Peter on the Great Controversy

Stephen Terry

 

Commentary for the March 12, 2016 Sabbath School Lesson

 

“But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.” 1 Peter 2:9, NIV

Many Christians are familiar with the story of Noah’s Ark and the associated flood.[i] Mankind had given themselves completely over to evil, so God decided to destroy the world with water. Because Noah alone was righteous, God chose to save him and his family. In order to do that he instructed Noah to build an ark that could contain him and his sons along with all of their spouses. In addition it would house a seminal group of animals to repopulate the Earth. According to one account, he took one pair of each animal onto the Ark.[ii] However a slightly later account increases that number by stating there were to be pairs of the unclean animals, but the clean animals were to be saved by seven pairs.[iii] These kinds of internal inconsistencies within stories have caused theological scholars to question whether or not there was more than one writer involved, perhaps trying to correct the text by harmonizing with something written elsewhere. But in turn they created disharmony within the story. In this instance, perhaps someone realized that if there was only one pair of each animal that would present a problem when Noah offered animal sacrifice after leaving the Ark.[iv]

This did not resolve all issues regarding the animals, however. Noah and his sons were given permission after the flood to eat every kind of animal. This makes sense, as it would naturally be some time before the first harvest of anything they planted. It may seem strange to some that God would find it necessary to grant permission for mankind to eat animals, but in the Creation Story of the first chapter of Genesis, mankind and all of the animals were apparently only given a vegan diet.[v] Just as in the first account of how many creatures were to enter the Ark, no distinction was made between clean and unclean when meat was added to the diet.[vi] There may have been a practical reason for this. It may have been necessary to allow enough breeding stock of the herd animals to survive without becoming too inbred. It may have meant that some of the unclean animals would become extinct, but perhaps that was not a huge concern. Mankind has since driven many, many species to extinction by overhunting. Whatever was eaten or not eaten, whatever was sacrificed or not sacrificed, a greater story lies behind this more obvious one. That story is not changed by the inconsistencies, but it is often missed, even by the diligent.

That greater story is that God may have intended to save the entire world. Too many see the story of the flood as being prima facie evidence that God wants to destroy mankind when he steps out of line, but first impressions are not always right. Some may respond that of course God wanted to save everyone. Noah spent well over a century building the Ark and calling for people to seek salvation. However, they also point out that the Ark could not possibly hold the entire Earth’s population. Therefore, God knew that they would not be saved. But the Ark may have been too small for a reason. Maybe salvation would have been possible if only a handful had repented.

When we consider the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, we see how this might have been. Abraham negotiated with God over the destruction of Sodom, where his nephew Lot lived with his family.[vii] God finally agreed to spare the city if ten righteous people lived there. Perhaps we can see the parallel between this story and the flood account, especially when we realize that in each instance ten righteous people could not be found. It begs the question of how many more righteous people would have prevented the flood. Perhaps the deaths of Methuselah and Lamech shortly before the flood became the tipping point. As sad as it may be that so few wish to follow God by adhering to His commands, how much more poignant is it when in spite of freely offered grace after the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ, so few have availed themselves of that opportunity. We read in Acts of the Apostles that on Pentecost, thousands came forward and initially pledged faithfulness to God.[viii] But as time wore on, cares of this world became more important to some. They even began to question whether the promised return of Jesus is a real event.[ix]Peter tells us that in doing so, they even “forget” or perhaps denied the events that led from the Creation Story through the Flood Account and how God has not failed to fulfill the prophecies of the past. Therefore He can be trusted to fulfill them now.

Peter tells us that we are a “royal priesthood,” but if we turn from the story that brought us to this point, then what point is there to our priesthood? The Aaronic priesthood with its human high priest was a type that foreshadowed the antitypical Melchizedekian priesthood with Christ as High Priest.[x] It would seem to follow then that if we are royal priests during the period of the Melchizedekian order that we would be priests of that order and not of the Aaronic order. As the antitype is always more real and therefore greater than the type that foreshadowed it, so is the latter priesthood greater than that of Aaron’s Levitical order. Aaron and all who followed him had a great privilege. They were to prepare the world for the incarnation. Nonetheless very few were prepared, and Jesus was born unrecognized by the very priesthood that should have been the first to acknowledge Him as Messiah. Perhaps this is behind Christ’s concern that at His return no one would be awaiting Him.[xi] Will we be able to maintain the humility necessary to be led by the Holy Spirit, finding salvation for ourselves and sharing it with others, or will we instead find ourselves so completely engrossed in the affairs of life that we even fail to be prepared for the Parousia?

Peter saw lessons in the flood instructive for us today, but he was only echoing what Jesus had said before. Christ had taught His disciples that just as the cares about life’s normal events and requirements caused so many to miss their opportunity in Noah’s day, so it would also be the same at the Second Coming.[xii] Peter further pointed out that any delay in the Parousia was because of God’s mercy and willingness to save all.[xiii] What may be a paradox though, is that some Christians wish to proclaim the gospel to the world to hasten Christ’s coming. This may be based on what Jesus said to His disciples about the gospel being preached everywhere before He returns.[xiv] But if we consider the cases of the Flood and the destruction of Sodom, God may come either in judgment or in grace. In those instances, judgment was perhaps hastened by indifference to the proffered salvation not by the conversion of the lost. Had the lost repented and sought to restore their lost relationship with God, those acts of judgment might have been mitigated to the saving of the city of Sodom in Lot’s day, or the saving of the entire world in Noah’s time. As a result, the spreading of the Gospel may be more likely to extend probationary time rather than hasten its close.

As Christians, we truly are the “salt of the Earth.”[xv] We may be all that stands between the lost and judgment. If we lose sight of the importance of our priesthood, if we fail to “stand between the living and the dead”[xvi] with the incense of Christ’s grace there remains only judgment. Therefore at the risk of prolonging time until Jesus returns, we act as the agents of God’s mercy and rejoice that a merciful God allows us to continue this privileged work that as many as possible might be saved. While it may be tempting to get caught up in what might be signs of Christ’s return that is not our responsibility.[xvii] We have been given a commission[xviii] that may prolong that wait, but however long it takes, that commission is to be honored up to the very end. It requires a loving heart to have that kind of commitment. Fortunately, God can give us that heart.[xix] We only need to turn from our sins and toward Him. With repentance, baptism and the receipt of the Holy Spirit as promised, we will find our heart changing as it begins to reflect the compassionate character of God.



[i][i] Genesis 6-9

[ii] Genesis 6:19-20

[iii] Genesis 7:2

[iv] Genesis 8:20

[v] Genesis 1:29-30

[vi] Genesis 9:3

[vii] Genesis 18

[viii] Acts 2:31

[ix] 2 Peter 3:3-4

[x] Hebrews 5:4-10

[xi] Luke 18:8

[xii] Matthew 24:37-39

[xiii] 2 Peter 3:9

[xiv] Matthew 24:14

[xv] Matthew 5:13

[xvi] Numbers 16:46-48

[xvii] Acts 1:7

[xviii] Matthew 28:18-20

[xix] Ezekiel 36:26

 

 

 

If you enjoyed this commentary, you might also enjoy this book. Now on sale at holiday pricing with over a 30% discount!

To learn more click on this link.
Creation: Myth or Majesty?

 

 

 

This Commentary is a Service of Still Waters Ministry

www.visitstillwaters.com

 

If you wish to receive these weekly commentaries direct to your e-mail inbox for free, simply send an e-mail to:

commentaries-subscribe@visitstillwaters.com

Scripture marked (NIV) taken from the Holy Bible, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by Biblica, Inc. All rights reserved worldwide. Used by permission. NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION® and NIV® are registered trademarks of Biblica, Inc. Use of either trademark for the offering of goods or services requires the prior written consent of Biblica US, Inc.

 

 

 

If you want a paperback copy of the current Sabbath School Bible Study Quarterly, you may purchase one by clicking here and typing the word "quarterly" into the search box.