We’re a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people; and we are, Peter continues, a nation of foreigners. He uses two terms here, both connected to earlier in the letter. One, for the second time, he calls us exiles. The first time comes in the first verse of the letter, and you may remember we talked about this word in the first sermon of this series. The Greek word referred to people who lived long-term in a place where they were not citizens, to which they remained foreigners. They were outsiders who did not melt into the surrounding culture; they stayed identifiably different. For their difference, they were often regarded with suspicion as possible threats to the social order, for their primary loyalty lay elsewhere.
To intensify his point, Peter also calls us “resident aliens.” This is the only time he uses this noun, but he used the adjective form in 1:17. The Greek word here is paroikos, so there’s a minor wordplay with oikos, the word for “house” which he used in 2:9; this word is oikos plus the prefix para, which means “by,” “alongside,” “near,” or “beyond”—thus for instance parallel lines are lines which run alongside each other but never touch. Literally, paroikos would mean someone or something near the house. It was first coined as a word meaning “neighbor,” but in Greek usage quickly came to denote someone who was a resident in a place for a long time but not a citizen there. The only real difference between this word and the one translated “exiles” is that one had more of a negative sense, while this one was used of foreigners and outsiders who enjoyed the protection of the community.
Put these two words together, then, and there’s a balance between them. We don’t belong here; we’re out of place. We’re not supposed to be assimilated to the culture and society around us because we have a higher allegiance and bow to a higher authority than any in this world. On this, both words agree. To say we’re exiles is to highlight our nonconformity to our culture and emphasize the reality that if the goals and values and instructions of our society conflict with those of the kingdom of God, our call is to follow God in defiance of the world around us. To call us resident aliens is to remind us we’re to be committed to the good of the community and the well-being of the society in which God has planted us, and to be committed in a way which actively displays that commitment to the world. We’re to be neither isolated from the culture nor integrated with it, but interacting with it as something different from it.
In light of that, it’s worth noting the two words Peter uses here also occur together in the Septuagint, the ancient Greek translation, of Genesis 23:4. Specifically, when Abraham’s wife Sarah dies and he wants to buy land for a burial plot for her, they’re the two words he uses to describe his status in the community. Once again, then, Peter’s taking Old Testament language for the people of God and applying it to the church—but this time it’s the self-description of Abraham, who was the ultimate ancestor of Israel and the Jews. This is who God’s people were at the very beginning, when they were just one household. The implication here, I think, is that this tells us something about the mission God had for his people, which Israel refused, which the church is now called to live out.
Given all this, then, how should we understand ourselves? When we take a good look at ourselves, what should we see? First and foremost, and this is of course a recurring point, we’re not primarily citizens of this country. That’s secondary and temporary. First and foremost we’re citizens of the kingdom of God. Our primary allegiance is to him and his kingdom, and our primary responsibility is to the work of his kingdom; all the gifts he’s given us are for kingdom work. Our allegiances in this world are of two kinds. There are those which are covenants we make within the context of his covenant with us as his people—marriage is the biggest one; ordination, as teaching elder, ruling elder, deacon, is another—in which our allegiance to one another is part of our allegiance to God and his kingdom. Any allegiance we pledge in this world which is purely of this world must come with a giant asterisk labeled “Subject to divine approval.”
Second, our purpose, our work, and our agenda aren’t primarily about this country or any other worldly structure. We’re not operating as agents of a hostile power trying to “take this country back”—like France and Germany fighting through the years over the border provinces of Alsace and Lorraine—or to produce any particular political, governmental, legal, cultural, or economic outcome. We aren’t spies or saboteurs, and we aren’t here to take over anything. We aren’t oriented to the principalities and powers of this present age at all. Being focused on the visible principalities and powers, like governments and corporations, is a great way to leave ourselves wide open to the manipulations of the spiritual principalities and powers . . . and trust me, you really don’t want that.
Instead, third, we are ambassadors. We’re citizens of another nation sent to this one as a diplomatic mission. And yeah, some people are more diplomatic than the others, and maybe you’re like me, you look at yourself and figure you’re definitely one of the “others”; but you know, we all have our part to play, whether you’re someone who always knows the right thing to say or someone who tends to say the quiet part out loud without realizing it, and probably not in your inside voice, either. The world sees diplomacy, in the Italian diplomat Daniele Varè’s famous definition, as “the fine art of letting someone else have your way,” and on that view very few of us could be ambassadors. The kind of embassy God has in mind is very different.
God wants us to be people who know firmly where their true allegiance lies and are willing to be open and honest about that (and consistently working to re-orient themselves to that allegiance, because the world is always pulling us away from it). He wants clear and faithful representatives of his character and will whose lives show his righteousness and truth, his grace, mercy, and love. Perhaps most important, he wants ambassadors who understand their calling as Paul did. Paul uses this title for himself and those working alongside him because they’re speaking on behalf of Christ, carrying forward Christ’s ministry of reconciliation which God has entrusted to them, and he calls us to take it up in our turn. He implores us to be reconciled to God so we would then turn and do the same for others, leading them to find the peace with God which we’ve found. That’s something any of us can do, whatever our style and way of operating.
This is who we are. We’re God’s people put here as his representatives to this nation and this community to declare his praises by our words and our actions, whether the world wants us to or not. We’re a new kind of people who don’t exist for ourselves. God has formed us for himself to be his diplomats, helping lead those around us in the fine art of having his way. We’re his ambassadors bringing the good news that the God of heaven has made a peace treaty with the people of this world, and inviting them to sign it.
What, then, are the implications of this? How should we then live? Peter calls us to self-control with respect to our physical and worldly desires. We should realize this doesn’t only apply to those desires which are sinful, because even ones which aren’t sinful in themselves are still liable to point us away from God. That doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll move us away from God, but they certainly will if we treat them in isolation and give them free rein. Note here “soul” doesn’t mean “spirit”; this refers to the whole self being made new in Christ, against which our desires will most definitely wage war if we set them free to do so. That includes desires beyond the obvious, by the way. Karen Jobes observes, “In addition to the usual list . . . one could also perhaps add the carnal desire to be accepted by society, which motivates ungodly behavior that is nevertheless socially acceptable.”
We should conduct our lives in ways the world can appreciate as honorable. In part, this means recognizing the good in our society, and thus the values of our culture which are in keeping with the character and will of God. That obviously only goes so far; we cannot align with the world’s values in every respect. When the world’s values and behaviors depart from the character of God, we must depart from them, and when and where that happens, we will be denounced as evildoers. That much we cannot avoid. That said, we can live honorably before the world even then, in two ways.
First, we can conduct our lives in ways which are consistent with the truth we proclaim and the values we profess. This means, one, speaking the truth in love. As I said a few weeks ago, truth requires love and love requires truth. Right now, sadly, social media is plagued with self-proclaimed defenders of Christianity who show no evidence of love in their words. This alienates the world and dishonors Christ. Two, being forthright in confession and repentance when and where we sin rather than seeking to justify ourselves or make excuses for our behavior; I don’t think I need to expand on that. Three, following Jesus even when it costs us in worldly terms. The acid test of our commitments is whether we’re willing to keep them when breaking them would be to our advantage. Four, integrity between our public and private selves. This is what it means to live a life that’s above reproach. It doesn’t mean being sinless; it doesn’t mean being above criticism, or above correction. It means coherence, being the same person in private you are in public, not pretending when you’re in public to be someone you’re not.
This connects us to the second way we can live honorably before the world, which is keeping the commitments and honoring the ideals the world’s heroes can’t. Lately it seems we can barely turn around without someone prominent being exposed as a Bad Person in one way or another—at which point it becomes necessary to obliterate their entire lives, because our post-Christian culture has no actual concept of grace. Then the culture turns to idolize someone else instead, somehow imagining that this time it will be someone who never does Bad Things; and the cycle repeats. A lot of church leaders have been exposed, and are being exposed, as well, which I think is the judgment of God cleaning out his body. I think the way for us is to live openly and honestly before the world, with no secret sins or failures or betrayals for other people to expose. Let the world hold us accountable all the way along so we can stay true to the mission God has given us and the calling he’s placed on our lives.
The point to living honorably before the world is that when the world calls us evildoers for not doing what it wants, the character of our lives will call its accusations into question. Let the world see good deeds and honorable lives it can’t deny even as it’s committed to calling us evil, and that will have an effect. Even if they refuse to ever admit what they’re seeing in this life, at the day of judgment, they will give God glory for what he has done in us.
Of course, there’s a lot to be said practically about how to go about living that way, which is where Peter goes next. For today, let me close with a story which illustrates what the apostle had in mind. [The story can be found in Michael Card’s book Immanuel (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1990), 172-74.]
Photo © 2016 Wikipedia user Koonankurish. License: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International. Image has been cropped to fit.