Commentary on First Peter (55)

Unlike God, who exercises constant and direct control over all things, it is impossible for a human ruler to have a direct hand in all that occurs under him. It is true that God himself delegates authority to his creatures, but this is not because he could not manage without their assistance, nor does this mean that his creatures can function without his active power and control at every moment. But a human ruler must divide his responsibilities and delegate authority, since he is limited in every way.

Thus under the king or emperor, there are "governors" (v. 14) assigned to specific territories. This is the title of Pilate (Matthew 27:2), Felix (Acts 23:24), and Festus. These are "sent by him" – the king – "to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right." There is no need to assume that this constitutes the complete description of what human government is supposed to accomplish. Peter is instructing believers on how they should think and behave when faced with the accusation that Christians are anti-government, a subversive group of anarchists that have no respect for the established authority. It is appropriate, therefore, for Peter to discuss human government relative to its role in responding to those who do wrong and those who do right.

The word for punishment here carries the connotation of retribution and vengeance. There are those who think that we should focus on reforming and "curing" the criminals, Peter does not express any interest in that. Whatever the state does with its criminals, it must be a top priority to punish them. Deterrence is an intended effect, as those who do wrong are supposed to fear the authorities (Romans 13:3-4). Some argue that punishment does not deter, but this is only because the modern examples cited include no actual punishment – no painful and destructive acts of vengeance against the criminals.

However, even those who affirm that deterrence is possible must not make punishment a solely practical affair, since again, the idea is retribution – to make the criminals suffer for the wrong that they have done. On the one hand, the public official acts on behalf of the society to protect the common good (Romans 13:4). But he is also God's representative to give wrongdoers a small foretaste of hell, where there will be only vengeance, and no chance to repent or reform.

Many people think that Scripture teaches against the very principle of revenge, but the opposite is true – it insists on it as the necessary demand of justice. As Paul writes, "For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you" (2 Thessalonians 1:6, NASB). What Scripture does teach is that it is not up to the offended individual to execute judgment upon the wrongdoer, and thus elsewhere Paul writes, "Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: 'It is mine to avenge; I will repay,' says the Lord" (Romans 12:19).

So God is not saying, "Do not take revenge, because revenge is wrong." Rather, he tells us, "Justice demands revenge, but you must let me do it." Then, for the sake of justice and order, God has established human government and authorized public officials to punish wrongdoers in a limited measure. Human abilities and methods can never exact upon a criminal what he truly deserves. Even execution kills only the body, but God can and will do much more.

In fact, from what God has commanded human government to do to criminals, we see a dim reflection of what he plans to do to all non-Christians in the life to come. If this is the kind of government that he establishes, and if this is the kind of treatment he orders for criminals, what horrors will sinners face in hell? Surely this is an apt analogy for preachers to declare the justice and the wrath of God, and to proclaim the only way of escape in Jesus Christ.