By what Paul said about those previous cases of subjection to husbands and slaveowners, we have a standard of measurement by which to measure how far the subjection and obedience to political governments and authorities as rulers goes with regard to dedicated, baptized Christians, such as Jehovah’s witnesses are. The subjection was to be, not total, but merely relative, toward husbands and slaveowners or masters, who are mere imperfect humans. Likewise the subjection must be a relative one toward governments and authorities, which are also made up of humans born in sin and condemned to death. However, the human “governments and authorities” have a responsibility toward all their peoples. One of their main responsibilities is to maintain good order and to give the people a measure of protection. Governments have enough trouble of their own with the unchristian people in general, without having dedicated, baptized Christians add to their troubles by joining worldly people in lawbreaking.

36. As far as being praised is concerned, why is it very fitting that Christians be obedient to governments and authorities?

³⁶ However, for Christians who are really God’s “holy ones” it is very fitting to be obedient to “governments and authorities as rulers.” Instead of deserving the ill will of these men in political office of this world, Christians should win, or, at least, deserve praise for being orderly and for respectfully abiding by the laws by which good order and public welfare are kept up in the community. Christians, because of their whole-souled devotion to God and their faithful imitation of Jesus Christ, are misunderstood and criticized enough and are therefore falsely accused for this cause alone, without needing to make themselves targets of true criticism and accusation for wrongdoing. Christians should show that the fear of God makes a difference in one’s life, for the better. Paul’s counsel is therefore for them to “be ready for every good work.”

37. How is this in harmony with the fact that Christ died and delivered us for a certain purpose, but how does this affect our subjection?

³⁷ This is entirely in harmony with the fact just mentioned beforehand by Paul, that our Savior Jesus Christ “gave himself for us that he might deliver us from every sort of lawlessness and cleanse for himself a people peculiarly his own, zealous for fine works.” (Titus 2:13, 14) How could doing this make us a potent danger to any governments and authorities of this world, even though our subjection to them is merely relative? At the same time our being a people delivered by Christ from every sort of lawlessness and our being “zealous for fine works” prevents us as Christians from rendering more than relative subjection to human governments and authorities. Why? Because human rulers may at times make demands and may enforce laws that are contrary to God’s supreme law.

38. What will our obedience to God’s law never let us do regarding governments and authorities, but what will it not let us join governments and authorities in doing?

³⁸ Our conscientious obedience to God’s law may embarrass human governments and authorities. It may show up their error and their nonalignment with God’s law. But it will never, no, never lead us into subversive movements or conspiracies or violent revolts against such existing governments and authorities. When we render to God what belongs to God during this system of things, it does not mean that we do not also render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar. (Matt. 22:21) It does not mean that we are violating the apostolic counsel to “be in subjection and be obedient to governments and authorities as rulers.” It simply means that as conscientious Christians we will not join with imperfect, human governments and authorities when they fight against God. We must take our stand with Christ’s apostles when they said to a nonpolitical, religious court in Jerusalem: “We must obey God as ruler rather than men.”—Acts 5:29.

39. Accordingly, what apostolic instructions will we follow, and with what in mind?

³⁹ In all cases we will follow the apostle Paul’s instruction about being in subjection to husbands, to slaveowners and to worldly, political governments and authorities as rulers, and about other affairs of life. This we will do “in order that those who have believed God may keep their minds on maintaining fine works. These things are fine and beneficial to men.”—Titus 3:8.

Subjecting Ourselves to “Every Human Creation”

1. Who are the freest people today, but how could they lose their freedom?

FREE people must be careful not to abuse their liberties or to use them as a cloak for selfish, lawless deeds. The freest people today are the people who have been set free from the bondage to the “ruler of this world,” Satan the Devil, who is the “god of this system of things,” the chief opposer of Jehovah God. (John 12:31; 2 Cor. 4:4) These people have been made free from the bondage to untruth, ignorance and superstitions. “If you remain in my word, you are really my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free,” said Jesus Christ, adding that “every doer of sin is a slave of sin. Moreover, the slave does not remain in the household forever; the son remains forever. Therefore if the Son sets you free, you will be actually free.” (John 8:31, 32, 34-36) Such disciples are free from the false human traditions and philosophies of this world that enslave men and hold them fast in a groove. They are not sin’s slaves who are not free to do right. But if they abused their freedom by becoming wild and then used their liberty as a cover for selfish lawlessness, they would lose their freedom. They would become slaves of sin, slaves of wrong.

2. How do true and imitation Christians differ as to use of freedom?

² Imitation Christians abuse the liberties they have. True disciples of Christ do not abuse their freedom, for they are guided by God’s Word. They are wise. They know that to abuse one’s freedom leads to trouble and difficulty with existing institutions of men.

3. When and to whom did Peter address his first letter, and how did he address them?

³ Christians follow God’s Word as expressed through the apostle Peter in his first letter to Christians. About A.D. 62-64, or about the same time that the apostle Paul wrote his letter to Titus, Peter wrote the letter to the Christians in Asia Minor, which was then part of the Roman Empire but now belongs to Turkey. Peter addressed them, not as permanent residents of where they were then living, not as a component part of the local community, but as the “temporary residents scattered about in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia.”—1 Pet. 1:1.

4, 5. (a) Their being merely temporary residents was all the more reason for Christians doing what? (b) Because they were aliens and temporary residents, what did Peter write them to do?

⁴ As they were only “temporary residents” they had all the more reason to keep from abusing their Christian freedom. Otherwise, they might not be understood or treated right by the community of which they were no real part, since they are no part of this world though being in the world. (John 17:14-16) True Christians today, such as the dedicated, baptized witnesses of Jehovah, are temporary residents in Turkey and all other parts of this world, for they are awaiting a new order of God’s creating. (2 Pet. 3:13) They are taking heed to Peter’s words that he wrote to caution true Christians against going too far with their freedom in Christ, namely:

⁵ “Beloved, I exhort you as aliens and temporary residents to keep abstaining from fleshly desires, which are the very ones that carry on a conflict against the soul. Maintain your conduct fine among the nations, that, in the thing in which they are speaking against you as evildoers, they may as a result of your fine works of which they are eyewitnesses glorify God in the day for his inspection. For the Lord’s sake subject yourselves to every human creation: whether to a king as being superior or to governors as being sent by him to inflict punishment on evildoers but to praise doers of good. For so the will of God is, that by doing good you may muzzle the ignorant talk of the unreasonable men. Be as free people, and yet holding your freedom, not as a blind for moral badness, but as slaves of God. Honor men of all sorts, have love for the whole association of brothers, be in fear of God, have honor for the king.”—1 Pet. 2:11-17.

6. Why is there no real reason to think that “a king as being superior” means Jesus Christ?

⁶ Who is this king? Who are the governors sent by this king? Since Peter wrote his letter to the Christian congregations, does Peter’s expression “a king as being superior” mean the Head of the Christian congregation, Jesus Christ? There is no real reason to think so. In his first letter Peter never directly mentions the kingdom of God, the closest suggestion of it being when Peter says that the Christians who are sanctified by God’s spirit are a “royal priesthood, a holy nation,” this meaning that they were king-priests. (1 Pet. 1:2; 2:9) But Peter does not speak of Jesus Christ as king. Peter always speaks of him as the Lord. This is so even in 2 Peter 1:11, where we read: “Thus there will be richly supplied to you the entrance into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.”a

7. How does Peter indicate whether this applies to a king inside or outside the Christian congregation?

⁷ Who, then, is the “king” mentioned in 1 Peter 2:13, 17? He is not the Lord Jesus Christ, nor is he Jehovah God, “the King of eternity.” Peter sets God in contrast with “the king,” saying: “Be in fear of God, have honor for the king.” When Peter gives his orders to Christians concerning this king, where does Peter locate the Christians to whom he writes? Is it inside the Christian congregation? Or is it outside in the world with its Roman emperor and its subsidiary kings and governors? Is Peter speaking to the Christians about their conduct inside the congregation, or about their conduct outside among the people of this world? In the opening sentence Peter addresses them as “temporary residents,” not inside the Christian congregation, but in the Roman provinces in Asia Minor. Then, just before speaking of the superior king and his governors, Peter reminds them of their status as aliens and temporary residents and tells them therefore to keep their conduct “fine among the nations,” where they are spoken against as evildoers.

8, 9. Why, then, was it necessary for Peter to tell Christians how to conduct themselves, and why was it particularly fitting at the time of his writing his letter?

⁸ That is outside the Christian congregation. Undeniably, then, Peter locates the Christians to whom he writes outside in the world of which they are no part. That is why Peter needed to tell them how to conduct themselves out there in close touch with the political, religious and social institutions of this world. From what he said in his letter it is plain that the Christians were suffering persecution, either from the pagans or from the unconverted Jews throughout the Roman Empire. So the Christians needed to watch themselves. If Peter wrote his letter about A.D. 62-64, it was just shortly before the Jewish revolt against the Roman Empire broke out at Jerusalem, which was in the year 66. The Christians had got their religion through the Jews, and the Christians’ headquarters were then at Jerusalem. Hence the general public confused the Christians with the unconverted natural Jews. By bad conduct against the Roman authorities just at that time Christians would give more reason for pagans to connect them up with the revolt-minded Jews.

⁹ Furthermore, the city of Rome was about to suffer the horrors and ruin of a great fire, A.D. 64, and Emperor Nero was about to turn the blame for this accidental fire away from himself by blaming the generally disliked, misunderstood Christians. Would the Christians inside the Roman Empire, by improper conduct, make themselves deserving of being suspected as the arsonists responsible for the burning of Rome? Providentially, in good time and with good forethought the inspired Peter showed Christians how to comport themselves in the Roman Empire under political governments.

10, 11. (a) Where is the “human creation” to which Christians are to be subject? (b) How or by whom did “every human creation” come into existence?

¹⁰ Accordingly, in 1 Peter 2:13-17 our attention is turned, not inside the congregation with its apostles, overseers and ministerial assistants, but outside the congregation to men in the visible, tangible world. Hence Peter tells us: “For the Lord’s sake subject yourselves to every human creation.” (1 Pet. 2:13) Here Peter does not say every spiritual or divine creation, which would be a creation inside God’s organization, such as the spiritual creation spoken of in 2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 6:15; Ephesians 2:10; 4:24; and Colossians 3:10. A “human creation” is one founded or arranged for or produced by a human individual or a group, such as an ambitious human or a lawmaking body like a senate or an assembly. The first human king was the founder of the city of Babel or Babylon. This was Nimrod, the “mighty hunter in opposition to Jehovah.” (Gen. 10:8-10) Of course, Nimrod did not create himself as a human creature. He created or founded the office of king.

¹¹ A lawmaking assembly or a government-making committee does not create the person who fills a certain government position. Such assembly or committee creates merely the office or government post that is to be occupied. It does not create the man that later occupies that office or post. When a man takes that office or post and assumes a title belonging to that position, then, as such, he becomes the creation of that human assembly or committee; he becomes a “human creation.” Thus by reason of his own action, aided by his followers, Nimrod was a “human creation” as the first earthly king. Likewise kings of other worldly nations are human creations by reason of the human origin of their office and of their appointment. Governors who are sent by such kings are also human creations.

WHETHER TO A KING OR TO GOVERNORS

12. For whose sake do they subject themselves, and how for his sake?

¹² Peter names or enumerates whom he means by the expression “every human creation” by going on to say: “Whether to a king as being superior or to governors.” Such a king does not mean the Lord Jesus Christ, because Peter just referred to him by saying: “For the Lord’s sake subject yourselves.” Thus Christians do not do something directly to God’s Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, but for his sake they subject themselves to “every human creation.” How for his sake? Because they do not want to bring any reproach upon the Lord Jesus Christ. They do not want their following him to be blamed for being disorderly and worldly among the nations. They desire to honor their Lord by being law-abiding residents, paying back to Caesar what belongs to Caesar.—Luke 20:25.

13, 14. (a) Whom is the expression “king” thought by some to mean? (b) Where is it that such a “human creation” as a “king” is “superior,” and to whom?

¹³ The king whom Peter here mentioned to Christians within the Roman Empire is thought by some to mean the Roman emperor, Nero at this time. In fact, some modern Bible translations, such as Moffatt’s and An American Translation, read: “the emperor as supreme”; and The New English Bible (New Testament): “the sovereign as supreme.”

¹⁴ However, Herod Agrippa I of Palestine and his son Herod Agrippa II, and Aretas of Nabataea, are mentioned as kings. (Acts 12:1; 25:13, 24; 26:1, 2; 2 Cor. 11:32) Such a “human creation” as a king or emperor is not superior or supreme inside the Christian congregation. There he is not superior to Jehovah God, who is the Most High, or to Jesus Christ, who is the Lord and Head of the congregation that is his body. But outside in the Devil’s organization the king is supreme locally or the emperor is supreme in the empire. So, as Christians are in the world of which Satan the Devil is the ruler and god, they have to be realistic and recognize that fact and act accordingly. The king or the emperor is superior to the governors whom he sends (John 13:16), but specially to the people his subjects. Hence the honor that is paid to the king or to the emperor is higher than that paid to governors.

15. When honoring a king, whom also must we honor, and what is his purpose in sending them, according to Peter?

¹⁵ Of course, if we honor the king or the emperor we must show it by also honoring his representatives, the “governors as being sent by him.” Now, when he sends these human creations, these governors, does the king intend to promote badness, disorder, confusion, moral decline, and business ruin and stagnation? Are governors sent by the king with a harmful, malicious intent? No! answers Peter, who says: “Being sent by him to inflict punishment on evildoers but to praise doers of good.” According to their own national laws or their own assignment of duties, Peter says that this is the purpose of sending and locating governors in Pontus, Cappadocia, Galatia, Asia Province and Bithynia and elsewhere.

16. What was the mission or function of governors in the Roman Empire with regard to Christians?

¹⁶ This mission of governors was especially true with regard to imperial colonies in distant parts of the Roman Empire. Otherwise, such governors would only induce revolt in the colonies. They were sent to maintain law and order. They were not sent specifically to persecute or act against true Christians. But, of course, if Christians did not bring forth the fruits of God’s holy spirit but turned to bringing forth the “works of the flesh” and thus did the same bad things that worldly persons did, then the governors would punish such Christians, not for being Christians, but for becoming evildoers and unfaithful examples of Christianity. The governors did not turn their attention solely to Christians. They inflicted punishment upon evildoers in general, including Christians who disobeyed Peter’s instruction and became evildoers. Of course, governors were obligated to give Christians the benefit of a trial when these were falsely accused by enemies. The unjust punishment of Christians was not the specific or exclusive function that governors were sent out to serve. Governors might even protect Christians.

17. (a) Was it the mission of governors to praise Christianity? (b) What is the idea, then, of Christians in seeking to win praise favorable to their religion?

¹⁷ To be sure, the governors were not sent by the king or by the Roman emperor to praise Christianity, for they had their own gods. But individual persons, whether Christian or not, could receive praise or approval from the governor for being orderly and law-abiding and beneficial to the community. The good conduct of the Christian would reflect favorably upon the religion that he practiced—Christianity. So in expressing any praise to the law-abiding Christian the governor would be indirectly paying a compliment to Christianity, the religion of these “aliens and temporary residents” in the Roman provinces. Christians have the right idea when they seek to win praise in behalf of their religion rather than to have punishment inflicted upon them for evildoing. What they want is that those ignorantly speaking against them “may as a result of your fine works of which they are eyewitnesses glorify God in the day for his inspection.” (1 Pet. 2:12) Because of being misunderstood for their religion Christians may be spoken of as evildoers, in spite of their “fine works.” But such evilspeaking by enemies does not necessarily or unavoidably cause punishment to be inflicted upon faithful Christians by the king’s governors.

“SO THE WILL OF GOD IS”

18. Why, according to the way that Peter puts the matter, could it not be dangerous for us to be subject thus to worldlings?

¹⁸ But are we not going ahead on a dangerous basis, if we say that Peter was talking about political kings and governors of this old world? How could a Christian apostle tell Christians to subject themselves to worldlings? Is that not perilous to Christian faith and practice? Would that not oblige Christians to obey the king and his governors rather than obey God? By no means; for Peter says that such subjecting of ourselves is God’s will for Christians who spiritually are “aliens and temporary residents” in this world of kings and governors. Such subjection has a purpose. What? “For so the will of God is, that by doing good you may muzzle the ignorant talk of the unreasonable men.” (1 Pet. 2:15) It would not be God’s will for Christians to obey kings and governors rather than God. Christians could not be “doing good” and at the same time be obeying the king and his governors to the point of disobeying God and sinning against God. Peter did not mean that Christians in subjection to kings and governors should break God’s laws. Disobeying God by breaking his commandments does not muzzle the ignorant talk of unreasonable men who do not want to understand Christianity.

19. (a) What is the “good” for doing which the Christians earn praise? (b) For the sake of what do they do it, and is their subjecting of themselves a forced subjection?

¹⁹ So the “good” for which the doers of good earn praise from the governors means what the governors think