Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Peter 2:22
Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:
22. Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth ] It is suggestive as indicating the line of prophetic interpretation in which the Apostle had been led on, that as soon as he begins to speak of the sufferings of Christ, he falls, as it were, naturally into the language of Isa 53:9, as he found it (with the one exception that he gives “sin” for “iniquity”) in the LXX. version. The two clauses assert for the righteous sufferer a perfect sinlessness both in act and word.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Who did no sin – Who was in all respects perfectly holy. There is an allusion here to Isa 53:9; and the sense is, that he was entirely innocent, and that he suffered without having committed any crime. In this connection the meaning is, that we are to be careful that, if we suffer, it should be without committing any crime. We should so live, as the Saviour did, as not to deserve to be punished, and thus only shall we entirely follow his example. It is as much our duty to live so as not to deserve the reproaches of others, as it is to bear them with patience when we are called to suffer them. The first thing in regard to hard treatment from others, is so to live that there shall be no just occasion for it; the next is, if reproaches come upon us when we have not deserved them, to bear them as the Saviour did. If he suffered unjustly, we should esteem it to be no strange thing that we should; if he bore the injuries done him with meekness, we should learn that it is possible for us to do it also; and should learn also that we have not the spirit of his religion unless we actually do it. On the expression used here, compare the Isa 53:9 note; Heb 7:26 note.
Neither was guile found in his mouth – There was no deceit, hypocrisy, or insincerity. He was in all respects what he professed to be, and he imposed on no one by any false and unfounded claim. All this has reference to the time when the Saviour was put to death; and the sense is, that though he was condemned as an impostor, yet that the charge was wholly unfounded. As in his whole life before he was perfectly sincere, so he was eminently on that solemn occasion.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 22. Who did no sin] He suffered, but not on account of any evil he had either done or said. In deed and word he was immaculate, and yet he was exposed to suffering; expect the same, and when it comes bear it in the same spirit. It is very likely that the apostle mentions guile, because those who do wrong generally strive to screen themselves by prevarication and lies. These words appear to be a quotation from Isa 53:9.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
i.e. There was no guile in his mouth; it is a Hebraism; to be found is the same as to be, and not to be found the same as not to be, Gen 2:20; Isa 39:2; see Rom 7:10. This signifies Christs absolute perfection, in that he did not offend so much as with his mouth, Jam 3:2. The sense is, Christ was free from all manner of sin, and yet he suffered patiently; and therefore well may ye be content to suffer too, though wrongfully; seeing, though ye may be innocent in your sufferings, yet you come so far short of Christs perfection.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
22. Illustrating Christ’swell-doing (1Pe 2:20)though suffering.
didGreekaorist. “Never in a single instance did” [ALFORD].Quoted from Isa 53:9, end,Septuagint.
neithernor yet: noteven [ALFORD]. Sinlessnessas to the mouth is a mark of perfection. Guile is acommon fault of servants. “If any boast of his innocency, Christsurely did not suffer as an evildoer” [CALVIN],yet He took it patiently (1Pe2:20). On Christ’s sinlessness, compare 2Co 5:21;Heb 7:26.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Who did no sin,…. He was in the likeness of sinful flesh; he looked like a sinful man, being born of a sinful woman, and keeping company with sinful men, being himself a man of sorrows, greatly afflicted, and at last put to death. He was traduced as a sinner by his enemies, and had all the sins of his people on him, which he bore, and made satisfaction for, and were the reason of his sufferings; but he had no sin in his nature, nor did he commit any in his life:
neither was guile found in his mouth; though it was diligently sought for, by the Scribes and Pharisees; there was no deceit in his lips, no falsehood in his doctrine, any more than there was immorality in his conversation; he was an Israelite indeed on all accounts, and in the fullest sense of that phrase; reference is had to Isa 53:9 and this is observed, partly to show that Christ suffered not for himself, or for any sins of his own, but for the sins of others, for which he was very fit, since he had none of his own; and partly as an argument for patience in suffering; for since Christ suffered, who had no sin, nor did any, nor could any be found in him, charged upon him, and proved against him; and which sufferings of his he bore with patience; then how much must it become sinful men to bear their sufferings patiently, though they may not be criminal with respect to the things for which they suffer, but yet are so in other things, whereas Christ was not criminal, nor blameworthy in anything?
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Who did no sin ( ). Quotation from Isa 53:9. He has already expressed the sinlessness of Christ in 1:19. The next clause is a combination of Isa 53:9; Zeph 3:13. For “guile” () see verse 1.
Was found (). First aorist passive indicative of . Christ’s guilelessness stood the test of scrutiny (Vincent), as Peter knew (Matt 26:60; John 18:38; John 19:4; John 19:6).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Found [] . Stronger than the simple was, and indicating a guilelessness which had stood the test of scrutiny. Compare Mt 26:60; Joh 18:38; Joh 19:4, 6. Christ ‘s sinlessness had also stood the test of Peter’s intimacy.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Who did no sin.” Who did not (hamatian) once “Miss the mark of righteousness” not even one time, as prophecied, Isa 55:9 and declared fulfilled. Heb 7:26.
2) “Neither was guile found in his mouth.” Nor was any (dolos) guile, deceit, trickery, or half-truth found or discovered in His mouth — His tongue tossed out no flattery, gossip, backbiting, idle words, or unbecoming speech. Even Pilate witnessed “I can find no fault in Him,” Luk 23:4; Luk 23:14; Luk 23:22.
COULD CHRIST HAVE SINNED?
Dr. I. M. Haldeman tells of a scene in New York State among the mountains. A bridge had been thrown across a great chasm hundreds of feet deep. One day he heard the first train on the road approaching, and looking out saw two huge locomotives drawn up on the bridge. There was a sharp challenging whistle, then the brakes crashed down, and the two great machines came to a standstill. They waited for fully half a day right in the center of the bridge, with their great tons of iron quivering and beating and the bridge beneath like a great spider’s web supporting them. What did it mean! They were there to demonstrate the strength of the bridge, to show there was no weakness in it; but that it was able to bear up under the greatest test put on it, and so was worthy of the fullest trust on the part of man. “All the weight of temptation was crowded on our Lord Jesus Christ in that hour when the Devil met him on the mount. He was “tempted in all points as we are,” from base appetites and desires, to the highest reaches of ambition for self-gratification and power. He was tempted and tried and tested at every point to prove and demonstrate to angels and to men that he could not say, “Yes” to the temptation; that He could not have sinned; that it was no more possible for Him to have sinned than it was possible for God to lie; “that we might see Him as the majestic, unbreakable bridge across the deep chasm of sin and death; and so seeing, fling ourselves without reserve, and in unhesitating confidence, upon Him as the One and all supreme object of our unfaltering faith and profound adoration.”
–From pamphlet by Haldeman,
“Could Our Lord Have Sinned?”
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
22 Who did no sin This belongs to the present subject; for, if any one boasts of his own innocence, he must know that Christ did not suffer as a malefactor. He, at the same time, shews how far we come short of what Christ was, when he says, that there was no guile found in his mouth; for he who offends not by his tongue, says James, is a perfect man. (Jas 3:2.) He then declares that there was in Christ the highest perfection of innocency, such as no one of us can dare claim for himself. It hence appears more fully how unjustly he suffered beyond all others. There is, therefore, no reason why any one of us should refuse to suffer after his example, since no one is so conscious of having acted rightly, as not to know that he is imperfect.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(22) Who did no sin.This verse is not to be taken by itself, but in the closest conjunction with the following. It is not the sinlessness of Christ by itself that is here set as an example before the servants, but His sinlessness in combination with His ill-treatment, or rather, His meekness under the combination. St. Peter again adapts the words of Isaiah (Isa. 53:9) to his purpose. The word there was one of violent transgression; St. Peter substitutes the simple word which he had used in 1Pe. 2:20, faultwho never made a faultsuch as household servants were often committingneither was guile found in His mouthagain referring to what was common with servantspetty acts of dishonesty, and petty deceits to screen themselves from punishment. One thing which lends special point to the allusion to Isaiahs prophecy is that Israel is in that passage spoken of under the title of Gods servant, a thought familiar to St. Peter long ago in connection with Christ. (See Note on Act. 3:13.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
22. The constant, unvarying innocency of Christ, in both act and word, predicted in Isa 53:9, is testified to by his chosen apostle, who speaks of his own knowledge in almost the exact words of the prophet.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth, who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered he threatened not; but committed himself to him who judges righteously,’
Let them in fact consider this, that although He was the sinless One, in whose mouth nothing of fault could be found (compare Isa 53:9), yet He was still reviled, and persecuted and made to suffer. And how did He then respond? Not by retaliating, but by not retaliating. When they reviled Him He did not revile in return (unlike the two thieves). When they persecuted Him and made Him suffer He did not threaten in return (compare Isa 53:7, ‘He opened not His mouth’), rather He committed Himself (handed Himself over) to Him Who judges righteously. He put the whole matter in the hands of God. He was prepared to leave the assessment of His case in God’s hands (compare Isa 50:7-8). And He did it because He knew that it was carrying forward God’s purposes. Furthermore He did so even though He really was without sin. So that was what these servants, who after all are not without sin, must do as well, for His sake.
Compare for this stress on His sinlessness the idea of the ‘lamb without blemish and without spot’ in 1Pe 1:19. It was because He was sinless as the infinite One that He could bear the sins of others.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
1Pe 2:22. Neither was guile, &c. In the Eastern languages, righteousness and truth are put one for another; and so are wickedness and falsehood, or deceit. By guile therefore we may here understand wickedness in general, but more especially in this connexion, lying and deceit. If Christ’s example have its genuine influence upon us, there will be no guile found in our mouths.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
1Pe 2:22 . The first feature in the exemplary nature of Christ’s sufferings: His innocence.
After Isa 53:9 , LXX.: , (Cod. Alex. . ). Gerhard: nec verbo nec facto unquam peccavit. The second half of the sentence expresses truth in speech. With , cf. chap. 1Pe 2:1 , Joh 1:48 . For the difference between and , cf. Winer, p. 572 [E. T. 769].
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:
Ver. 22. Who did no sin ] St Paul saith, “He knew no sin,” 2Co 5:21 , to wit, with a practical knowledge (we know no more than we practise); with an intellectual he did, for else he could not have reproved it.
Neither was guile found in his mouth ] Which imports that they sought it. The wicked seek occasion against the godly.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
22 .] Further expansion of this example of Christ , making it plain that He : who never did (the aor. gives the force, as distinguished from the imperf. , of “never in a single instance”) sin (the words are almost a citation from Isa 53:9 , A[ [9] 3a ], , ) nor yet (climax: not only did He never sin in act, but not even ) was guile ever found (“non deprehendebatur fraudulenta locutus,” Wiesinger: cf. Winer, 65. 8, on this sense of ) in His mouth:
[9] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century . The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are: A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr 1 ; B (cited as 2 ), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; C a (cited as 3a ) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1 , it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that C a altered it to that which is found in our text; C b (cited as 3b ) lived about the same time as C a , i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here 6 .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1Pe 2:22 = Isa 43:9 , . being put for ( ) and . (so [149] c [150] [151]
[152] , etc.) for (= Heb.) of LXX. The latter variation is due to conjunction of Zep 3:13 , : Christ being identified with the Remnant. The former appears in the Targum: “that they might not remain who work sin and might not speak guile with their mouth”.
[149] Codex Sinaiticus (sc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.
[150] a Codex Sinaiticus (sc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.
[151] Codex Alexandrinus (sc. v.), at the British Museum, published in photographic facsimile by Sir E. M. Thompson (1879).
[152] An eighth century version of Codex Vaticanus
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
sin. App-128. Compare Joh 8:40. 2Co 5:21. 1Jn 3:5.
neither. Greek. oude. verse quoted from Isa 53:9.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
22.] Further expansion of this example of Christ, making it plain that He :-who never did (the aor. gives the force, as distinguished from the imperf. , of never in a single instance) sin (the words are almost a citation from Isa 53:9, A[[9]3a], , ) nor yet (climax: not only did He never sin in act, but not even ) was guile ever found (non deprehendebatur fraudulenta locutus, Wiesinger: cf. Winer, 65. 8, on this sense of ) in His mouth:
[9] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century. The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are:-A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr1; B (cited as 2), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; Ca (cited as 3a) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1, it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that Ca altered it to that which is found in our text; Cb (cited as 3b) lived about the same time as Ca, i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here6.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
1Pe 2:22. , , …, who did no sin, neither was guile found, etc.) Isa 53:9, Septuagint, , , that is, He committed neither open nor secret sin. Words most suitable for the admonition of servants, who easily fall into sins and deceits, reproaches towards their fellow-servants, and threats, arising from anger without strength.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
sin
Sin. (See Scofield “Rom 3:23”).
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
did: Isa 53:9, Mat 27:4, Mat 27:19, Mat 27:23, Mat 27:24, Luk 23:41, Luk 23:47, Joh 8:46, 2Co 5:21, Heb 4:15, Heb 7:26, Heb 7:27, Heb 9:28, 1Jo 2:1, 1Jo 3:5
guile: Joh 1:47, Rev 14:5
Reciprocal: Lev 2:4 – the oven Lev 4:32 – a lamb Lev 4:35 – and the priest shall make Lev 6:17 – baken Lev 22:19 – General Num 19:2 – no blemish Job 31:30 – have Psa 34:13 – speaking Psa 35:20 – quiet Psa 35:24 – Judge Psa 64:4 – the perfect Psa 69:4 – hate Isa 42:4 – shall not Mat 27:39 – reviled Joh 14:30 – and Joh 18:38 – I find Joh 19:4 – that ye Act 22:14 – that Act 28:19 – not 2Co 10:1 – by 1Th 4:7 – God 1Th 5:15 – none Heb 9:14 – without Jam 5:6 – and he 1Pe 1:19 – with 1Pe 2:1 – guile 1Pe 3:10 – speak
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Pe 2:22. Jesus did no sin in the conduct of his own body, neither was any guile (deceitful language) found in his mouth. If Jesus who was sinless had to suffer persecution, surely His imperfect followers should expect to endure such treatment.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1Pe 2:22. who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth. Of all the apostles, Peter, with the single exception of John, had known the Christ of history most intimately, and had seen Him in the circumstances, both public and private, most certain to betray the sinfulness of common human nature, had such been latent in Him. Peter had felt, too, not less strongly than others, how the type of holiness which Christ taught conflicted with his own traditional Jewish notion of a holiness bound up with the rigid observance of Sabbath laws and ceremonial rules of life. But with what quiet strength of fixed conviction does he proclaim Christs blamelessness! Nor can Peters confession of that sinlessness, as he lingers over it in this section, be said to come behind either Pauls who knew no sin (2Co 5:21), or Johns in Him is no sin (1Jn 3:5). It is the affirmation of a freedom not only from open but also from hidden sin, a sinlessness not in deed only, but also in word, and indeed (as the guile implies, on which see also at 1Pe 2:1) in thought. The language, as Bengel suggests, is peculiarly pertinent to the case of slaves with their strong temptations to practise deception. The choice of the verb was found or was discovered (see also on 1Pe 1:7) is in harmony with the idea of a sinlessness which had stood the test of suspicious sifting and scrutiny. The statement is given, too, with the direct and positive force of simple historical tenses, which may imply (as Alford puts it) that in no instance did He ever do the wrong deed, or say the guileful word. All this, however, is in the form not of words of Peters own, but of a reproduction (taken exactly from the LXX., only that sin appears here, while iniquity or lawlessness appears there) of the great prophetic picture of Jehovahs servant in Isaiah (Isa 53:9).
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Our apostle proceeds to represent and recommend our Lord Jesus Christ as the mirror and perfect pattern of patience under the sharpest sufferings; he acquaints us,
1. With his pure and spotless innocency; he did no sin, therefore could not suffer for doing evil; no guile was found in his mouth neither in his expressions, nor in his actions; he never did ill either in word or deed, but was a perfect pattern of unblamable holiness.
Next, our apostle recommends to us his invincible patience under all his sufferings, telling us, that although Christ was most shamefully reviled, having the dirt of a thousand scandals, slanders, reproaches, and blasphemies, cast upon him, yet he reviled not again not giving them one ill word for all.
And when he suffered all manner of injuries and indignities at once, being buffeted, spit upon, crowned with thorns, and crucified, though he had power sufficient to look them into nothing, to frown them into hell, yet he threatened them not with the least revenge, but prayed for his murderers, and committed his cause to a just and righteous God: He threatened not, but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously.
Blessed Jesus! help us to imitate thy patience under sufferings, and reproaches, and never let us be found rendering to any, evil for evil, or railing for railing, but contrariwise, blessing for cursing, courtesies for injuries, affability for affronts; let us at no time be overcome of evil, but labour at all times to overcome evil with good.
Note, lastly, How our apostle takes notice, that the sufferings of Christ were not only exemplary, but satisfactory; he did not only suffer patiently, but meritoriously; He his own self bare our sins in his own body upon the tree.
Note here, 1. What was borne, our sin, that is, the guilt and punishment of our sin.
2. Who bare it, Christ his own self.
This imports, 1. The singularity of his sufferings, he had no partner or sharer with him in what he bare, he trod the wine-press alone.
2. The sufficiency of his sufferings, he himself bare our sins; he who was God-man, the Lamb of God, and as such took away the sin of the world.
3. How he bare it, in his own body upon the tree; that is, in his human nature upon the cross. Christ suffered in his soul as well as in his body, and both were satisfactory to divine justice, but his bodily sufferings are only mentioned, because these were most visible.
4. The great ends of his sufferings, namely, expiation of sin, and mortification of sin; our sins were expiated on the tree by Christ’s suffering for us in his own body; and by his death he also purchased virtue for mortifying sin in us, and for quickening us unto holiness of life, that, as he died for sin, we should die unto sin; and as he rose again and revived, never to die more, so should we, being dead unto sin, live no longer therein: He himself bare our sins in his own body upon the tree, that we, being dead to sin, should live unto righteousness, by whose stripes, that is, by whose expiatory sufferings, we are healed; the wounds made in our souls by the guilt and power of sin, are mercifully and meritoriously healed; the guilt of sin is pardoned, the power of sin subdued, and all the invaluable fruits and benefits of the Redeemer’s death obtained. Thanks be to God for Jesus Christ.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
The Lord Suffered Despite Living Sinlessly
Woods’ comments prove helpful for those who remember Jesus’ strong statements about the scribes and Pharisees on certain occasions and may be confused by this verse.
The pointed words of condemnation which Jesus sometimes hurled at the Pharisees and others ( Mat 7:5 ; Mat 16:3 ; Mat 22:18 ; Mat 23:13 ; Mat 23:25-26 ) were not the bitter taunts of personal malice, nor the retaliatory retorts for insults received, but the probings of one capable of looking into the innermost recesses of the heart and exposing the corruption there, with the design of saving, if possible, the persons so possessed.
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
Peter applied this prophecy to Jesus Christ (Isa 53:9).
"The OT statement is applied to Christ to indicate that in his total conduct, especially in his words, he followed God’s will." [Note: Goppelt, p. 210.]
This is quite a statement. Peter had lived with Jesus for more than three years and had observed Him closely, yet he could say that Jesus never sinned.
The absence of deceitful speech would have been ". . . particularly applicable to slaves in the empire, where glib, deceitful speech was one of their notorious characteristics, adroit evasions and excuses being often their sole means of self-protection." [Note: James Moffatt, "The General Epistles, James, Peter, and Judas," in The Moffatt New Testament Commentary, p. 127.]