Journal of Biblical Literature - Society of Biblical Literature

Bauman-Martin: Women on the Edge 271
include resisting sexual service. The word that the author uses most often for
correct behavior (the behavior that will cause the suffering, not prevent it) is
ajgaqopoievw. Clearly, uJpotavssesqe here does not mean that they are to submit
sexually or to stop their Christian activities so that the suffering would cease;
the author insists consistently that the suffering will continue because of their
ajgaqopoiou'nta" (doing good). 67 “Accepting authority” here would then mean
that the slaves will not retaliate when punished for their Christian actions. 68
The author does not ask them to end the conflict-causing activities, but only to
behave submissively when confronted and punished for their nonconformity.
The author clarifies what their behavior should be in 2:21–25, in a
“midrash” on Isaiah 53:4–12. The focus of that passage is the >ebed Yhwh, or
“slave of Yahweh,” more commonly translated as Suffering Servant, who was
increasingly identified with Jesus by Christians in the late first century, if not
earlier. 70 The author demonstrates many points of contact between Christ’s
experience and what he expects the slaves to imitate: First, Jesus was innocent
of wrongdoing, as are the slaves in this situation. They may have disobeyed the
master by attending a Christian meeting or resisting sex, but they are truly
behaving correctly. The point is that the most innocent and holy behavior will
cause conflict and disharmony in relationships with non-Christians, not ameliorate
suffering or increase harmony with non-Christians. Jesus’ own moral
actions led to his own death. 71
Second, in spite of his innocence, Jesus was subject to abuse, and so are
the slaves. The abuse was probably physical and verbal and may have included
beating, rape, disabling, cursing, whipping, ridicule, and imprisonment. The
author seems to focus on the verbal abuse and the speech patterns of the Chris-
67 1 Peter 1:6–7; 2:4–8, 12, 18–20; 3:1–2, 9, 14, 15, 17; 4:1–2, 12–19; 5:8–10. Schüssler
Fiorenza instead argues that ajgaqopoiou'nta" should be interpreted as “being a good citizen”
because “‘what is good’ is agreed upon by Christians as well as pagans” (In Memory of Her, 261).
68 The punishment for a slave resisting sexual service could include physical abuse or the
threat of being sold (Glancy, “Obstacles to Slaves,”487, citing K. R. Bradley, “‘The Regular, Daily
Traffic in Slaves’: Roman History and Contemporary History,” CJ 87 [1992]: 125–38).
69 Thomas P. Osborne, “Guide Lines for Christian Suffering: A Source-Critical and Theological
Study of I Peter 2:21-25,” Bib 64 (1983): 381–408; Michaels, 1 Peter, 136–37.
70 Martin, Metaphor and Composition, 151. Scholars debate how well defined the idea of the
Suffering Servant was in first-century Judaism and how formative it was for the Christian idea of
the Messiah. J. Jeremias (“pais theou,” TDNT 5:677–717) has been the most influential; see also
Donald Juel, Messianic Exegesis: Christological Interpretation of the Old Testament in Early
Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988).
71 Osborne points out that this understanding of the apparent contradiction between actions
and results demonstrates an evolution in the Jewish concept of suffering—a new tradition represented
by the Suffering Servant hymn, which presented the positive consequences of suffering
inflicted upon the righteous (“Guide Lines,” 394 n. 49).