1 PETER 2:18–20

SERVANTS, MASTERS, AND UNJUST SUFFERING

18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.
19 For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully.
20 For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.
— 1 Peter 2:18–20, KJV

These verses require careful handling.

For centuries, passages concerning servants and masters have sometimes been used to defend slavery. They have also been used to tell mistreated people:

Stay where you are.

Don't resist.

Just suffer quietly.

But before using Peter's words that way, we need to ask some basic questions.

Whom was Peter addressing?

What was their situation in the Roman world?

What exactly does he command?

And equally important:

What does Peter never say?

Peter is teaching Christians how to remain faithful when they suffer unjustly.

That is not the same thing as declaring the unjust system itself to be good.

FIRST, NOTICE THE CONTEXT

Peter has just discussed Christians and civil authorities:

“Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake…”
— 1 Peter 2:13, KJV

Now he turns to another relationship involving authority:

“Servants, be subject to your masters…”

Later he will address wives and husbands.

So Peter is moving through relationships his readers encountered in ordinary Roman society.

His immediate concern is:

How does someone who belongs to Christ behave when living under another person's authority—especially when that authority is unjust?

“SERVANTS”

The KJV says:

“Servants…”

The Greek word here is oiketai, the plural of oiketēs.

It refers particularly to household servants or slaves.

We should not soften the passage by pretending Peter is merely speaking about modern employees.

Many of the people Peter addressed would have lacked freedoms that a modern employee possesses.

A modern employee can ordinarily quit a job.

A Roman slave generally could not simply announce:

I resign.

So the relationship Peter describes is much more serious than employer and employee.

ROMAN SLAVERY WAS NOT IDENTICAL TO AMERICAN RACE-BASED SLAVERY

We also need to avoid moving in the opposite direction and pretending all historical forms of slavery were identical.

Slavery in the Roman world took several forms.

Enslaved people could work in households, agriculture, mines, businesses, education, administration, and skilled professions. Some could eventually be freed.

Roman slavery was not based exclusively upon the racial system later developed in the Americas.

But none of that makes slavery harmless.

An enslaved person was legally under another person's authority and lacked freedoms we would regard as basic human rights.

So we should neither make Roman slavery identical to every later slave system nor minimize what it meant to be enslaved.

PETER IS SPEAKING TO THE SERVANTS THEMSELVES

This is important.

Peter does not address Roman lawmakers here.

He does not write a political program for abolishing slavery.

He speaks directly to Christians who were already living within the system.

That distinction matters.

There is a great difference between saying:

Here is how a Christian slave can faithfully follow Christ in circumstances he cannot easily change

and saying:

God approves the institution that placed him there.

Peter says the first.

He does not say the second.

“BE SUBJECT TO YOUR MASTERS”

Peter tells them:

“be subject to your masters…”

Again the language is submission.

It follows directly after his discussion of submission to government.

But as we saw there, biblical submission does not make another human being God.

Every human authority remains beneath God's authority.

That will become especially important when Peter explains why a Christian might endure unjust treatment.

“WITH ALL FEAR”

At first glance this sounds as though Peter says:

Be terrified of your masters.

But we need to read it in light of what Peter has just written.

Verse 17 said:

“Fear God. Honour the king.”

And verse 19 will say:

“for conscience toward God…”

So whose judgment ultimately governs the Christian servant's behavior?

God's.

There is some interpretive discussion over whether the “fear” of verse 18 is directed immediately toward the master or reflects reverence toward God. But Peter's larger argument clearly places ultimate fear and accountability with God.

The earthly master is not the Christian's ultimate Lord.

“NOT ONLY TO THE GOOD AND GENTLE”

Peter recognizes that some masters were:

“good and gentle.”

The word translated “gentle” carries the idea of fairness, reasonableness, or consideration.

Submission to a good master would be comparatively easy.

But Peter is interested in the difficult case.

“BUT ALSO TO THE FROWARD”

The KJV word “froward” is old English.

The Greek word is skolios.

It means crooked, perverse, harsh, or unjust.

Our English word scoliosis comes from the same basic idea of crookedness.

Peter is not calling these masters good.

That is crucial.

He distinguishes:

GOOD AND GENTLE

from

CROOKED AND UNJUST.

Peter recognizes that the authority figure can be wrong.

Submission does not magically make injustice righteous.

PETER DOES NOT SAY THE MASTER IS RIGHT

That distinction becomes even clearer in verse 19:

“suffering wrongfully.”

Peter calls the suffering what it is:

wrongful.

That one word prevents us from interpreting the passage as though whatever the master does automatically becomes legitimate because he is the master.

Peter knows that authority can act unjustly.

The Christian may be innocent.

The master may be wrong.

And God knows the difference.

“FOR CONSCIENCE TOWARD GOD”

Why would a Christian endure such treatment without retaliating?

Peter says:

“for conscience toward God…”

This is not passive submission because the master deserves unquestioned obedience.

The Christian's attention is directed above the master.

He knows God sees.

God knows whether the accusation is true.

God knows whether the punishment is deserved.

The servant's ultimate relationship is with God.

That changes the meaning of his endurance.

“ENDURE GRIEF”

Peter does not pretend suffering feels pleasant.

He calls it:

“grief.”

The Christian may hurt.

The Christian may feel the injustice deeply.

Faith does not require pretending that mistreatment does not hurt.

Peter never says:

If your faith is strong enough, injustice won't bother you.

Instead he recognizes the grief while teaching them how to respond faithfully.

“SUFFERING WRONGFULLY”

This may be the controlling expression in the paragraph.

The Greek word carries the straightforward idea of suffering unjustly.

Peter is dealing with innocent suffering.

That becomes even clearer in verse 20.

NOT ALL SUFFERING IS CHRISTIAN SUFFERING

Peter asks:

“For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently?”

In other words:

Suffering does not automatically make us righteous.

Sometimes people suffer because they did something wrong.

Peter will make the same distinction later:

“But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evildoer…”
— 1 Peter 4:15, KJV

There is no spiritual credit in behaving badly and then calling the consequences persecution.

That is an important distinction in every generation.

“BUFFETED”

The word Peter uses can refer to being struck.

So we should not sanitize the situation.

These servants could experience physical punishment.

Peter knew that such treatment occurred.

Yet notice again what he says:

“when ye do well, and suffer for it…”

The servant is doing good.

The suffering is wrongful.

The master may be crooked.

Peter does not morally confuse the victim and the wrongdoer.

“WHEN YE DO WELL, AND SUFFER FOR IT”

This is Peter's concern.

A Christian does what is right.

He suffers anyway.

What then?

Peter says:

“ye take it patiently…”

The word does not mean pretending the injustice is acceptable.

It means enduring without abandoning faithfulness to God.

Peter's question is:

Will suffering make you become like the person mistreating you?

Will injustice turn you toward revenge?

Will hatred produce hatred?

Will violence produce a desire for retaliation?

Peter's answer is:

Continue doing good.

“THIS IS ACCEPTABLE WITH GOD”

The KJV says:

“this is acceptable with God.”

Verse 19 similarly says:

“this is thankworthy…”

The underlying word is connected with charis—grace or favor.

The point is that God sees faithful endurance under unjust suffering.

The master may not appreciate it.

Society may not notice it.

But:

God does.

This is one of Peter's recurring answers to suffering Christians.

Human judgment is not the final judgment.

DOES PETER APPROVE SLAVERY?

We should answer only what the text permits.

Peter does not say:

Slavery is good.

He does not say:

God created slavery as the ideal social arrangement.

He does not tell masters:

You have God's permission to mistreat your slaves.

He specifically calls some masters crooked and some suffering wrongful.

At the same time, Peter does not launch a direct campaign in this passage to abolish the Roman institution.

He addresses Christians who already live within it and tells them how to follow Christ there.

Those are the facts of the text.

We should not make Peter say either more or less.

THE REST OF THE NEW TESTAMENT ADDS SOMETHING IMPORTANT

Paul tells Christian masters:

“give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven.”
— Colossians 4:1, KJV

And:

“forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him.”
— Ephesians 6:9, KJV

That radically limits the master's supposed superiority.

The earthly master himself has a Master.

And God shows:

“no respect of persons.”

Before God, the social hierarchy does not determine human value.

PHILEMON GOES EVEN FARTHER

Paul's letter to Philemon concerns Onesimus, who was enslaved.

Paul tells Philemon to receive him:

“Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved…”
— Philemon 16, KJV

That does not amount to a full political program for ending Roman slavery.

But it plants something profoundly disruptive inside the institution.

The man society calls a slave is:

“a brother beloved.”

If master and slave are brothers under one Lord, the supposed absolute difference between them has begun to collapse.

GALATIANS MAKES THE EQUALITY EXPLICIT

Paul writes:

“There is neither bond nor free…for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”
— Galatians 3:28, KJV

That does not mean every social distinction disappeared instantly in Roman society.

Clearly it did not.

But before God, slave and free stand on the same ground in Christ.

That truth eventually creates enormous pressure against treating one human being as the property of another.

DOES THIS PASSAGE REQUIRE SOMEONE TO REMAIN IN ABUSE TODAY?

No such command appears in the text.

That needs to be stated carefully.

Peter is speaking to people within a first-century system in which many servants had extremely limited legal or practical ability to leave.

He teaches them how to remain faithful within circumstances they may not be able to change.

He does not say:

If escape from unjust treatment becomes possible, you must refuse it.

He does not say:

Never seek protection.

He does not say:

Never report wrongdoing.

He does not say:

Allow someone to injure you when lawful protection is available.

Those ideas would have to be brought into the passage from somewhere else.

They are not Peter's words.

PAUL EVEN ALLOWS FREEDOM WHEN AVAILABLE

Paul tells enslaved Christians:

“Art thou called being a servant? care not for it: but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather.”
— 1 Corinthians 7:21, KJV

The precise syntax of the last phrase has generated some scholarly discussion, but a common and natural reading is that if freedom becomes available, the enslaved Christian should make use of it.

At minimum, the New Testament does not teach that remaining enslaved is spiritually superior.

ENDURANCE IS NOT THE SAME AS ENABLING EVIL

This distinction is essential.

Peter teaches:

Do not let another person's evil turn you into an evildoer.

That is very different from:

Help the evildoer continue doing evil.

A Christian may refuse revenge while still seeking justice.

A Christian may forgive while still reporting a crime.

A Christian may love an enemy while still protecting someone vulnerable from that enemy.

A Christian may endure unavoidable suffering without believing that avoidable suffering must never be escaped.

Those distinctions become even clearer when we see what Peter says about Jesus.

PETER IS ABOUT TO POINT TO CHRIST

Verse 20 ends:

“when ye do well, and suffer for it…”

Then verse 21 begins:

“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us…”

That means we should not stop the argument at verse 20.

Peter's ultimate example is not the Roman slave system.

It is Jesus Christ.

Christ did good.

Christ suffered unjustly.

Christ did not retaliate.

Christ entrusted Himself to God.

And His suffering accomplished something no ordinary human suffering could accomplish.

Peter is about to move from:

the suffering servant

the suffering Servant.

ISAIAH 53 IS COMING

The next verses are saturated with Isaiah 53.

Peter will say:

“Who did no sin…”

“neither was guile found in his mouth…”

“Who his own self bare our sins…”

“by whose stripes ye were healed.”

“For ye were as sheep going astray…”

Peter is moving directly toward Isaiah's suffering Servant.

That gives this paragraph its deepest Christian meaning.

The oppressed Christian is not told:

Your suffering doesn't matter.

He is told:

Your Lord knows what unjust suffering is.

Jesus Himself walked that road.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUFFERING AND RETALIATION

Peter's central concern is not that Christians must preserve unjust social arrangements.

His concern is what suffering does to the Christian.

Will injustice produce injustice?

Will hatred produce hatred?

Will cruelty produce cruelty?

Will slander produce slander?

Or can someone suffer wrongfully while continuing to do good because his conscience is fixed upon God?

That question runs throughout 1 Peter.

TEXT BEFORE TRADITION

This passage gives us a good example of how dangerous it can be to begin with a later controversy and then make the Bible defend one side.

Someone defending slavery could quote:

“Servants, be subject to your masters…”

and stop.

Someone wanting to avoid the difficulty could simply say:

“Servants” means employees.

Neither approach does justice to the text.

Peter really was addressing people living in slavery.

He really did tell them to submit.

He also called unjust masters crooked.

He called innocent suffering wrongful.

And he grounded Christian endurance not in the moral goodness of slavery but in:

“conscience toward God.”

Read everything Peter says.

Do not remove the uncomfortable part.

Do not add what he did not say.

Read first. Conclude later.

QUESTIONS WORTH THINKING ABOUT

Why is “servant” an incomplete modern picture of the oiketēs Peter was addressing?
Why should we neither equate Roman slavery completely with later American race-based slavery nor minimize its injustice?
Does Peter tell us that slavery itself is good—or does he tell Christians how to live faithfully within an existing system?
What does Peter's word “froward” tell us about his judgment of some masters?
Why is the phrase “suffering wrongfully” so important?
What does “for conscience toward God” tell us about the Christian's ultimate allegiance?
Why does Peter distinguish suffering for wrongdoing from suffering while doing good?
Does patiently enduring unavoidable suffering mean Christians must refuse protection or escape when those become possible?
How do Colossians 4:1, Philemon 16, and Galatians 3:28 add to the New Testament picture?
Have passages like this sometimes been made to defend an institution when Peter's actual concern is how Christians remain faithful while suffering within it?

NEXT DEEPER STUDY

1 PETER 2:21–25 — “BY WHOSE STRIPES YE WERE HEALED”

This is one of the richest passages in the letter because Peter takes us directly into Isaiah 53.

But it raises several important questions.

When Peter says:

“Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example…”

was Jesus' death primarily an example for us to imitate?

Or did His death accomplish something that our suffering never could?

Peter will answer:

“Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree…”

And when he says:

“by whose stripes ye were healed,”

does Peter mean that Christ's death guarantees Christians physical healing?

Isaiah 53 and Peter's own explanation will help us answer that without making the verse say either less—or more—than Peter intended.

Return to HOME page

Return to PETER page