This verse further describes the recipients of the letter in three ways: (1) They are chosen according to the purpose of God the Father, (2) they were made a holy people by his Spirit, and (3) they were chosen to obey Jesus Christ and be purified by his blood. It can be seen very clearly that this is, in trinitarian language, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, although the traditional order is not followed. If the letter can be regarded as primarily a baptismal sermon (see Introduction), then the presence of the Trinity right at the beginning would be most appropriate.
According to the purpose of God the Father is literally “according to the foreknowledge of God the Father.” “Foreknowledge” is a difficult word to interpret. It can mean simply “to know beforehand,” in which case all that Peter is saying is that God knew all along that he would choose them, and when the right time came, he did just that. However, many interpreters understand the word to include God’s intention and purpose, and this is reflected in Good News Translation and some other translations (New English Bible [New English Bible], Jerusalem Bible [Jerusalem Bible]). A further element which is included in the word is “foreordaining.” What God knows beforehand he makes sure will happen; otherwise, his knowledge is limited. Accordingly, this is also reflected in some translations, for example, Phillips (Phillips) “knew and chose long ago…”; Revised Standard Version “chosen and destined by God the Father”; Moffatt (Moffatt) “whom God the Father has predestined and chosen.”
There are, of course, many problems that arise out of this one word. However, it must be remembered that Peter was speaking as a devout Jew and was probably not aware of all the theological, metaphysical, and logical problems that would arise out of his letter. The passive construction You were chosen according to the purpose of God the Father must be made active in a number of languages, and God the Father must be clearly indicated as the agent of the choosing. One can, for example, restructure the first part of verse 2 as “God the Father chose you according to his own purpose.” The term purpose may be expressed in some instances as “that is what he wanted to accomplish.”
The term chosen should reflect what has already been employed in verse 1 in speaking of God’s chosen people. There is the danger, however, in a term such as chosen to suggest “selecting” in a negative sense, since in some instances a term for “selecting” may suggest selecting what is bad from what is good, that is to say, to pick out the bad in order to dispose of it.
If one wishes to render the term purpose as meaning “destined” or “predestined,” it is possible to employ a phrase such as “arranged ahead of time what would happen to.”
The expression were made a holy people by his Spirit is literally “in [or “by”] sanctification of the Spirit.” Spirit refers to the Holy Spirit. “Sanctification” may refer to the act and process of being made holy, with “holy” interpreted morally. This is reflected in some translations, for example Barclay (Barclay) “who are travelling on the road to holiness in the power of the Spirit.” On the other hand, “sanctification” may refer to a process by which a person is made a part of God’s own people, and it is the Spirit who does this. This seems to be what is favored by the Good News Translation, with “holy” understood not primarily as an ethical term, but in a strictly religious sense: it is the very fact of a person’s being set apart that makes him holy.
As in the case of the passive expression You were chosen according to the purpose of God the Father, it may also be necessary to change from passive to active the phrase were made a holy people by his Spirit, for example, “God’s Spirit made you a holy people.” On the other hand, if holy is to be understood in the sense of a particular relationship to God, then one may translate were made a holy people by his Spirit as “God’s Spirit made you his people” or “… caused you to become the people of God.”
Some translators have wanted to always employ “Holy Spirit” in rendering “Spirit” (when the reference is to the Holy Spirit). This does, however, imply certain complications in some instances. For example, if one says “God’s Holy Spirit made you his people,” the question might be raised as to whether God had an “evil Spirit” as well as a “good Spirit” or “Holy Spirit.” Even more fundamental problems, however, are involved in the choice of a word for Spirit in speaking of the “Holy Spirit,” since some terms for “spirit” may only suggest that aspect of personality which lives on after death, that is to say, a kind of disembodied spirit, and such a term is normally unacceptable in speaking of God’s Spirit. One should also avoid a term for “Spirit” which would suggest a kind of “familiar spirit” which God might send out on various tasks as a kind of spiritual errand boy. Basically, a term for God’s Spirit should be one which suggests the non-physical power or aspect of personality which can think, will, and perform actions. Such a spirit should be the non-physical aspect of personality. One should not, however, expect to find in a word for “spirit” all the theological implications of a trinitarian view. Such theologically derived doctrines as the Trinity come from the broader understanding of Scripture and the interpretation of such a doctrine cannot be readily forced into the meaning of any single term or phrase.
What is the relationship between the act of the Spirit with that of the Father? First of all, the “sanctification” of the believers can be understood as the purpose of being chosen by God (for example, Phillips, Knox, Jerusalem Bible). Secondly, however, “sanctification” and “chosen-ness” can be understood as belonging to a process: people are chosen, and now they are made holy (for example, Good News Translation, New English Bible, New American Bible [New American Bible], Barclay). Finally, sanctification can be understood as the instrument of the call (for example, Moffatt “predestined and chosen, by the consecration of the Spirit…”). The weight of scholarly opinion seems to favor the second of these alternatives.
The phrase to obey Jesus Christ and be purified by his blood is related to what precedes in various ways. Some understand this as a result of election. Others understand it as a result of their being sanctified (as probably New American Bible “consecrated by the Spirit to a life of obedience to Jesus Christ and purification with his blood”). Still others understand it as the purpose of being chosen by God and of being made a holy people (as in Good News Translation, Phillips “that they might obey Jesus Christ…”; also Moffatt and Knox). A fourth possible position is to understand it as simply the third in a trilogy, without defining its relation to what precedes. The key to a proper interpretation is how to understand the Greek preposition which introduces the phrase (literally “into”), which in some cases denotes purpose, and in other cases result. If one wishes to indicate clearly the purpose involved in the phrase to obey Jesus Christ and be purified by his blood, it is possible to translate “in order that you may obey Jesus Christ and be purified by his blood.” Result may be expressed as “as a result you will obey Jesus Christ and be purified by his blood” or “this will cause you to obey Jesus Christ and be purified by his blood.”
There is normally no difficulty in rendering the expression “obey Jesus Christ,” since “obeying a person” is a common expression in almost any language. However, sometimes a term which also means “hear” carries the meaning of “obey,” for example, “you will hear Jesus Christ.” On the other hand, obedience may be spelled out in rather specific terms, “do what Jesus Christ has told you to do” or “conform yourself to Jesus Christ’s commands.”
Be purified by his blood (literally “sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ”) is, of course, metaphorical speech. There are many possible Old Testament passages which can be the background for this statement, but the most probable is Exodus 24.1-11, where the covenant sacrifice is described. In this ceremony, the blood sprinkled on the altar symbolizes the people’s obedience to God, and the blood sprinkled on the people symbolizes the people sharing in the blessings of the sacrifice, primarily, entering into the covenant relationship. Cleansing, purification, and forgiveness were not formerly parts of the understanding of the sacrifice, but were soon associated with it, and this kind of association is reflected in various parts of the New Testament.
Blood here refers to Jesus’ death on the cross. To be purified by Jesus’ blood is to share in the blessings and benefits arising out of Jesus’ death, and these benefits may be forgiveness, purification, or simply a new relationship with God, realized primarily in the church. All of this is possible, especially as one remembers that the metaphor is related to the sacrament of baptism, which symbolizes not only forgiveness, but also initiation into the Christian fellowship.
Most translations have kept the metaphor, the one exception being Barclay “share in the new relationship with God which God [Jesus?] made possible by his sacrificial death.”
Be purified by his blood may be rendered as “his sacrificial death will cause you to become pure” or “by his sacrificial death he will cause you to become pure.” Sometimes the means expressed in the phrase by his blood or “by his sacrificial death” must be expressed as a causative, for example, “because he died, he will cause you to become pure.”
A term rendering “pure” should not be applicable merely to some physical substance, but should suggest a moral and/or spiritual state. Sometimes, however, this can only be expressed in terms of “forgiveness,” for example, “will cause you to be forgiven” or “to cause you not to have guilt.”
After addressing his readers in a very theological manner, Peter now greets them with the traditional Christian greeting. Grace reflects an expression commonly used among Greek speakers, and it refers to God’s undeserved love. Peace, on the other hand, reflects an expression used among Jewish people, and it denotes total health, total well-being, in other words, the sum total of what God bestows on people in order for them to enjoy life in all its abundance. Both of these words are now combined together in a Christian greeting, which, judging by its presence in other letters as well, seems to have been the traditional and popular greeting among Christians. It is very tempting to take these words in their full theological meaning and impact; one must remember, however, that these are part of a greeting formula, and therefore must be translated according to their function within the formula.
The type of third person request for blessing as in the clause May grace and peace be yours in full measure must be expressed in a number of languages by introducing the agent and also by preposing an expression of prayer or request, for example, “I pray that God may give you grace and peace in abundance” or “… a great deal of grace and peace.”
Since in a number of languages grace is most closely related to a term for “love,” one may translate May grace … be yours as “may God show his love to you.”
Peace may be expressed in some instances as “well being,” and therefore May grace and peace be yours could be expressed as “may God show his love and cause you to have happiness” or “… to enjoy life.”
Be yours in full measure is literally “be multiplied to you,” and is a distinctive feature of Jewish prayers (compare Dan 4.1; 6.25). It conveys the hope that the readers will receive “grace and peace” continually and that their lives are therefore blest and made more pleasant as a result (compare New American Bible “be yours in abundance”; Jerusalem Bible “be with you more and more”).
In many of Paul’s letters, the source of “grace and peace” is usually indicated (God, Christ, or both). There is no explicit source here, but the implicit source is most probably God.
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 .