, but here, it is made to refer to Christ, as seen in the following verse where him specifically refers back to the Lord in verse 3, and clearly refers to Christ. However, since it is an Old Testament quotation, it is best to keep “Lord” ambiguous, and not make it explicitly refer to Christ.

As in other instances, it may be necessary to change the scripture says to “one may read in the Scriptures” or “the Scripture contains these words.”

A more difficult problem is the meaning of the whole quotation, which literally rendered is “you have tasted of the Lord’s kindness.” “To taste” here is a figure of speech, which means to “experience” (Barclay), or “to come to know something” (Arndt-Gingrich [AG]). Most translations have retained the metaphor; however, the Good News Translation has dropped it in favor of a straightforward translation: you have found out for yourselves.

The metaphorical use of “taste” in this verse has led some scholars to the conclusion that the whole quotation has reference to the sacrament of holy communion, probably even to the first communion these believers have participated in. This position is further supported by three factors. First, there seems to be a play on words between “kindness” (chrēstos) and “Christ” (christos), two words which were probably pronounced the same at that time. The believers have therefore tasted chrēstos, that is, Christ himself, and this experience is made possible through the sacrament of communion. Secondly, there is the fact that in later stages of Christian history, Psalm 34 came to be considered as a eucharistic hymn by the early church and used regularly during eucharistic services. Finally, “taste” is in the aorist tense and therefore may refer to a definite act in the past.

A few others, however, take the position that it is not primarily the sacrament of communion that the verse refers to, but the experience believers have of the Lord’s goodness through the message of the Word (that is, the gospel) and through their fellowship with one another.

The word “kindness” (Good News Translation, Revised Standard Version, Barclay, Moffatt) may also be translated, and perhaps more appropriately, as “goodness” (Best, New English Bible, New American Bible, Jerusalem Bible, Phillips, Knox, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy). In Luke 5.39, it is used for delicious and wholesome food.

It is rare that one can preserve the figure of speech involved in “tasting,” since taste is not closely related to general experience. For the most part it is more satisfactory to translate have found out for yourselves as “have discovered” or “have experienced” or “have learned what it means.”

How kind the Lord is may be regularly rendered as “how good the Lord is” or “how good to you the Lord is.” A term meaning simply “good” might refer only to the moral qualities of the Lord, while a term such as kind involves two essential components: (1) goodness and (2) an activity of expressing that goodness for the benefit of others.

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The First Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This is a rhetorical question, with the implicit answer “No one.” You is plural, referring to all the readers of the letter. Harm is the verbal form of evil in verse 12 (kakos—kakeō), which makes the transition from verse 12 to 13 much less abrupt in the Greek; the last word in verse 12 becomes a point of departure to verse 13 and following (compare Biblia Dios Habla Hoy “who can do you evil”). Harm describes in a general way any kind of injury (Phillips “injure”) or mistreatment (Moffatt “wrong”; Jerusalem Bible “hurt”), but here is used in a special sense of permanent injury, or perhaps injury in a spiritual sense, that is, affecting their faith adversely. Christians do not escape persecution and difficulties by doing good; in fact the opposite may be closer to the truth: they are persecuted simply because they are eager to do good. But in the long run, such persecutions do not do them permanent harm, and do not affect adversely their faith and commitment to God, or their proper attitude towards others, especially to non-Christians. It is possible that Peter has in mind specific groups or individuals who are the source of harm; but it is more likely that the focus here is not on who does the harming, but on the fact that Christians will not be harmed. Accordingly, this sense can be captured by a passive recasting of the rhetorical question, for example, “you will not be harmed if….”

Since the context does not point to any particular individual or group who are likely to harm Christians, it is possible to recast the rhetorical question as “will anyone harm you if you are eager to do what is good?” In some languages one may employ a rhetorical question, but some kind of emphatic answer must immediately follow. Therefore, one is obliged in certain instances to add the answer, namely, “no one.” Since, however, many languages do not employ rhetorical questions, but have a strong negative equivalent, the question may be recast as “certainly no one will harm you if you are eager to do what is good,” or in passive form, “surely you will not be harmed if you are eager to do what is good.”

Who will harm you may be conveniently rendered as “who will cause you to suffer” or “who will hurt you.”

Eager to do what is good is literally “zealous of the good” (compare Titus 2.14). To be “zealous” of something is to desire it, and strive for it with all one’s heart (compare New English Bible “devoted to”; New American Bible “committed deeply to”; Moffatt “a passion for”). What is good picks up a favorite theme of the letter; in this context, it connects this verse with verse 11 and 12a. For good, see 2.12; 2.15.

Eager to do what is good may be rendered as “want very much to do what is good” or “try very hard to do what is good” or “work with all your strength to do what is good.”

The rendering of good must be closely related to the rendering of right in verse 14. It is of course not necessary to translate the two expressions in the same way, but there should be sufficient overlapping of meaning so that there will not appear to be a distinct difference; otherwise, the reader might not understand the relevance of the first clause of verse 14.

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The First Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .