To
pick up where we left off, Peter tells us that the reason we are called to “do
good” to those in authority who abuse and hurt us is because God wants to use
us to “put to silence the ignorance of
foolish people” (1 Peter 2:15). We should also note that the Greek term
found here (agathosune) refers to
God’s moral character reflected in us (Mark 10:18). Saints cannot “do good” naturally
because, when God is ruled out of the equation, “no one
does good”
(Rom. 3:12). The flesh profits nothing. However, when one is born of God, he
takes on the character qualities of God, practicing righteousness—doing good
because he is born of God (1 John 3:10).
In other words, Peter calls upon
the believers to behave toward those who spitefully use them or abuse them with
kindness and gentleness by doing good to them. Good in God is essential,
absolute, and consummate. God is the only good. No one can do good who is not
of God. Thus, the good that believers do is morally honorable, pleasing to God,
and beneficial.
In this fallen world where “no one does good, not even one,” how do
we account for the apparent goodness around us? The world often puts the church
to shame by acts of sacrificial generosity. It takes discernment to understand
the root issue, which is, who gets the glory? That is why we are not to be “conformed to this world” but by being “transformed” so that we may, by testing,
prove “what is the will of God, what is
good” (Rom. 12:2). Why do we do “good”? Is it to promote self or glorify
God? “Whoever serves, let him serve by
the strength which God supplies—in order that in everything God may be
glorified through Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 4:11).
If one retaliates to wrongful
treatment, he proves that he is self-driven. When one responds with goodness,
he proves that he is empowered by God. David is an example here (1 Sam.
25:9–39). Rebuffed by Nabal’s demeaning rejection of his plea for assistance, David
sought revenge in anger (vv. 13, 22). His personal expectation of respect as
Israel’s future king had been met with disdain and contempt (v. 10). His pride
hurt, David thought that he had a right to retaliate. However, to do so would
have tarnished the throne he was to occupy (v. 26) and would have brought dishonor
to his God (vv. 31–34). God graciously intervened in the person of Nabal’s
wife, Abagail, who did good to her foolish husband by humbling herself to David
and assuaging his anger. Abagail saved Nabal’s life by owning Nabal’s folly in
her own person. What sounds to western ears as criticism (v. 25) was, to a
near-eastern woman, an admission of her own status. In a godly act, she owned
that she was the wife of a fool by degrading herself before David. In that, she
“put
to silence the ignorance of foolish [David].”