John Calvin Commentary 1 Peter 2

After having taught the faithful that they had been regenerated by the word of God, he now exhorts them to lead a life corresponding to their birth. For if we live in the Spirit, we should also walk in the Spirit, as Paul says (Galatians 5:25). It is not, then, sufficient for us to have been once called by the Lord, unless we live as new creatures; this is the meaning.

But as to the words, the Apostle continues the same metaphor. For as we have been born again, he requires from us a life like that of infants, by which he intimates that we are to put off the old man and his works. Hence this verse agrees with what Christ says:

“Except you become like this little child,
you shall not enter into the kingdom of God” (Matthew 18:3).

Infancy is here set by Peter in opposition to the oldness of the flesh, which leads to corruption; and under the word milk, he includes all the feelings of spiritual life. For there is also, in part, a contrast between the vices he enumerates and the sincere milk of the word. It is as if he had said, “Malice and hypocrisy belong to those who are accustomed to the corruptions of the world; they have absorbed these vices. What pertains to infancy, however, is sincere simplicity, free from all guile.”

Men, when grown up, become imbued with envy, they learn to slander one another, they are taught the arts of mischief; in short, they become hardened in every kind of evil. Infants, due to their age, do not yet know what it is to envy, to do mischief, or similar things. He then compares the vices, in which the oldness of the flesh indulges, to strong food; and milk is called that way of living suitable to innocent nature and simple infancy.

1. All malice. There is not here a complete enumeration of all those things which we should lay aside; but when the Apostles speak of the old man, they set forth as examples some of those vices which mark his whole character.

   Known, says Paul, are the works of the flesh, which are these (Galatians 5:19).

   And yet he does not enumerate them all; but in those few things, as in a mirror, we may see that immense mass of filth which proceeds from our flesh. So also in other passages, where he refers to the new life, he touches only on a few things, by which we may understand the whole character.

   What, then, he says amounts to this — “Having laid aside the works of your former life, such as malice, deceit, hypocrisies, envy, and other things of this kind, devote yourselves to things of an opposite character, cultivate kindness, honesty,” and so on. He, in short, urges this, that new morals should follow a new life.

The sincere milk of the word. This passage is commonly explained according to the rendering of Erasmus, “Milk not for the body but for the soul,” as if the Apostle reminded us by this expression that he spoke metaphorically. I think instead that this passage agrees with that saying of Paul:

“Be you not children in understanding, but in malice” (1 Corinthians 14:20).

That no one might think that infancy, void of understanding and full of foolishness, was commended by him, he promptly meets this objection. Therefore, he instructs them to desire milk free from guile, and yet mixed with right understanding. We now see for what purpose he joins these two words, rational and guileless (λογικὸν καὶ ἄδολος). For simplicity and quickness of understanding are two things apparently opposite; but they ought to be mixed together, lest simplicity should become insipid, and lest malicious craftiness should creep in due to a lack of understanding. This mingling, well regulated, is according to what Christ says:

“Be you wise as serpents, and harmless as doves” (Matthew 10:16).

And so, the question that might have otherwise been raised is resolved.

Paul reproves the Corinthians because they were like children and therefore could not take strong food, but were fed with milk (1 Corinthians 3:1). Almost the same words are found in Hebrews 5:12. But in these passages, those are compared to children who remain always novices and ignorant scholars in the doctrine of religion, who continued in the first elements, and never penetrated into the higher knowledge of God.

Milk is called the simpler mode of teaching, and one suitable to children, when there is no progress made beyond the first rudiments. Paul justly charges this as a fault, as does the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. But milk, here, is not elementary doctrine, which one perpetually learns but never comes to the knowledge of the truth. Instead, it is a way of living that has the savor of the new birth, when we surrender ourselves to be nurtured by God.

In the same manner, infancy is not set in opposition to manhood, or full age in Christ, as Paul calls it in Ephesians 4:13, but to the oldness of the flesh and of former life. Moreover, as the infancy of the new life is perpetual, so Peter recommends milk as a perpetual nourishment, for he desires those nourished by it to grow.

If it is so that you have tasted; or, If indeed you have tasted. He alludes to Psalm 34:8,

Taste and see that the Lord is good.

But he says that this taste is to be experienced in Christ, as, doubtless, our souls can find no rest anywhere but in Him. He has drawn the basis of his exhortation from the goodness of God, because His kindness, which we perceive in Christ, should allure us.

The subsequent phrase, To whom coming, is not to be referred simply to God, but to Him as He is revealed to us in the person of Christ. Now, it must be that the grace of God powerfully draws us to Himself and inflames us with the love of Him through whom we obtain a real perception of it. If Plato affirmed this of his "Beautiful," of which he beheld only a shadowy idea from afar, how much truer this is with regard to God.

Let it then be noted that Peter connects access to God with the taste of His goodness. For as the human mind necessarily dreads and shuns God as long as it regards Him as rigid and severe, so, as soon as He makes known His paternal love to the faithful, it immediately follows that they disregard all things, even forget themselves, and hasten to Him. In short, only the one who in heart comes to God makes progress in the Gospel.

But he also shows for what end and to what purpose we should come to Christ: namely, that we may have Him as our foundation. For since He is established as a stone, He should be so to us, so that nothing appointed for Him by the Father is in vain or to no purpose.

He also counters a potential stumbling block by acknowledging that Christ is rejected by people. Because a large part of the world rejects Him, and many even abhor Him, He might for this reason be despised by us. Indeed, we see that some who are uninformed are alienated from the Gospel because it is not universally popular, nor does it win favor for those who profess it.

But Peter forbids us to esteem Christ less, no matter how much He is despised by the world, because He nevertheless retains His own worth and honor before God.

You also, as lively or living stones, are built up. The verb may be in the imperative as well as in the indicative mood, for the termination in Greek is ambiguous. But in whatever way it is taken, Peter no doubt meant to exhort the faithful to consecrate themselves as a spiritual temple to God, for he aptly infers from the design of our calling what our duty is.

We must further observe, that he constructs one house from the whole number of the faithful. For though every one of us is said to be the temple of God, yet all are united together in one, and must be joined together by mutual love, so that one temple may be made of us all.

Then, as it is true that each one is a temple in which God dwells by his Spirit, so all ought to be so fitted together, that they may form one universal temple. This is the case when every one, content with his own measure, keeps himself within the limits of his own duty; all have, however, something to do with regard to others.

By calling us living stones and spiritual building, as he had before said that Christ is a living stone, he intimates a comparison between us and the ancient temple; and this serves to amplify divine grace. For the same purpose is what he adds regarding spiritual sacrifices. For the more excellent the reality is than the types, the more all things excel in the kingdom of Christ; for we have that heavenly exemplar, to which the ancient sanctuary conformed, and everything instituted by Moses under the Law.

A holy priesthood. It is a singular honor that God should not only consecrate us as a temple to himself, in which he dwells and is worshipped, but that he should also make us priests. But Peter mentions this double honor in order to stimulate us more effectively to serve and worship God. Of the spiritual sacrifices, the first is the offering of ourselves, of which Paul speaks in Romans 12:1; for we can offer nothing until we offer to him ourselves as a sacrifice, which is done by denying ourselves. Then, afterwards follow prayers, thanksgiving, acts of charity, and all the duties of religion.

Acceptable to God. It ought also to add greatly to our alacrity when we know that the worship we perform to God is pleasing to him, as doubt necessarily brings sloth with it. Here, then, is the third thing that enforces the exhortation; for he declares that what is required is acceptable to God, lest fear should make us slothful. Idolaters are indeed under the influence of great fervor in their fictitious forms of worship; but it is so because Satan intoxicates their minds, lest they consider their works; but whenever their consciences are led to examine things, they begin to stagger. It is, indeed, certain that no one will seriously and from the heart devote himself to God until he is fully persuaded that he will not labor in vain.

But the Apostle adds, through Jesus Christ. Our sacrifices never possess such purity that they are acceptable to God in themselves; our self-denial is never entire and complete, our prayers are never as sincere as they should be, and we are never so zealous and diligent in doing good that our works are not still imperfect and mingled with many vices. Nevertheless, Christ procures favor for them.

Then Peter here obviates that lack of faith which we may have regarding the acceptability of our works, when he says that they are accepted, not for the merit of their own excellence, but through Christ. And it ought to kindle the ardor of our efforts all the more when we hear that God deals so indulgently with us, that in Christ he sets a value on our works, which in themselves deserve nothing. At the same time, the words, by or through Christ, may be appropriately connected with offering; for a similar phrase is found in Hebrews 13:15,

Through him let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God.

The sense, however, will remain the same; for we offer sacrifices through Christ, that they may be acceptable to God.

Wherefore also it is contained in Scripture; or, Wherefore also the Scripture contains. Those who refer the verb “contain” (περιέχειν) to Christ and translate it “embrace,” because through him all these unite together, completely depart from the meaning of the Apostle. No better is another exposition, that Christ excels others; for Peter simply intended to quote the testimony of Scripture.

He then shows what had been taught by the Holy Spirit in the Scriptures, or, which is the same thing, that what he adds is contained in them. Nor is it an unsuitable confirmation of the preceding verse.

For we see for what slight reasons, and almost for none, many reject Christ, and some fall away from him. But this is a stumbling block which above all other things stands in the way of some: they are drawn away because not only the common people despise and reject Christ, but also those who are high in dignity and honor and seem to excel others.

This evil has almost always prevailed in the world, and today it prevails greatly. For a great part of humankind judges Christ according to the false opinion of the world. Moreover, such is the ingratitude and impiety of men that Christ is everywhere despised. Thus it is that while they regard one another, few pay him his due honor. Therefore, Peter reminds us of what had been foretold about Christ, so that contempt or rejection of him should not move us from the faith.

Now, the first passage which he cites is taken from Isaiah 28:16, where the Prophet, after having inveighed against the desperate wickedness of his own nation, finally adds:

“Your perfidy shall not prevent God from restoring his church, which now through you lies completely in a ruinous state” (Isaiah 28:16).

The manner of restoration he thus describes: “I will lay in Sion a stone.” From this we learn that there is no building up of the Church without Christ, for there is no other foundation than him, as Paul testifies (1 Corinthians 3:11). This is no matter of wonder, for all our salvation is found only in him. Whoever, then, turns away from him in the least degree will find his foundation a precipice.

Therefore, the Prophet not only calls him a cornerstone, which connects the whole edifice, but also a stone of trial, according to which the building is to be measured and regulated; and furthermore, he calls him a solid foundation, which sustains the whole edifice. He is, then, a cornerstone, so that he might be the standard for the building, as well as the only foundation.

But Peter took from the words of the Prophet what was especially suitable to his argument: namely, that he was a chosen stone, in the highest degree valuable and excellent, and also that on him we ought to build.

This honor is ascribed to Christ so that, however much he may be despised by the world, he may not be despised by us; for by God he is regarded as very precious.

But when he calls him a cornerstone, he intimates that those who do not rely on Christ have no concern for their salvation.

What some have elaborated on the word “corner,” as though it meant that Christ joins together Jews and Gentiles as two distinct walls, is not well founded. Let us, then, be content with a simple explanation: that he is so called because the weight of the building rests on him.

We must also observe that the Prophet introduces God as the speaker, for he alone forms and plans his own Church, as it is said in Psalm 78:69 that his hand had founded Sion. He, indeed, employs the labor and ministry of men in building it; but this is not inconsistent with the truth that it is his own work. Christ, then, is the foundation of our salvation, because he has been ordained for this end by the Father.

And he says in Sion, because there God’s spiritual temple was to have its beginning. Therefore, for our faith to rest firmly on Christ, we must come to the Law and to the Prophets.

For though this stone extends to the farthest parts of the world, it was still necessary for it to be located first in Sion, because at that time Sion was the seat of the Church.

But it is said to have been set there when the Father revealed him for the purpose of restoring his Church. In short, we must hold this: that only those who keep the unity of the Church rest on Christ, for he is not set as a foundation stone except in Sion.

As from Sion the Church came forth, which is now everywhere spread, so also from Sion our faith has derived its beginning, as Isaiah says:

“From Sion shall go forth the law,
and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.” (Isaiah 2:3).

Corresponding with this is what is said in the Psalms:

“The scepter of thy power will the Lord send forth from Sion.” (Psalms 110:2).

He that believeth. The Prophet does not say in him, but declares generally, “He that believeth shall not make haste.” As, however, there is no doubt that God sets forth Christ there as the object of our faith, the faith of which the Prophet speaks must look on him alone. And, doubtless, no one can rightly believe but he who is fully convinced that in Christ he ought to trust completely.

But the words of the Prophet may be taken in two ways: either as a promise or as an exhortation. The future time is indicated, “He shall not make haste”; but in Hebrew the future tense is often to be taken as an imperative, “Let him not make haste.” Thus the meaning would be, “Do not be moved in your minds, but quietly entertain your desires and check your feelings until the Lord is pleased to fulfill his promise.” So he says in another place:

“In silence and in quietness shall be your strength” (Isaiah 30:15).

But as the other reading seems to come nearer to Peter’s interpretation, I give it the preference. Then the sense would not be unsuitable: “He who believeth shall not waver” or vacillate, for he has a firm and permanent foundation. And it is a valuable truth that, relying on Christ, we are beyond the danger of falling. Moreover, to be ashamed (pudefieri) means the same thing. Peter has retained the real sense of the Prophet, though he has followed the Greek version.

Unto you therefore which believe God having pronounced Christ to be a precious and a chosen stone, Peter draws the inference that he is so to us. For, no doubt, Christ is there described as we apprehend him by faith, and as he proves himself to be by real evidences. We ought, then, carefully to notice this inference: Christ is a precious stone in the sight of God; then he is such to the faithful. It is faith alone which reveals to us the value and excellence of Christ.

But as the Apostle's design was to counteract the offense that the multitude of the ungodly creates, he immediately adds another clause concerning the unbelieving: that by rejecting Christ, they do not take away the honor granted him by the Father. For this purpose, a verse in Psalm 118:22 is quoted: that the stone which the builders rejected, is become, nevertheless, the head of the corner. It therefore follows that Christ, though opposed by his enemies, yet continues in that dignity to which he has been appointed by the Father. But we must take notice of the two things said here: first, that Christ was rejected by those who ruled in the Church of God; and second, that their efforts were all in vain, because what God had decreed had to be fulfilled—that is, that he, as the cornerstone, should sustain the edifice.

Moreover, that this passage should properly be understood as referring to Christ is witnessed not only by the Holy Spirit and Christ himself, who explained it this way (Matthew 21:42), but it also appears evident from the fact that it was commonly understood this way before Christ came into the world. Nor is there any doubt that this exposition had been passed down, as it were, from hand to hand from the fathers. We therefore see that this was, so to speak, a common saying concerning the Messiah, even among children. I will, therefore, no longer discuss this point. We may take it for granted that David was rejected by his own generation in this way so that he might typify Christ.

Let us now, then, return to the first clause: Christ was rejected by the builders. This was first foreshadowed in David, for those who were in power considered him condemned and lost. The same was fulfilled in Christ, for those who ruled in the Church rejected him as far as they could. It might have greatly disturbed the weak when they saw that Christ’s enemies were so numerous—even the priests, the elders, and teachers, who were the conspicuous representatives of the Church. To remove this offense, Peter reminded the faithful that this very thing had been predicted by David. He especially addressed the Jews, to whom this properly applied; at the same time, this admonition is very useful even today. For those who arrogate to themselves the first place of authority in the Church, are Christ’s most inveterate enemies and persecute his Gospel with diabolical fury.

The Pope calls himself the vicar of Christ, and yet we know how fiercely he opposes him. This spectacle frightens the simple and ignorant. Why is this? It is because they do not consider that what David predicted is happening now. Let us, then, remember that this prophecy did not only warn those who saw Christ rejected by the Scribes and Pharisees, but that we also are fortified by it against daily offenses that might otherwise upset our faith.

Whenever, then, we see those who glory in the title of prelates rising up against Christ, let us remember that the stone is rejected by the builders, according to David’s prediction. And as the metaphor of building is common when speaking of political or spiritual government, so David calls them builders—those to whom the care and power of governing is committed—not because they build rightly, but because they have the name of builders and possess the ordinary power.

It therefore follows that those in office are not always God’s true and faithful ministers. It is, therefore, extremely ridiculous for the Pope and his followers to arrogate to themselves supreme and indubitable authority on the sole pretense that they are the ordinary governors of the Church. In the first place, their vocation to govern the Church is in no way more just or legitimate than that of Heliogabalus to govern the empire.

But even if we were to grant them what they unblushingly claim—that they are rightly called—yet we see what David declares concerning the ordinary rulers of the Church: that they rejected Christ, so that they built a sty for swine rather than a temple for God. The other part follows: that all the great, proud of their power and dignity, will not prevail to prevent Christ from remaining in his own place.

And a stone of stumbling. After having comforted the faithful that they would have in Christ a firm and permanent foundation, even though the greater part, and even the chief men, allowed him no place in the building, he now denounces the punishment that awaits all unbelievers, so that they might be terrified by their example. For this purpose, he quotes the testimony of Isaiah 8:14. The Prophet there declares that the Lord would be to the Jews a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense. This properly refers to Christ, as can be seen from the context, and Paul applies it to Christ (Romans 9:32). For in him the God of hosts has plainly manifested himself.

Here, then, the terrible vengeance of God is denounced on all the ungodly, because Christ will be to them an offense and a stumbling, since they refused to make him their foundation. For just as the firmness and stability of Christ are such that he can sustain all who by faith rest on him, so his hardness is so great that it will break and tear in pieces all who resist him. For there is no middle ground between these two things: we must either build on him or be dashed against him.