DISCLAIMER: The Aquila Report is a news and information resource. We welcome commentary from readers; for more information visit our Letters to the Editor link. All our content, including commentary and opinion, is intended to be information for our readers and does not necessarily indicate an endorsement by The Aquila Report or its governing board. In order to provide this website free of charge to our readers,  Aquila Report uses a combination of donations, advertisements and affiliate marketing links to  pay its operating costs.

The very realization that God is in control of all things is the sole reason why we should cease from being anxious! How can you cast all your cares upon a God who stands impotent before human free will? But once we humble ourselves before the mighty hand of God who foreordains whatsoever comes to pass, and who is a loving Father, who has promised to give us everything we need (not necessarily what we want), then it becomes much easier to cast our cares upon him, because we know that he already holds our future in his hands. The more we know about God’s love and power, the easier it is to trust him in hard times. 

What Do You Say to Persecuted Christians?
What do you say to Christians who have been displaced from their homes by a cruel and cynical act of a pagan emperor? How do you comfort a persecuted people who see no relief in sight from their troubles? What do you say to people who are reviled and cursed because they profess their faith in Jesus Christ as Creator, Redeemer, and Lord, and refuse to worship Caesar or the pantheon of pagan gods? How do you comfort a people who are mocked because they follow the teaching of Jesus, and therefore refuse to indulge every bodily urge simply because those urges exist? If you are the apostle Peter, you tell them the truth.
The reality is that fiery trials come with being a Christian living in a pagan environment. Yet, these trials are also the means through which God strengthens our faith. Just as it was with Jesus–that the cross of Good Friday precedes the empty tomb of Easter–so too it is with Christians. Suffering precedes the glory yet to be revealed. Peter also tells these Christians that despite their troubles, God has not cast them off. Regardless of how they feel, those who believe in Jesus are his elect exiles, his spiritual temple, possessing a heavenly citizenship which guarantees all the blessings of eternal life and a heavenly inheritance. Peter also tells them that Christians must strive to humble themselves before God, and learn to cast all of their cares and worries upon the sovereign God who is also their loving father. As they do so, Christians begin to live in the hope of the eternal glories yet to come.
We now wrap-up our series on 1 Peter. In the previous discussion, we devoted our attention to several of the points raised by Peter in the concluding section of this epistle (vv. 1-14 of chapter 5)–specifically Peter’s reference to the office of elder, which functions as a bulwark against the schemes of the devil, the adversary, who is looking for struggling Christians to devour. This time, we will cover the same ground, but focus upon two different themes in the text–humbling ourselves before God, while at the same time learning to cast all of our cares upon him. This will bring our time in 1 Peter to an end.
The Final Exhortations to Christ’s Flock
Peter wraps up his lengthy series of exhortations (imperatives) to suffering Christians–the elect exiles of the Diaspora of Asia Minor–by directing his audience’s focus away from those external circumstances under which Christians are struggling, to internal and pastoral matters. Before extending greetings to several individuals and concluding his letter, Peter addresses those things the churches and their leaders ought to be doing so as to persevere through difficult times. As we saw last time, Peter begins with an exhortation to the elders of the churches receiving this letter. In verses 1-2, he writes, “so I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as a partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed: shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you . . .” Jesus is the chief shepherd of his church, and he calls church officers (“elders” and ministers) to shepherd his flock as “under-shepherds.”
The reference to Christ’s church as a “flock,” is a metaphor widely used throughout the Old Testament in reference to those instances where sinful individuals are likened to sheep because of the tendency of sheep to wander away from the flock and place themselves in peril. A sheep which is separated from rest of the flock is completely helpless and likely to become an easy meal for any of the common predators in the area–wolves, jackals, coyotes, or even lions. Apart from a shepherd, who leads and protects them, the sheep are lost, they know not where to go, nor what to do.
Another sense in which the metaphor of sheep and flocks is used throughout the Old Testament is in reference to God’s people, Israel, who are often identified as God’s “flock” which requires his care, nurture, and protection. The metaphor of the sheep and shepherd is well-known enough in Israel that in John 10, when Jesus speaks of himself as the “good shepherd” who lays down his life for his sheep, virtually everyone hearing him knows exactly what he means–YHWH was Israel’s shepherd, therefore Jesus is claiming to be one with YHWH.
Elders as Shepherds and Servants
In reminding the elders of the churches in Asia Minor of this very point, Peter stresses that it falls to the elders of the church to protect Christ’s flock from predators, in this case the chief predator, Satan. In verses 8 and 9 Peter informs his readers that the devil prowls like a mortally wounded animal, seeking to devour any helpless Christian who wanders away from the protection of the shepherds of God’s flock. By speaking of the church as “the flock of God” Peter is also reminding the under-shepherds that the flock is not theirs–it is God’s, having been purchased by the shed blood of Jesus. God calls the elders of the church to protect its members from being devoured by the devil–which, as we discussed last time, is likely a reference to Satan using the power of the pagan state to oppress and persecute the people of God.
According to Peter’s charge in verse 3, elders are to shepherd Christ’s flock, “not for shameful gain, but eagerly; not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock.” This is a very important and highly practical point in light of the contrast Peter has set out throughout the earlier chapters of his letter between the way in which the Greco-Roman world understands the use of power (governors, masters, cruel spouses), with the way in which Christian citizens, Christian slaves, and Christian spouses are to respond to those who abuse them–in humility, by submitting to lawful authority in imitation of Jesus who came not to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.
Following the example of Jesus and serving under his authority as chief shepherd, elders are to view their office as one of service and of bearing witness to Christ–who is the chief shepherd of his church. Elders are not to use their office for personal benefit or to secure gifts and take advantage of the people of God (acting in a domineering way). Elders, when called, are to serve eagerly, and not lord their authority over the members of Christ’s church. Elders are to set good examples to the congregation, not as men who live above sin, but as men who deal with their sins properly, and who do not bring scandal to Christ’s church. In verse 4 Peter reminds those who serve of the great benefit of doing so–“And when the chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.” That God will reward his people when Jesus returns, is one of the characteristic ways the Apostle seeks to give hope to a people in the midst of intense suffering and trials. Elders, too, are to take heart in the knowledge that their difficult duties are not conducted in vain, but are noticed by the chief shepherd, and they will be rewarded by the Lord of the church. Peter’s focus upon eternal life is a point to which we will return momentarily.
God Opposes the Proud, But Gives Grace to the Humble
If elders are to rule Christ’s church as his under-shepherds, then the members of the church are to submit to the elders’ rule. Peter exhorts the younger to submit to the elders in verse 5, when he states “likewise, you who are younger, be subject to the elders.” This verse can be understood in two ways. The first is taking Peter’s imperative on its face, i.e., that younger people (in age) are to submit to those who are chronologically older–the elders in the church, indicating that church elders were typically older men. Yet, given the way Paul exhorts Timothy not to let people look down on his youth, Peter may be using the older/younger metaphor to mean that those new to the faith (younger) submit to those who have been Christians much longer (elders), and who may not be smarter, but are certainly wiser because of a lifetime of experience with the various issues and trials of life.
At the end of verse 5, Peter reminds this persecuted church that one of the ways in which Christians distinguish themselves from unbelievers is in the fact that Christians are to “clothe yourselves, all of you, with humility toward one another, for `God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.’” As he does throughout this letter, Peter cites from the Old Testament, in this case from Proverbs 3:34, which is part of a larger section of chapter 3, vv. 21-35 of Proverbs in which the wise parent encourages his son to seek wisdom and to make sound judgments. The idea is that those who are wise will seek righteousness, while those who are wicked behave foolishly.
In this particular case, the contrast is between those who are Christ’s (who have been sanctified by Christ’s blood and set apart to live holy lives) and those Greco-Roman pagans who tend to see humility as a vice, because humility was thought to be the attitude of a slave, not that of a free man who can exercise authority. Once again, Peter’s exhortation to these persecuted Christians is completely counter-cultural. A Christian’s conduct–following the example Jesus set for us of proper humility before all, even before those who hate us–is what sets believers apart from the pagans. We separate ourselves from the unbelievers around us not through visible or cultural distinctives, like a distinctive diet, or in Christian clothing, or even in withdrawing from the world. We distinguish ourselves from the pagans around us by our honorable conduct–in this case we clothe ourselves with humility toward one another because this is right, and this is the example set for us by Jesus.
Proper Conduct–Humility
Our conduct grows out of the fact that in a profound sense Christians are strangers and aliens in this world, because the elect exiles of Asia Minor hold a heavenly citizenship in addition to their Roman citizenship. As citizens of heaven, Christians wholeheartedly strive to submit to God and obey his will. We accept our place in God’s world since we know that we are totally dependent upon God for our very lives, for all that we are, and all that we have. We are supremely dependent upon God for the gift of eternal life freely given to us through faith in the saving work of Jesus Christ, despite the fact that we are sinful rebels who deserve God’s eternal punishment.
Read More
Related Posts:

At this point in time, one may legitimately ask just how sharp the dividing line remains between “Side A” and “Side B,” when it seems almost no expression of gay identity is out of bounds for Side B Christians. This question was openly raised in a Religion News report last year, in which Collins suggested some in the Side B camp might feel they have more “shared ground” with “Side A people who are Christians” than with more conservative same-sex attracted Christians, some of whom might have roots in the old “ex-gay” movement. Collins is not alone in comfortably referring to people on Side A as “Christians.” Wesley Hill has a similar stance toward affirming fellow Episcopal priests, even saying he “could be wrong” in his own commitment to the traditional sexual ethic.

In 2018, Wesley Hill published a report in First Things on a movement that claimed to be breaking new ground in the Christian discourse around faith and sexuality. It was the inaugural year of the Revoice conference, which billed itself as an ecumenical orthodox space for same-sex attracted Christians who wanted to honor a traditional sexual ethic, yet believed the Church’s approach to the issue needed to be rethought—“revoiced.” Such Christians needed more than a “vocation of no,” Hill argued. They needed a way to integrate their sexuality into their Christianity. They needed a “vocation of yes.”
Carl R. Trueman was an early critic of the Revoice project, although he was sympathetic in theory. Despite some concerns, he hoped the movement would self-correct and mature in response to good-faith criticism. But following a World magazine report on the conference’s 2022 convention, Trueman offered a less than favorable updated assessment: So far from self-correcting, the movement had ignored its critics and taken on board all the trappings of sexual identitarianism, from “preferred pronouns” to queer theory to the splintering of attendees into “affinity groups” based on their particular orientation. Cautiously hopeful as he’d once been, Trueman could no longer see anything to salvage. Besides all this, the conference’s inaugural host church, Memorial Presbyterian, recently voted to leave the PCA amid swirling controversy around its LGBT community outreach and its openly gay lead pastor, Greg Johnson.
The speed of this decline naturally prompts a question: Was there ever anything to salvage? In its current incarnation, are we witnessing a radical moral turn? Or are we witnessing the inevitable end of an inherently flawed project?
Before the first Revoice conference, Wesley Hill and Ron Belgau co-founded the group blog Spiritual Friendship in 2012, where they developed their new philosophy together with an ecumenical group of contributors. Catholic writer Eve Tushnet also contributed thoughts at her Patheos blog. As a shorthand for groups with divergent views on the topic, they used the metaphor of a record’s “A” and “B” sides. “Side A Christians” believed God would bless their gay relationships, while “Side B Christians” pursued chastity, some through heterosexual marriage, but most through celibacy.
Yet, even in celibacy, they proposed that they could still accept and sublimate their sexuality as a kind of gift. Perhaps they could even recover a covenantal model of “spiritual friendship” that would offer a chaste relational substitute for marital permanence, even if both parties were same-sex attracted. Tushnet, who first coined the phrase “a vocation of yes,” has recently written about her own exclusive commitment to another woman, the sort of commitment she has argued can strengthen a gay person’s walk with God. They openly identify as “a lesbian couple.”
In developing this philosophy, various Side B writers have rejected the idea that homosexual temptation is uniquely disordered. In his 2017 book All But Invisible, Revoice founder Nate Collins argued that the word “disordered” should apply equally to any sexual attraction outside monogamous male-female marriage. That same year, future Revoice collaborator Gregory Coles published his memoir Single, Gay, Christian, in which he speculated that his homosexual proclivity was not even a result of the Fall. Meanwhile, Hill, Belgau, and Tushnet all consistently normalized certain manifestations of same-sex desire, blurring the lines between proto-romance and “spiritual friendship.”
This normalization has been succinctly crystallized by Revoice charter speaker Grant Hartley, who has asserted explicitly that not all same-sex romance is “off limits” in a Side B framework, only same-sex sex. He goes on to elaborate that some “Side B folks” might “pursue relationships with the same sex which might be called ‘romantic’—the category of ‘romance’ is vague.” Hartley first provoked controversy with his inaugural Revoice talk, endorsed by Hill, which proposed that Christians could mine gay culture for “queer treasure.” For example, he analogizes “coming out of the closet” to death and resurrection. Even in spaces like a gay club, he feels a sense of “homecoming.”
Read More
Related Posts: