The Good Life

Automated transcript of the sermon audio, generated with OpenAI Whisper (small.en). It has not been checked against the recording and may contain errors, especially in names and Scripture references.

I would invite you to join me tonight in 1st Peter chapter 3 verses 8 through 12 That’s going to be the paragraph that we will be looking at in our time together The fact is self-evident that men pursue happiness We make decisions and we act Based on what we think will bring about our greatest happiness in the end If a robber comes up to you with a gun in hand and says give me your wallet You surrender your wallet not because you think that will make you happiest right now but because that will affect your greatest happiness in the end, right? Because lots of people push back and say, well if man does what he wants to do, if he’s actually bound by his will, then how do we explain when I do things that I don’t want to do?

Well, in truth we don’t. We are always striving for our happiness. The Greek philosopher Aristotle, along with a host of other philosophers, understood this well. And it is confirmed by the Christian worldview. In fact, this greatest happiness that men pursue is what philosophers have over the ages called the good life. It’s true, the ancient Greek philosophers pursued the good life with calculated determination. But they couldn’t agree on how to get there. Just looking at three big ones, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Spa, if you ever have a hard time remembering who discipled whom. Socrates and Plato thought reality transcended what we perceive.

Aristotle was much closer to the truth and his insistence on the reality of the particulars, what can be perceived here with our senses. So you get that. So Aristotle was more here, and Socrates and Plato were more here. That’s Raphael’s painting, School of Athens. And of course, the biblical worldview teaches something, well that is true of course, but Aristotle was closer to the reality, namely that what we perceive with our senses is absolutely real. This is real. Heaven will be real and we will perceive it with senses. It’s not just this ethereal dream state, it is real. And even if we’re looking forward to more profound, real experience yet to come after this life, that doesn’t mean that this is not real.

This is more than just shadows on a cave wall or something. So for Socrates, the good life existed in the realm of the forms. The ideal situation was to graduate past the corrupt realm of the physical to the realm of the forms, as the good life has neither shadow nor substance, just essence.

And if it’s hard to figure this stuff out, it’s because it’s hard to figure this stuff out. And I think that largely these philosophers themselves confused and not self-consistent. So it’s hard to keep track of them because I think they did a poor job keeping track of themselves and their own teaching. But Plato, a disciple of Socrates, taught that this life is but shadows of a reality. And the philosophers are closer to seeing accurately the reality than the normal numbskulls like you and me might be.

And the allegory of the cave, the normal folks like you and me were just ones who were strapped to these chairs looking at a cave wall for our whole lives. It could turn either to the right nor the left, seeing these shadows. And the shadows are being cast by an artificial light, namely a fire that was set behind us. And then imagine one person getting free and actually going out of the cave into the sunlight and seeing things as they actually are. And coming back and telling everybody, no this is fake. This is all, these are all just shadows. Well they may well kill that man. And of course he was making a to comment on, the philosophers are the ones who are truly enlightened and not only might they hypothetically kill such a man, they did kill Socrates. So Plato sympathized with Socrates in that. But for you and me, all we’re seeing are just shadows. Right, the question is not whether or not this is a music stand. That’s actually, that’s fine, well and good, but how does it embody the essence of music stand-ness?

So what about it is fundamentally, essentially characteristic of music stands. Because somewhere in the ether there’s a music stand that is the music stand. And this is just a picture. I know there’s black ones back there in the closet or up on the stage. Those are also. fine, but they’re shadows of a reality. The forms, I mean that’s where the reality actually is. No doubt, he must have been a lot of fun at parties. But Plato, who not surprisingly held the general disdain for matter, so this is a reflection of shadow, whatever. For whatever. For him it was unconscionable that God would take on flesh. It’s like God becoming a shadow on the wall of the cave and that’s something that was that he could not imagine. For Plato then who held the general disdain for matter the best we could do was live in potentially political harmony in community one with another because it was all for now Matter can’t be avoided.

What also you see with Plato, for instance, is the folly of men defining their own terms for morality. So Plato identifies, you know, justice is what creates, what does the greatest good for mankind. And that is, that is consummate morality. And when you’re not doing the greatest, when you’re not doing what you’re supposed to do, when you’re not doing your job, that is immoral when you’re not doing your job in a culture, so says Plato. Well, on an IQ test, Plato would score pretty high. But what we see with Plato and Aristotle and Emma Socrates are men grasping at truth apart from the capital T, truth. So what else are they going to do?

Of course they’re going to define their own terms. And so, as we mentioned, Aristotle, the disciple of Plato, thought that the particulars were real. Thought this matter that’s around us is real. And so it’s at least okay. So, Aristotle got a whole lot closer to the truth than did his predecessors. He thought the man could actually find happiness in this earthly life. And he prescribed ways to go about it. But once again, he was at least conjecturing. He was the least speculating because he didn’t have an objective source of morality to return to. So he was saying that in his school, it was actually on a grove, and they walked around.

They’re called parapetetics. And they would just walk around and do their lessons. And he would say, all this that you see is real. And men pursue happiness, and the way for men to pursue, to attain the greatest happiness, the good life, is basically a life of moderation. It’s a life of finding the mean between extremes. That is a virtue. A virtue is finding the mean on a spectrum between excess and deficiency. So it might be any number of things, but that again, that’s well and good. But why? Who? How? Those are all fair questions. And that’s called again the doctrine of the mean. These virtues were means to be attained between in any set of actions.

So enter Peter, for instance. There’s a sense in which Aristotle may well have agreed with much of what Peter had to say in our passage tonight. And even Peter is quoting David from Psalm 32. We’ll look at that. But if you write nothing else down, write this down. So Peter makes one point. He comes at it a bunch of different ways, but in the passage we’re looking at tonight, this is it. The good life is the blessing of God and It comes to those who bring the greatest blessing to others I’ll repeat that Yeah, I’ll talk first so what what it’s not the good life is not the pursuit of some moderate mean between extremes the the the The good life is not pining for death when the good is yet to come.

And yes, it is true. The good is yet to come. But I think it’s far too low of a bar for us to suppose that Peter is just trying to help his readers muddle through this life and make it into heaven. In fact, emphatically, that’s not the case. It is true. And he opens his letter by talking about an inheritance that is undefiled in Paris when and won’t fade away and all the rest. That’s great. There’s a lot coming. That actually ought to motivate us to live righteously now. But this is a formula for real happiness in this life in the pages of scripture. And that is not something that Aristotle or Plato or Socrates had.

Or really, they might have been able to appreciate it if they had God’s word. But I’ll give it again. Contrasted with the Greek philosophers, The good life is the blessing of God, and it comes to those who bring the greatest blessing to others. That’s the case that I wanna make tonight, and we’ll do so as we examine this passage. There’s no need for spiritual empowerment if you wanna obey Aristotle. Natural man can do what Aristotle prescribed. He only needs to be interested in his own happiness to pursue those virtues, but to obey Peter, a man must be spirit-filled, And in his blessing of others, he, by the grace of God, brings about his own blessing.

By the blessing of others, the Spirit-filled man brings about his own blessing. That is the good life. Our culture is too easily satisfied. Well, we think of as the good life is something like a beer commercial or like the life of the celebrities, a rock star, like how they live. We know on one level that’s empty, but because the suicide numbers are uncannily high. But man does it look attractive. Luxury, no worry. Don’t, yeah, don’t mistake. Sometimes temporal blessings come about as blessings from God, that’s fine. But in scripture we do not find lasting satisfaction coming about from the pursuit of earthly pleasures.

It doesn’t happen. Sometimes God gives, good gifts, material gifts. The things of earth are themselves blessings from God for our enjoyment and it is wrong for us not to receive them with thankfulness. I would say it’s wrong for us not to receive them in the first place as many ascetics do. No, Lord, I’m satisfied in you, I don’t need food. Okay, but what if he wants you to enjoy that? That’s a blessing from him, but we must receive those things with thankfulness and yet The pursuit of those things in and of themselves forsake of themselves is idolatry but too much good stuff though didn’t seem to be the problem of Peter’s readers Now he wrote this letter to have the dispersion in Pontius, Galicia, Cappadocia, Asia, Bithynia This is Asia Minor modern-day Turkey Those were all provinces of the Roman Empire and on the throne in AD 64 ish Anybody know who was the Emperor at that time?

In 64 who was a Mrs. Ratzlaff? It was Nero, not a hero Yeah in the wake of AD 64, what happened in the summer of AD 64? Anybody know? Something really bad happened, was it? Rome burned And how much time do I have? I’ll go fast Nero was opportunistic. Whether or not he actually was the one who initiated that fire or not, he at least had the negative character that an accusation like that would stick. And he didn’t help himself when in the wake of that fire, like eight of the twelve districts of Rome were burned to the ground, and he used that opportunity to build himself a new palace. So he infamously played his harp and sang while Rome was burning.

marveling at the spectacle. But that actually was not a good PR move, so he took opportunity to then deflect some of that attention by persecuting Christians. Empire-wide, starting in Rome and then going outwards. So in the wake of the summer of AD 64, there was a wide-scale persecution of Christians. And Peter, I think Peter and Paul both died under Nero’s rule. But in this time, Peter is looking at this tremendous opportunity. Here we have an unprecedented opportunity to be as lights in a dying world in the midst of tremendous persecution. The persecution of the Christians by the Romans was a lot like water on a grease fire.

Far from extinguishing the flames, it just scattered them without having any sort of dousing effect. And Peter’s big picture focus then is on the testimony of his readers in a time of tremendous opportunity and persecution, that opportunity being brought on by their suffering. Because when a martyr is tied to the stake and wishes to issue a few last words, those who are gathered around the flames will tend to perk up and listen. Sometimes they cut out his tongue, but other times they’ll listen. And that was the sort of opportunity that they had here and now. And when you read the whole of First Peter with that in view, it’s really remarkable.

So, their affliction gave them great opportunity as witnesses. And he really wants them to take full advantage of that opportunity, proclaiming Christ to the Gentiles with their words and with their actions. 1 Peter 3 verses 8 through 12 is at then the back end of a section that stretches. Well, it’s introduced in chapter 2 verses 11 and 12. Let’s read that real quick, just two verses. Chapter 2 verses 11 and 12, where he says, Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul, keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable, so that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation.”

And after that he gives a host of directives related to how to go about that, how to put feet to that charge. And that runs from then verse 13 of chapter 2 through the paragraph that we will look at tonight. So if you would please join me In reading this passage, I would be glad to do that.

First Peter chapter three, verses eight through 12. Finally, all of you have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and humble mind. Do not repay evil for evil or a violin for a violin, but on the contrary, bless, for to this you were called that you may obtain a blessing. For whoever desires to love life and see good days, let him keep his tongue from evil and his lips from speaking deceit. Let him turn away from evil and do good. Let him seek peace and pursue it for the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous and his ears are open to their prayer but the face of the Lord is against those who do evil.” This is at the back end of a passage then where Peter is instructing his readers on how to impact a dying world while dying themselves. How to live dynamic lives of faithful submission in appropriate submission one to another.

And submission, that’s kind of a funny term, but we’re talking about appropriate submission. So you have a submission to civil authorities, you have submission slaves to masters, you have submission wives to husbands, you have an appropriate submission that comes from dying to self of husbands to their wives, living with their wives in an understanding way as someone weaker. And all of this, it is more than just how Christians ought to live in community, it is more than that, it’s how they are to live in society. With one another there’s a there’s a lot of Christian to Christian interaction direct this direction here But also how you are to live in a culture. So what do you do if you have a godless?

Husband master if you’re a slave and so on and so forth Well Yes, he is offering a recipe for that sort of impact But he also offers a formula for the good life for our greatest happiness While we are not called to pursue fleeting pleasures in this life, neither are we simply to muddle through somehow. The teaching that he offers is dynamic, it’s radical, it’s Christ-centered, and they’re being equipped, these readers are being equipped to impact eternity through their conduct. And Peter, Paul, other apostles, by applying these same principles of boldness and joyfulness in the face of godless persecutors, We’re said to have turned the world upside down, you may recall from Acts 17.

This is powerful, impactful obedience to Christ. Well, I would add that if the good life were attainable in the first century for believers of Peter’s audience, how much more ought we to desire to love life and see good days? Yeah, if they could apply this paragraph with a promise of spiritual blessing, then Don’t think that the payoff is any smaller for us today. Yeah, I grant that the distracting presence of temporal blessings, like all of those crazy temporal blessings that we enjoy, food on the table, MP3s on our iPods, cell signals, our idea of persecution and affliction is being laughed at or having to wait and align more than three deep at Starbucks.

That’s not in my notes. It should be easier for us to apply these principles in the society where we don’t face the fear of real persecution for doing so. But here we are. We find ourselves then in this passage. It’s a beautiful and encouraging paragraph with rich promises for the believer, but it also has plenty of warnings, and I don’t want us to miss those. It seems as though there are four keys, and I want to key in on four keys to the good life, according to Peter, in this paragraph, and they will serve as our outline. The first key is a good attitude. The second key is a good response. The third key is a good commitment, and fourth, a good motive.

This is a life for tremendous blessing. It’s possible to thrive in this world, but to do so, we have to be living for the next one. Let’s look at Peter’s keys then, the good life. First is a good attitude, and we find this at the back end of verse 8, where he says, Finally, all of you have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind. Finally, can also be translated to sum up, finally actually is telos, I love it. It’s like my new favorite word. So Aristotle believed that human conduct was teleological. There was an end to it and it was our happiness. And this is finally, that is to get to the end of this instruction, Peter is saying, have this unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, a humble mind.

So he’s not talking about the end of the letter, what he’s saying at the end of this section. That’s what the finally means here. We could consider it with particular focus on submission, all these things that I’ve said, this section. But a larger heading might be related to the believer’s relational conduct. Whether it is in the form of submission to authorities, or in the home, or other principles from this paragraph, Peter is aware that his reader’s conduct and interaction are important for their testimony. But here he wraps up this particular teaching. What follows then are five attitudes. These are Christian virtues by which Peter would like his readers to be characterized.

He lists, they’re actually adjectives describing words that have a very instructional sense to them. The ESV renders them as nouns and having these things is understood. They’re both good translations in the end, the NAS with the adjectives like the Greek es or the ESV, because the idea is clear. Be marked by these things, have these things. And let’s look at them one by one. Interesting that intentional or otherwise, there’s actually a key asset structure to these five attributes. The first and last deal with the mind, and then the unity of mind and a humble mind. The second and fourth deal with feeling. And then right squarely in the middle is what is central to this all, namely brotherly love.

Peter says have unity of mind. Well, true of this attribute and all the others is that they are completely appropriate for believers. Sure, and impossible for unbelievers. True unity can characterize believers because we’re indwelt by the same spirit. The same person of God, the Father, the Son, the Spirit, the Third Person, the Trinity, actually resides within each believer. He cannot be at odds with himself. So when we are being controlled by the Spirit, of course we’re going to live harmoniously. We’re going to have a unity that the world can neither understand, really nor appreciate. It’s a unity the only true believers can enjoy.

Second, he points to sympathy. This is exactly like it is in English. Feeling the same thing as someone else. That is to be compassionate. And this is what Christ does for us. Hebrews teaches us that as much, that he can sympathize with our weaknesses. And it ought to be what we do for one another. When we feel one another’s hurts. we are better equipped to minister and to be a blessing to one another. So in the greater context of being a blessing to others, feeling for them helps us to do that. Brotherly love is sinful in these five, literally and figuratively, because the other four attitudes simply can’t exist without love.

This is a particular love that believers share as they are united in the spirit. Unbelievers can’t take part in this love. Peter was most certainly present when Jesus told his disciples in John 13, 35, by this All people will know that you are my disciples if you have love for one another. That brotherly love characterizes Christians and is a hallmark of believers. Fourth he calls these readers to have a tender heart. That deals with a deep-seated kindness actually from bowels like the splognan, right? Way down here, deep in the core of your being. I suppose the contrast of this might help if you think of a surface level, superficial, plastic niceness on the outside sort of compassion.

A simple good deed to impress other’s stance in contrast with a kindness that actually comes from deep within you. And it’s also worth noting that a superficial kindness demands to be seen, but deep-seated, tender heartedness and compassion doesn’t need to be seen by others. It actually flows from who we are. And fifth and finally, a humble mind. That is the most basic of Christian attitudes really because while love may drive all these other attributes, a humble mind makes them possible. There’s no place for self-promotion. There’s no place for self-glorification in the Christian life. Neither is there salvation without any humility.

The proud person doesn’t recognize any need for a Savior. So Peter has shown then what sort of attitude accompanies the good life. This is a good attitude that accompanies the good life. So how does this play out in our response to evildoers? Helpful again thinking about the context of this letter. Let’s look at our second key to the good life, namely a good response. We find this in verse 9. A good response, do not repay evil for evil or reviling for reviling. But on the contrary, bless, for to this you were called, that you may obtain a blessing.” Peter is, he’s not just expecting it. He knows that they are being paid evil and reviling and they have opportunity to repay something different.

He’s suggesting that those who seek revenge on other people will never actually find the satisfaction that they’re looking for. Think for a moment of why you might want to get back at someone. If you have any siblings, you don’t have to use your imagination. We say things, we’ll say things high and mighty like, I just want to see justice served. Because or, it’s just not right. Well getting beyond that, we know that that’s not the case because we’re not actually that hungry for justice. I mean if we were, then the cross would be offensive to us as well. As the wrath of God was poured out on Christ for sins that we committed, the demands of God’s justice we’re met at the cross make no mistake but at the expense of Christ while we benefit. So justice for justice sake is hardly what motivates us.

Rather we actually want to feel better and it makes us feel better to put somebody in his place when other people get what they deserve. But then what? Does that bring back the thing that was taken or destroyed? Does that bring satisfaction? Well no. The key to the good life is not to actually return evil for evil but it is to return good for evil. Again, something evidently not of the mind of men. Do not return evil for evil or reviling for reviling because it won’t bring the satisfaction you’re hoping for. Think about how freeing it would be to be able to return good for evil every time. How would that like change your family dynamic? There are also, think about politics, this season of political turmoil and mudslinging.

There are also practical benefits to this kind of patience. So Proverbs 51, a gentle answer turns away wrath. When you respond righteously to an unkind gesture or a word, you heap coals on the head of your enemy. Well, Peter strengthens this case as he suggests that this is part and parcel to the Christian life. To this you were called. This, here that he’s talking about, is a life and a pattern of blessing our enemies. The calling is the call of salvation. The call of a believer is to be afflicted, potentially, and to respond by blessing his enemies. But the linchpin is the last phrase of verse 9, that you may obtain a blessing.

That’s huge because the implication is if we don’t do that, then we won’t be blessed ourselves. I’ll return to that in just a moment. But as you’ve already said, the good life is full of blessing from God as we bless others. And if we would obtain a blessing, we must bless others. I do want to take a moment to emphasize that phrase because it’s critical to Peter’s argument. Even in the face of persecution, our marching orders are clear. Bless, for to this you recalled, that you may obtain a blessing. It is the design of God that he would bless us as an outcome of our being a blessing to others. God blessing us is the end.

Our blessing of others is the means to that end. Now, I get that he’s talking about enemies. And I am taking this and applying from the greater to the lesser, because if Peter expects for us to be a blessing to our enemies, how much more so ought we to be a blessing to our brothers and sisters? If we are to be eager to be a blessing to our persecutors, How much more ought we to strive to bless other believers or those around our dinner tables? But how can we know then that these concepts are tied together? Namely, bless and you’ll be blessed is tied to any of the rest of it. Well look at our next key to the good life in verses 10 through 11.

Third, a good commitment. A good commitment. Four. That is pointing back to what we just said. In fact, let me read verses 10 and 11 together with verse 9. Do not repay evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary, bless. For to this you were called, that you may obtain a blessing. 4. Whoever desires to love life and see good days, let him keep his tongue from evil and his lips from speaking deceit. Let him turn away from evil and do good. Let him seek peace and pursue it.” It looks a lot like Peter is using this passage to clarify what he is saying in verse 9. Whether that’s the intent or not, that is what happens.

This clarifies how we are to then bless and be blessed. To drive home his point, what Peter is saying, he uses scripture. This section may look like indented poetry in your translations. That’s because it’s from Psalm 32. He’s quoting here from David, Psalm 34, verses 12 through 16 in the same way that you or I might use scripture to drive home a point where we’re having a casual conversation. He’s defending his position by using the word of God. says, let him keep his tongue from evil and his lips from speaking to see. Well that’s an interesting passage for him to quote. One that speaks of the importance of taming the tongue.

Well elsewhere in the New Testament, James echoes a similar sentiment that a man who can tame his tongue is capable of taming the rest of his body as well. From the mouth comes the outflow of our hearts. our mouth out of man’s heart he speaks says Christ but if you can tame that little rudder you can tame the whole ship. The only way then to keep our tongues from evil and our lips from speaking deceit is to actually purify our hearts and minds. Take away the defilement on the inside and it won’t come out in our speech. That’s the recipe for the good life. The one with pure speech will have a pure heart, righteous conduct, a good testimony, and the blessing of God.

I’ll say that again. The one with pure speech will have a pure heart, righteous conduct, a good testimony, and the blessing of God. So in other words, he goes right to the tongue because you actually can’t tame it naturally. Well, that is the opposite of the world’s recommendations for a good life. There’s no suggestion here to make lots of money, eat lots of red meat, have lots of parties, go bowling as much as possible. Where’s Ryan? Jim, yeah. Rather, this is a promise for any who would wish to love life and see good days. Peter goes further in verse 11. Let him turn away from evil and do good. Let him seek peace and pursue it.

Well, most of us are really glad when peace comes our way, but we’re not active about pursuing it. Well, the grammar here is emphatic. The pursuit of peace is no casual affair. We are to seek after it in the same way as you would seek for anything else of value that might be elusive, hard to find, hard to capture. Love or treasure, if it’s valuable, you’ll pursue it. In quoting the Psalmist David, Peter is urging his readers to seek peace. Go after it. Don’t wait for it to come to you. And the call to do good hearkens back all the way to verse 15. I read you verses 10 and 11. We, yeah, let’s see, it was back here.

I read you 11 and 12, but a few verses later, he says in verse 15, for this is the will of God that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. When believers do good as they are supposed to do, it quickly silences our adversaries. But that’s not the only reason we are to do good. Peter suggests that a key to the good life is also to have the right incentive. We find that here in verse 12, and that’s our fourth key here. Our fourth point is what we’re calling a good motive. For the eyes, verse 12, of the Lord are on the righteous, and his ears are open to their prayer. But the face of the Lord is against those who do evil.

It seems to me like an understatement here, but one that needs to be said. Namely, God likes it when people are godly. His face looks on with favor to the one who does righteousness and who can do righteousness. Only those who have been filled with the Spirit who are His. You may know the term anthropomorphism. It’s attributing man-like characteristics to someone that’s not a man, like God in this case. This is anthropomorphic language and it’s crystal clear. Though God does not actually have eyes, David states and Peter reiterates that God is attentive to the prayers of those who obey His law. This is true for at least two reasons.

Well, their prayers are not impeded by sin and they pray according to the will of the Father. His ears are open to their prayer. He doesn’t have eyes to see, but they are on the righteous. He looks with favor on the righteous. We can understand it very, very well. Conversely, his face is set against those who do evil. We would not wish to be counted in this number. That’s a sobering warning for Peter’s audience who are here living the good life. They’re called to live the good life, and that’s antithetical to a life outside of God’s favor. Living the good life is synonymous with living righteously and living under the loving gaze of our Heavenly Father.

This is blessing and this looks to the future. It is also something the Socrates and Plato and Aristotle could not have understood. Living Koram Deo, knowing his favor. Now, those Greek philosophers thought that the Greek pantheon was ridiculous. And they were right. But one thing that characterized the societies in which they lived, the polytheistic societies, was an ongoing hope that the gods were not angry with you, but without any sort of certainty that that were the case. There is no concept of true satisfaction before the gods. Because if you were to satisfy one, you would just enrage another. And when you satisfied one, his satisfaction was never final.

It was temporary until such time as he wanted more. So the notion of being able to, again, the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous and and his ears are open to their prayer, but the face of the Lord is against those who do evil.” It’s unconscionable to the natural mind and to the polytheistic mind of this first century audience. The good life, as the Bible is concerned, is not eating and drinking and making Mary continually. It’s not about fame, money, relaxation, parties, or worldly success, but it lives about God’s favor on those who look to bless others just as Christ has done. Christ was born in the fullness of time. The time was right for Him to come when He did and the closer you drill down and look the more evident that is, the stronger the case to be made that the time was right, the language was right, the place was right for the gospel to come, for Christ to come, for God to come in the flesh and to live and die for men.

The gospel dawned on a culture that was saturated though with the influence of the Greek philosophers. It was brimming with the worship of ridiculous gods and it was dominated by dissatisfaction. The right reader of Aristotle would have had to have said, is that it? That’s all you’ve got. The thoughtful respondent would say, finding the mean between this and this, like, that’s it? Does that ever change? Maybe having enough bread and water to have my temporal needs met, and then, hopefully, not to live and worry. Is that supposed to get me through the hard times of life? Is that supposed to convince my enemies not to pursue their own greatest happiness at my expense?

Right? So because you’ve got to think about that. When there’s no object of source of morality to go back to, when men are pursuing what makes them happiest, a lot of times, we’ve seen this, they will do that at one another’s expense. And a slap on the wrist is the recourse. Let’s invent laws with no moral backing behind them. Well, how far is that going to last? Why do this?

Come on, Aristotle, who says that your virtues or all your categories will even work? Then the light of the gospel dawns with a law that is written authoritatively and consistently, affirming the law that is written on our hearts since they’re both written by God. And Peter, speaking for God, offers a recipe for the good life that does not depend on circumstances, it does not depend on the performance of others. Peter’s readers, many of them, would be familiar with Aristotle and the other Greeks, could say, yes.

Aha, that makes sense. Step aside, Aristotle. This will hold up amid trials, this satisfies, and it’s backed by the promises of God. So when the best that Aristotle could do to convince a bad guy not to be a bad guy is, That’s not going to make you happy. He might rightly say, watch me. But when we actually have God’s authority, when we have his word, when we have a standard that is unchanging, well, we ought not to be surprised when it does resonate deeply within our hearts, but it also makes sense. God used the philosophers to show how close to the truth men can actually get using their own natural wisdom. And for some really smart guys like Aristotle, it’s fairly close, but it’s not nearly close enough to save.

There is no dependence on the righteousness of another to satisfy a holy God in the teachings of Aristotle. The best we have is pursuing a virtue because I promise that’ll make you happy, I think. So it really ought to have whetted the appetites of the Roman culture for the feast of the gospel. The gospel ought to have been like a fountain of living water for their otherwise parched souls that have been licking sand from this Greek philosophy. And guess what? Here we are almost two thousand years later and it still is immensely satisfying.

The Gospel is the bedrock of our world view and it cannot be shaken by unbelief or by worldly wisdom or the philosophy of men. It offers hope and it offers direction when trials come and when we are prone to doubt. I returned then to my thesis, my point earlier, the good life is the blessing of God and it comes to those who bring the greatest blessing to others. So little ones, there is application here. You seek to be a blessing to others even when nobody is looking and God’s favor will find you. For old ones, the promise is identical. When He’s not looking and you have the deep-seated bowels of compassion, when you have that deep-seated tenderheartedness, a love for others that comes from Him, you can know, you can know, you can know that God is effecting your blessing.

He is bringing about your blessing as you bless others. I hope you’re as impressed as I am with how counterintuitive that is to the natural mind. It defies the very best human reason as is exhibited in Aristotle, for instance. But this too is an evidence that it comes from the mind of God. The philosophers could have had the good life by surrendering their lives to Christ and by living for others. And the good news is that we have the good news. And it ought to make us tremendously grateful to have been born now. To be in a time where we actually have this recorded, to live this side of the cross, and to see these things by faith.

Let’s pray for God to apply this to our hearts. Father, we are grateful that you have given your word, and we are grateful how clear it is. We’re grateful for the work of your spirit to illuminate and to help it to make sense to us. We are stricken with how this does not resonate with how men think. So it must be from you over and over and over again. Men scratch and claw to trying to avail themselves of some power higher than themselves and to try and pacify the gods who hate your image in them and how satisfying we are, how satisfying we find the gospel. We thank you for Peter’s direction here and that as we look to be a blessing to others, yes, we will stand out in this world.

That is the idea. Others will look at us and see that there is something different. They will even and then be caused to ask for a reason, for the hope that’s in us, and we ought to be ready for that. But in the process, in the process, we can actually attain, by your grace and by your spirit, what the philosophers tried to and never could. That is the good life. So help us to lead a good life now by your spirit and then also to appropriately long for the one that is to come. We depend upon you for all these things and we make these requests in the name of Christ. Amen.