1 Peter 2:8

Verse 8. A stone of stumbling] Because in him all Jews and Gentiles who believe are united; and because the latter were admitted into the Church, and called by the Gospel to enjoy the same privileges which the Jews, as the peculiar people of God, had enjoyed for two thousand years before; therefore they rejected the Christian religion, they would have no partakers with themselves in the salvation of God. This was the true cause why the Jews rejected the Gospel; and they rejected Christ because he did not come as a secular prince. In the one case he was a stone of stumbling-he was poor, and affected no worldly pomp; in the other he was a rock of offence, for his Gospel called the Gentiles to be a peculiar people whom the Jews believed to be everlastingly reprobated, and utterly incapable of any spiritual good.

Whereunto also they were appointed.] Some good critics read the verse thus, carrying on the sense from the preceding: Also a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence: The disobedient stumble against the word, (or doctrine,) to which verily they were appointed.-Macknight.

Mr. Wakefield, leaving out, with the Syriac, the clause, The stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, reads 1Pet 2:7; 1Pet 2:8 thus: To you therefore who trust thereon, this stone is honourable; but to those who are not persuaded, (απειθουσι,) it is a stone to strike upon and to stumble against, at which they stumble who believe not the word; and unto this indeed they were appointed; that is, they who believe not the word were appointed to stumble and fall by it, not to disbelieve it; for the word of the Lord is either a savour of life unto life, or death unto death, to all them that hear it, according as they receive it by faith, or reject it by unbelief. The phrase τιθεναι τινα ειςτι is very frequent among the purest Greek writers, and signifies to attribute any thing to another, or to speak a thing of them; of which Kypke gives several examples from Plutarch; and paraphrases the words thus: This stumbling and offence, particularly of the Jews, against Christ, the corner stone, was long ago asserted and predicted by the prophets, by Christ, and by others; compare Isa 8:14; Isa 8:15; Mt 21:42; Mt 21:44; Lu 2:34; and Ro 9:32; Ro 9:33. Now this interpretation of Kypke is the more likely, because it is evident that St. Peter refers to Isa 8:14; Isa 8:15: And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem: and many among them shall stumble, and fall, and be broken, c. The disobedient, therefore, being appointed to stumble against the word, or being prophesied of as persons that should stumble, necessarily means, from the connection in which it stands, and from the passage in the prophet, that their stumbling, falling, and being broken, is the consequence of their disobedience or unbelief but there is no intimation that they were appointed or decreed to disobey, that they might stumble, and fall, and be broken. They stumbled and fell through their obstinate unbelief; and thus their stumbling and falling, as well as their unbelief, were of themselves, in consequence of this they were appointed to be broken; this was God's work of judgment. This seems to be the meaning which our Lord attaches to this very prophecy, which he quotes against the chief priests and elders, Mt 21:44. On the whole of these passages, see the notes on Mt 21:42-44.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

2:8 they meet the fate that was planned for them (literally for which they were appointed): It is not clear whether these people were appointed by God to unbelief or whether they were, because of their unbelief, appointed by God to suffer condemnation.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

1Pe 2:8. Οἱ προσκόπτουσι, τῷ λόγῷ ἀπειθοῦντες, who stumble, not believing the word) In 1Pe 2:7, he expressed the different judgments of believers and unbelievers respecting Christ; now he sets forth the difference itself between believers and unbelievers. Many construct προσκόπτουσι τῷ λόγῳ, stumble at the word. But προσκόπτουσι, put absolutely (as in Joh 11:9), is derived from προσκόμματος, the word quoted from Isaiah; and the declaration follows, τῷ λόγῳ ἀπειθοῦντες, not believing the word, as ch. 1Pe 4:17, Τὶ τὸ τέλος τῶν ἀπειθούντων τῷ τοῦ Θεοῦ εὐαγγελίῳ; What shall be the end of those who obey not the Gospel of God? and certainly ch. 1Pe 3:1, εἴ τινες ἀπειθοῦσι τῷ λόγῳ: If any obey not the word. It is in the Gospel-word that the preciousness of Christ is set forth: they who do not believe the word, despise Christ, and stumble at Him.—εἰς ὃ καὶ ἐτέθησαν, to which also they were appointed) Which refers to stumble: they who do not believe, stumble; they who stumble are also appointed for stumbling. This appointment follows unbelief and stumbling, as even the intensive particle, also, and the order of this clause which is placed last, signify. And yet stumble is present. They were appointed has the force of a past tense; by which it is implied, that by a most just judgment of God, unbelievers stumble more and more from day to day. Are appointed answers to I lay (or appoint), 1Pe 2:6; but with some difference: for God is said, in the active, to appoint Christ and the elect: unbelievers, in the passive, are said to be appointed. Comp. Rom 9:22, note.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Pe_2:8. οἱ προσκόπτουσι] links itself on to ἀπειθοῦσι κ.τ.λ.: that is to those who, etc., not to what follows, as if εἰσι were to be supplied: they who stumble are those who are, etc.

προσκόπτειν has here the same meaning as that contained in the last words, but the turn of the thought is different; there, it is shown what Christ is become to the unbelievers, namely, the ground of their destruction; here, on the contrary, that they are really overtaken by this destruction; Lorinus explains προσκόπτουσι incorrectly: verbo offenduntur et scandalizantur, id blasphemant et male de illo loquuntur.

τῷ λόγῳ ἀπειθοῦντες] It is better to connect τῷ λόγῳ with ἀπειθοῦντες than with προσκόπτουσι (either: who at the word are offended, or: who by the word suffer hurt). For, on the one hand, the leading idea προσκ. would be weakened by its connection with λόγῳ; and, on the other, the nearer definition requisite is supplied of itself from what precedes; it would, too, be inappropriate that λόγος should of a sudden take the place of Christ, who in 1Pe_2:7 is, as λίθος, the object of προσκ. (Brückner). Wolf: qui impingunt, nempe: in lapidem illum angularem, verbo non credentes: quo ipso et offensio ipsa et ejus causa indicatur.

εἰς ὃ καὶ ἐτέθησαν] εἰς ὅ not equal to ἐφʼ ᾧ, on account of which; nor is it equal to εἰς ὅν (sc. λόγον or λίθον); Luther: on which they are placed; or similarly Bolten: they stumble at that, on which they should have been laid (he makes εἰς ὅ refer to the omitted object of προσκ.), but it points rather to the end of ἐτέθησαν.[122]

τίθημι] is here, as frequently in the N. T., to appoint, constituere (cf. 1Th_5:9). It is clear from the connection of this verse with the preceding, that εἰς ὅ does not go back to 1Pe_2:5 (Gerhard: in hoc positi sunt, videlicet, ut ipsi quoque in hunc lapidem fide aedificarentur). It may be referred either to ἀπειθεῖν (Calvin, Beza, Piscator, and others) or to προσκόπτειν and ἀπειθεῖν (Estius, Pott, de Wette, Usteri, Hofmann, Wiesinger,[123] etc.), or, more correctly, to ΠΡΟΣΚΌΠΤΕΙΝ (Grotius, Hammond, Benson, Hensler, Steiger, Weiss), since on the latter (not on ἈΠΕΙΘΕῖΝ) the chief emphasis of the thought lies, and ΕἸς Ὃ Κ.Τ.Λ. applies to that which is predicated of the subject, that is, of the ἈΠΕΙΘΟῦΝΤΕς, but not to the characteristic according to which the subject is designated. The ΠΡΟΣΚΌΠΤΕΙΝ it is to which they, the ἈΠΕΙΘΟῦΝΤΕς, were already appointed, and withal on account of their unbelief, as appears from the Τῷ ΛΌΓῼ ἈΠΕΙΘ. This interpretation alone is in harmony with the connection of thought, for it is simply the ΠΙΣΤΕΎΟΝΤΕς and ἈΠΕΙΘΟῦΝΤΕς, together with the blessing and curse which they respectively obtain, that are here contrasted, without any reference being made to the precise ground of faith and unbelief. Vorstius correctly: Increduli sunt designati vel constituti ad hoc, ut poenam sive exitium sibi accersant sua incredulitate.

Following the construction of 1Pe_2:7 adopted by him, Hofmann takes ΟἹ ΠΡΟΣΚΌΠΤΟΥΣΙΝ not as an adjunct referring to what precedes, but as protasis to the subsequent ΕἸς Ὅ, which, according to him, contains the apodosis expressed in the form of an exclamation. This interpretation falls with that of 1Pe_2:7. Besides, it gives rise to a construction entirely abnormal, and of which there is no other example in the N. T., either as regards the relative pronoun[124] or the method here resorted to, of connecting apodosis with protasis. The words are added by the apostle in order to show that the being put to shame of unbelievers, takes place according to divine determination and direction. Oecumenius[125] is not justified by the context in laying special stress on the personal guilt of unbelief; or Aretius, in answering the question: quis autem illos sic posuit? by non Deus certe, sed Satan tales posuit.

[122] The application to the Word or to Christ occurs already in the older commentators; thus Beda says: in hoc positi sunt i. e. per naturam facti sunt homines, ut credant Deo et ejus voluntati obtemperent; and Nicol. de Lyra, applying it specially to the Jews: illis data fuit lex, ut disponerentur ad Christum secundum quod dicitur Galatians 3. lex paedagogus noster fuit in Christo; et ipsi pro majore parte remanserunt increduli.

[123] Different interpreters seek in various ways to soften the harshness of the dea here presented. Thus Estius, by explaining ἐτέθησαν only of the permission of God; Pott, by paraphrasing the idea thus: their lot seemed to bring this with it; Wiesinger, by asserting that the passage here speaks of the action of God as a matter of history, not of His eternal decrees. But what justifies any such softening down? While Hofmann, in the 1st edition of his Schriftbeweis, I. p. 210, says precisely: that God has ordained them to this, that they should not become obedient to His word, but should stumble at it and fall over it; in the 2d ed. I. p. 237, it appears that the meaning only is: that the evil which befalls them in the very fact of their not believing, is ordained by God to those who do not obey His message of salvation, as a punishment of their disposition of mind. Schott agrees with this view. But in it the idea of ἐτέθησαν in relation to ἀπειθοῦντες is arbitrarily weakened; since Schott expressly says that unbelievers, by their own state of mind, appoint themselves to unbelief, he can look on unbelief only in so far as the result of a divine decree, that God has appointed faith impossible with a carnal disposition. But a limitation of this kind is here all the more inappropriate, that Peter in the passage makes no allusion to the disposition which lies at the foundation of unbelief. Hofmann in his commentary says: it is the word which is preached to them that they refuse to obey, but by the very fact of their doing so they stumble at Christ and fall over Him, as over a stone that lies in the way. Both are one and the same thing, named from different sides; the one time from what they do, the other from what is done to them. Yet these are two different things; the one the cause, the other the effect.

[124] Hofmann, indeed, appeals to Mat_26:50; but the interpretation of this passage is so doubtful that it cannot be relied upon; cf. the various interpretations in Meyer on this passage; in Winer, p. 157 [E. T. 207 f.]; in Buttmann, p. 217.

[125] Οὐχ ὡς ἀπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ εἰς τοῦτο ἀφωρισμένοις, εἴρηται· οὐδευία γὰρ αἰτία ἀπωλείας παρὰ τοῦ πάντας ἀνθρώπους θέλοντος σωθῆναι βραβεύεται· ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἑαυτοῖς σκευή κατηρτικόσιν ὀργῆς καὶ ἡ ἀπείθεια ἐπηκολούθησε, καὶ εἰς ἣν παρεσκεύασαν ἑαυτοὺς τάξιν ἐτέθησαν. Thus also Didymus: ad non credendum a semetipsis sunt positi; and Hornejus: constituti ad impingendum et non credendum ideo dicuntur, quia cum credere sermoni Dei nollent, sed ultro eum repellerent, deserti a Deo sunt et ipsius permissione traditi ut non crederent et impingerent.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

stone of stumbling, &c.--quoted from Isa 8:14. Not merely they stumbled, in that their prejudices were offended; but their stumbling implies the judicial punishment of their reception of Messiah; they hurt themselves in stumbling over the corner-stone, as "stumble" means in Jer 13:16; Dan 11:19.

at the word--rather, join "being disobedient to the word"; so Pe1 3:1; Pe1 4:17.

whereunto--to penal stumbling; to the judicial punishment of their unbelief. See above.

also--an additional thought; God's ordination; not that God ordains or appoints them to sin, but they are given up to "the fruit of their own ways" according to the eternal counsel of God. The moral ordering of the world is altogether of God. God appoints the ungodly to be given up unto sin, and a reprobate mind, and its necessary penalty. "Were appointed," Greek, "set," answers to "I lay," Greek, "set," Pe1 2:6. God, in the active, is said to appoint Christ and the elect (directly). Unbelievers, in the passive, are said to be appointed (God acting less directly in the appointment of the sinner's awful course) [BENGEL]. God ordains the wicked to punishment, not to crime [J. CAPPEL]. "Appointed" or "set" (not here "FORE-ordained") refers, not to the eternal counsel so directly, as to the penal justice of God. Through the same Christ whom sinners rejected, they shall be rejected; unlike believers, they are by God appointed unto wrath as FITTED for it. The lost shall lay all the blame of their ruin on their own sinful perversity, not on God's decree; the saved shall ascribe all the merit of their salvation to God's electing love and grace.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

8 Which stumble at the word He points out here the manner in which Christ becomes a stumbling, even when men perversely oppose the word of God. This the Jews did; for though they professed themselves willing to receive the Messiah, yet they furiously rejected him when presented to them by God. The Papists do the same in the present day; they worship only the name of Christ, while they cannot endure the doctrine of the Gospel. Here Peter intimates that all who receive not Christ as revealed in the Gospel, are adversaries to God, and resist his word, and also that Christ is to none for destruction, but to those who, through headstrong wickedness and obstinacy, rush against the word of God.

And this is especially what deserves to be noticed, lest our fault should be imputed to Christ; for, as he has been given to us as a foundation, it is as it were an accidental thing that he becomes a rock of offense. In short, his proper office is to prepare us for a spiritual temple to God; but it is the fault of men that they stumble at him, even because unbelief leads men to contend with God. Hence Peter, in order to set forth the character of the conflict, said that they were the unbelieving.

Whereunto also they were appointed, or, to which they had been ordained. This passage may be explained in two ways. It is, indeed, certain that Peter spoke of the Jews; and the common interpretation is, that they were appointed to believe, for the promise of salvation was destined for them. But the other sense is equally suitable, that they had been appointed to unbelief; as Pharaoh is said to have been set up for this end, that he might resist God, and all the reprobate are destined for the same purpose. And what inclines me to this meaning is the particle καὶ (also) which is put in. If, however, the first view be preferred, then it is a vehement upbraiding; for Peter does hence enhance the sin of unbelief in the people who had been chosen by God, because they rejected the salvation that had been peculiarly ordained for them. And no doubt this circumstance rendered them doubly inexcusable, that having been called in preference to others, they had refused to hear God. But, by saying that they were appointed to believe, he refers only to their outward call, even according to the covenant which God had made generally with the whole nation. At the same time their ingratitude, as it has been said, was sufficiently proved, when they rejected the word preached to them.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(8) And a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence.—Another quotation, no doubt suggested by the word “a stone,” but conveying a totally different metaphor. Here there is no thought whatever of the stone as a material for building; the thought is that of a mass of rock on the road, on which the terror-stricken fugitives stumble and fall. The words are taken from Isa_8:14, and are translated directly from the Hebrew. The LXX. not only makes nonsense, but can again be hardly acquitted of “guile” (1Pe_2:1) in its endeavour to make out the best possible case for Israel by deliberately inserting the word “not” twice over. We shall find St. Peter in 1Pe_3:14 quoting the verses which immediately precede our present citation, and again the point lies in the context. The words are no mere phrase hastily caught up to serve the turn. They come out of the great Immanuel section of Isaiah, and immediately involve, like the quotation in 1Pe_2:6, the sharp contrast between the Jews who trust in Immanuel (the presence of God with Israel) and the Jews who do not, but rely on “confederacies.” To the one party, the Lord of Hosts will be “for a sanctuary;” but to the other party, who are described as “both houses of Israel,” and specially as the “inhabitant of Jerusalem,” He will be “for a stone of striking, and for a rock of stumbling over,” and also “for a snare.” The “sanctuary” does not seem to mean a temple (though this would connect it with the preceding words of St. Peter), but rather such a “sanctuary” as that of Bethel (Gen_28:18), a consecrated stone to which a man might flee as an asylum. In the flight of terror before the face of the Assyrians the very stone which afforded right of sanctuary to those who recognised and trusted it, was a vexatious and dangerous obstacle, a trap full in the way to those who did not. Once more, therefore, the Hebrews of the Dispersion, in separating themselves from “both houses of Israel” and the “inhabitant of Jerusalem,” were obeying the warnings of the Immanuel prophecy, which every Hebrew recognised as Messianic. Though the coupling of these passages of the Old Testament together certainly seems to show traces of the influence of St. Paul (comp. Rom_9:32-33), yet St. Peter must have been present and heard “the Lord of Hosts” Himself put them together (Luk_20:17-18), and probably St. Paul’s use of the passages is itself to be traced back to the same origin.

Stumble at the word, being disobedient.—It seems better to arrange the words otherwise: which stumble, being disobedient to the word. The participle thus explains the verb. “‘A stone of stumbling’ He is to them; and the manner of the stumbling is in being disobedient to the gospel preaching” (Leighton).

Whereunto also they were appointed—i.e., unto stumbling. The present commentator believes that when St. Peter says that these unhappy Jews were appointed to stumble, he primarily means that the clear prophecies of the Old Testament which he has quoted marked them for such a destiny. It was no unforeseen, accidental consequence of the gospel. It had never been expected that all who heard the gospel would accept it. Those who stumbled by disbelief were marked out in prophecy as men who would stumble. Thus the introduction of the statement here has the direct practical purpose of confirming the faith of the readers by showing the verification of the prophecy. Still, in fairness, we must not shirk the further question which undoubtedly comes in at this point. Even though the moment of their appointment to stumble was that of the utterance of the prophecy, it cannot be denied that, in a certain sense, it was God Himself who appointed them to stumble. It will be observed, however, from the outset, that our present passage casts not a glance at the condition of the stumbling Jews after death. With this caution, we may say that God puts men sometimes into positions where, during this life, they almost inevitably reject the truth. This is implied in the very doctrine of election—e.g., in 2Th_2:13, where, if God selects one man out of the hundred to a present salvation through belief of truth, it seems to follow logically that the ninety and nine are appointed to have no share in that salvation, so far as this life is concerned, through disbelief of truth. These things remain as a trial of faith. It suffices that we know for certain that God is Love. He has “brought us forth at His own option by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of His creatures” (Jas_1:18). We have but to prize more highly our own present salvation, and to trust His love for that fuller harvest of which we are but the firstfruits. In some way even their stumbling will ultimately prove His love, to them as well as to us.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

8. which stumble at the word] The “word,” as before, is the sum and substance of the Gospel. Men opposing themselves to that word, looking on it as an obstacle to be got rid of, were as those who rush upon a firm-fixed stone, and who falling over it are sorely bruised.

whereunto also they were appointed] Attempts have been made to soften the apparent fatalism of the words by carrying the antecedent of the “whereunto” as far back as 1Pe_2:5, and seeing in the words the statement that even those who stumbled were appointed, as far as God’s purpose was concerned, to be built up on Christ. It is, however, all but obvious that this puts a forced and artificial meaning on the Apostle’s words. What he really affirms is that it is part of God’s appointed order that the disobedient should stumble and be put to shame. And it may be noted that this way of looking on things is eminently characteristic of him. In the treachery of Judas he read the lesson that “the Scripture must needs have been fulfilled” (Act_1:16). Stumbling, however, was not necessarily identical with falling irretrievably (Rom_11:11).

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

But ye are a chosen generation,.... Or "kindred"; the phrase is to be seen in the Septuagint, on Isa 43:20, to which, and the following verse, the apostle refers here, and in another part of this text. The allusion is throughout to the people of Israel in general, who, in an external way, were all that is here said; but was only true in a spiritual sense of such as were chosen and called among the Jews: and who were a "generation or kindred"; being regenerate, or through abundant mercy begotten, and of an incorruptible seed born again; and were akin to God, he being their Father, and they his children by adopting grace, and which was made manifest by their new birth; and also akin to Christ, he being their head, husband, Father, and brother, and they his members, spouse, children, and brethren; and to the saints, being of the same household and family in heaven and in earth; having the same Father, Lord, Spirit, faith, baptism, and they all brethren: and they were a "chosen" generation or kindred; being famous, and in high esteem with God, and accounted by him for a generation; he having chosen them above all kindreds, tongues, people, and nations, and that from all eternity; and of his own sovereign good will and pleasure; and not on account of their faith, holiness, and good works; and to special benefits, to the relation and kindred they are in, to grace here, and glory hereafter; to regeneration and sanctification, and to salvation and eternal life; just as Israel, as a nation, were chosen above all others, because of the love of God to them, and for no other reason, to many external privileges and favours, which others did not enjoy: now the apostle mentions this character first, because God's eternal election is the source and spring of all spiritual blessings, which provides and secures them, and according to which they are bestowed, and with which they are inseparably connected:

a royal priesthood; referring to Exo 19:6, where the Israelites are called a "kingdom of priests"; which the Chaldee paraphrase renders, kings, priests; see Rev 1:6 a character which one of the Jewish commentators says (y) shall return to the Jews , "in time to come"; and well agrees with all the people of Christ, whether Jews or Gentiles, who are all of them kings, through their relation to Christ; and at the present time have a kingdom which cannot be moved, or taken away from them; being not only brought into the Gospel dispensation, the kingdom of the Messiah, and having a right to all the privileges and immunities of it, but have also the kingdom of grace set up within them, or grace, as a reigning principle, implanted in them; which lies not in anything external, but in righteousness and true holiness, in inward peace, and spiritual joy; and they have the power of kings over sin, Satan, and the world; and the riches of kings, being possessed of the riches of grace now, and entitled to the riches of glory in another world; they live like kings, they wear royal apparel, the robe of Christ's righteousness; they sit at the king's table, and feed on royal dainties; and are attended on as kings, angels being their life guards, and ministering spirits to them; and hereafter they shall reign with Christ on earth, and that for the space of a thousand years, and, after that, for ever: being raised up from a low estate, to inherit the crown of glory, to wear the crown of life and righteousness, and possess the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world, of which they are now heirs: and they are "priests", as well as kings; being made so by Christ, and through his priestly office; are anointed with the Holy Ghost, and sanctified by his grace, and allowed to draw near to God, and offer up by Christ their spiritual sacrifices of prayer and praise; and are enabled and assisted to offer up the sacrifice of a broken heart, and their bodies also, and even their lives when called to it; the allusion is to the kingdom and priesthood being formerly together, and which met in Christ, Zac 6:13 and in his people. The Jews were wont to call the priestly dignity and office , "the crown of the priesthood" (z):

an holy nation; referring to the same place in Exo 19:6 where the Israelites are so called, being separated by God from other nations, and legally and externally sanctified by him; as all the true Israel of God are sanctified, or set apart by God the Father, in eternal election, to real and perfect holiness; and are sanctified or cleansed from sin, by the blood and sacrifice of Christ; and are internally sanctified by the Spirit of God; have principles of holiness wrought in them, from whence they live holy lives and conversations:

a peculiar people; as the Israelites are called a "peculiar treasure", Exo 19:5 to which the reference is: God's elect are a peculiar people, to whom he bears a peculiar love; they are chosen by him to be a special people above all others, and have peculiar blessings bestowed on them, and peculiar care is taken of them; they are the Lord's, his treasure, his jewels, his portion and inheritance, and therefore he will preserve and save them; they are a people for acquisition, purchase, and possession, as the words may be rendered; whom God has obtained, procured, and purchased for himself, with the precious blood of his Son; hence the Syriac version renders them, , "a redeemed company": the same with the church God has purchased with his blood, Act 20:28 and the purchased possession, Eph 1:14 and which are redeemed and purified to be, and appear to be a peculiar people, zealous of good works, Tit 2:14 the end of all which grace being bestowed upon them in election, redemption, and regeneration, is,

that ye should show forth the praises of him; that is, God, who has chosen them into a spiritual kindred and relation, made them kings and priests, sanctified them by his Spirit, and redeemed them by his Son, as a peculiar people; all which laid them under obligation to show forth with their lips, and in their lives and conversations, his "virtues": we read, "praises"; and so the Syriac version; that is, the power, wisdom, goodness, love, grace, and mercy of God, and the commendations of them, displayed in the above instances: the apostle seems to have his eye on Isa 43:21, where the Septuagint use the same word for "praise", as here: next follows a periphrasis of God, and in it an argument, or reason for speaking of his virtues, and showing forth his praise:

who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light; which is to be understood, not of an external call by the ministry of the word only; for many are called in this sense, who are not chosen, redeemed, and sanctified; but of an internal, special, powerful, holy, and heavenly calling, by the Spirit and grace of God: and this is, "out of darkness"; out of the darkness of the law, under the former dispensation, which was as night, in comparison of the Gospel day; and out of that darkness which the Jews were particularly in, in and about the coming of Christ, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and the spirituality of the law; having lost all right notions of the Messiah, and the true sense of the Scriptures, and were carried away with the traditions of the elders, and led by blind guides, the Scribes and Pharisees; out of this darkness, as well as what is common to men, in a state of unregeneracy, having no sight of themselves, their sin, and misery, nor knowledge of divine things, of God in Christ, and of salvation by him, and of the work of the Spirit upon the heart, they were called,

into his marvellous light: by which they saw the exceeding sinfulness of sin, the insufficiency of their righteousness, their need of Christ, and salvation by him; and astonishing it was to them, that they who were born blind, and were brought up in darkness, and were darkness itself, should be made light in the Lord; and the objects they saw were amazing to them; everything in a spiritual way was marvellous in their eyes; especially the sun of righteousness, the light of the world, and also the wonderful things out of the law, or doctrine of Christ, the Gospel, and the surprising love and grace of God, in the whole, and in the several parts of their salvation: it was with them, as if a child, from the moment of its birth, was shut up in a dungeon, where there was not the least crevice to let in the least degree of light, and should continue here till at years of maturity, and then be brought out at once, at noonday, the sun shining in its full strength and glory, when that particularly, and all objects about him, must strike him with wonder and surprise. The Syriac version renders it, "his most excellent light"; the apostle seems to refer to the form of praise and thanksgiving used by the Jews, at the time of the passover; who say (a),

"we are bound to confess, to praise, to glorify, &c. him who hath done for our fathers, and for us, all these wonders; he hath brought us out of bondage to liberty; from sorrow to joy, and from mourning to a good day, , "and out of darkness into great light"; and from subjection unto redemption.

This was also part of their morning prayer (b),

"I confess before thee, O my God, and the God of my fathers, that thou hast brought me out of darkness into light.

And it is to be observed, that the third Sephira, or number, in the Jewish Cabalistic tree, which answers to the third Person in the Trinity, among other names, is called, "marvellous light" (c),

(y) Baal Hatturim in loc. (z) Pirke Abot, c. 4. sect. 13. Tzeror Hammot, fol. 78. 3. (a) Misn. Pesachim, c. 10. sect. 5. Haggada Shel Pesach, p. 23. Maimon. Hilchot Chametz Umetzah, c. 8. sect. 5. (b) T. Hieros. Beracot, c. 4. fol. 7. 1. (c) Cabala Denudata, par. 2. p. 8.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

8 And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.

Ver. 8. And a rock of offence] Like that rock Jdg 6:21, out of which comes fire to consume the reprobate.

Which stumble at the word] An ill sign, and yet an ordinary sin. A bridge is made to give us a safe passage over a dangerous river; but he who stumbleth on the bridge is in danger to fall into the river. The word is given as a means to carry us over hell into heaven; but he who stumbles and quarrels at this means, shall fall in thither, from whence otherwise he had been delivered by it. Few sins are more dangerous than that of picking quarrels at God’s word, and taking up the bucklers against it, snuffing at it, Mal 1:13; chatting against it, Rom 9:19-20; enviously swelling against it, Act 13:45; casting reproaches upon it, Jer 20:8-9; gathering odious consequences from it. Surely of such a man may say, as one doth of a hypocrite; I read not in Scripture, saith he, of a hypocrite’s conversion; and what wonder? for whereas after sin, conversion is left as a means to cure all other sinners; what means to recover him who hath converted conversion itself into sin? so here; what hope that he shall be saved who stumbleth at the only ordinary means of his salvation?

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And a stone of stumbling - A stone over which they, stumble, or against which they impinge. The idea seems to be that of a cornerstone which projects from the building, against which they dash themselves, and by which they are made to fall. See the notes at Mat 21:44. The rejection of the Saviour becomes the means of their ruin. They refuse to build on him, and it is as if one should run against a solid projecting cornerstone of a house, that would certainly be the means of their destruction. Compare the notes at Luk 2:34. An idea similar to this occurs in Mat 21:44; “Whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken.” The meaning is, that if this foundation-stone is not the means of their salvation, it will be of their ruin. It is not a matter of indifference whether they believe on him or not - whether they accept or reject him. They cannot reject him without the most fearful consequences to their souls.

And a rock of offence - This expresses substantially the same idea as the phrase “stone of stumbling.” The word rendered “offence,” (σκάνδαλον skandalon) means properly “a trap-stick - a crooked stick on which the bait is fastened which the animal strikes against, and so springs the trap,” (Robinson, Lexicon) then “a trap, gin, snare”; and then “anything which one strikes or stumbles against; a stumbling-block.” It then denotes “that which is the cause or occasion of ruin.” This language would be strictly applicable to the Jews, who rejected the Saviour on account of his humble birth, and whose rejection of him was made the occasion of the destruction of their temple, city, and nation. But it is also applicable to all who reject him, from whatever cause; for their rejection of him will be followed with ruin to their souls. It is a crime for which God will judge them as certainly as he did the Jews who disowned him and crucified him, for the offence is substantially the same. What might have been, therefore, the means of their salvation, is made the cause of their deeper condemnation.

Even to them which stumble at the word - To all who do this. That is, they take the same kind of offence at the gospel which the Jews did at the Saviour himself. It is substantially the same thing, and the consequences must be the same. How does the conduct of the man who rejects the Saviour now, differ from that of him who rejected him when he was on the earth?

Being disobedient - 1Pe 2:7. The reason why they reject him is, that they are not disposed to obey. They are solemnly commanded to believe the gospel; and a refusal to do it, therefore, is as really an act of disobedience as to break any other command of God.

Whereunto they were appointed - (εἰς ὅ καὶ ἐτέθησαν eis ho kai etethēsan.) The word “whereunto “means unto which. But unto what? It cannot be supposed that it means that they were “appointed” to believe on him and be saved by him; for:

(1)This would involve all the difficulty which is ever felt in the doctrine of decrees or election; for it would then mean that he had eternally designated them to be saved, which is the doctrine of predestination; and,

(2)If this were the true interpretation, the consequence would follow that God had been foiled in his plan - for the reference here is to those who would not be saved, that is, to those who “stumble at that stumblingstone,” and are destroyed.

Calvin supposes that it means, “unto which rejection and destruction they were designated in the purpose of God.” So Bloomfield renders it, “Unto which (disbelief) they were destined,” (Critical Digest) meaning, as he supposes, that “into this stumbling and disobedience they were permitted by God to fall.” Doddridge interprets it, “To which also they were appointed by the righteous sentence of God, long before, even as early as in his first purpose and decree he ordained his Son to be the great foundation of his church.” Rosenmuller gives substantially the same interpretation. Clemens Romanus says it means that “they were appointed, not that they should sin, but that, sinning, they should be punished.” See Wetstein. So Macknight. “To which punishment they were appointed.” Whitby gives the same interpretation of it, that because they were disobedient, (referring, as he supposes, to the Jews who rejected the Messiah) “they were appointed, for the punishment of that disobedience, to fall and perish.”

Dr. Clark supposes that it means that they were prophesied of that they should thus fall; or that, long before, it was predicted that they should thus stumble and fall. In reference to the meaning of this difficult passage, it is proper to observe that there is in the Greek verb necessarily the idea of designation, appointment, purpose. There was some agency or intention by which they were put in that condition; some act of placing or appointing, (the word τίθημι tithēmi meaning to set, put, lay, lay down, appoint, constitute) by which this result was brought about. The fair sense, therefore, and one from which we cannot escape, is, that this did not happen by chance or accident, but that there was a divine arrangement, appointment, or plan on the part of God in reference to this result, and that the result was in conformity with that. So it is said in Jud 1:4, of a similar class of people, “For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation.” The facts were these:

(1) That God appointed his Son to be the cornerstone of his church.

(2) That there was a portion of the world which, from some cause, would embrace him and be saved.

(3) That there was another portion who, it was certain, would not embrace him.

(4) That it was known that the appointment of the Lord Jesus as a Saviour would be the occasion of their rejecting him, and of their deeper and more aggravated condemnation.

(5) That the arrangement was nevertheless made, with the understanding that all this would be so, and because it was best on the whole that it should be so, even though this consequence would follow. That is, it was better that the arrangement should be made for the salvation of people even with this result, that a part would sink into deeper condemnation, than that no arrangement should be made to save any. The primary and originating arrangement, therefore, did not contemplate them or their destruction, but was made with reference to others, and notwithstanding they would reject him, and would fall. The expression “whereunto” (εἰς ὅ eis ho) refers to this plan, as involving, under the circumstances, the result which actually followed. Their stumbling and falling was not a matter of chance, or a result which was not contemplated, but entered into the original arrangement; and the whole, therefore, might be said to be in accordance with a wise plan and purpose. And,

(6) It might he said in this sense, and in this connection, that those who would reject him were appointed to this stumbling and falling. It was what was foreseen; what entered into the general arrangement; what was involved in the purpose to save any. It was not a matter that was unforeseen, that the consequence of giving a Saviour would result in the condemnation of those who should crucify and reject him; but the whole thing, as it actually occurred, entered into the divine arrangement. It may be added, that as, in the facts in the case, nothing wrong has been done by God, and no one has been deprived of any rights, or punished more than he deserves, it was not wrong in him to make the arrangement. It was better that the arrangement should be made as it is, even with this consequence, than that none at all should be made for human salvation. Compare the Rom 9:15-18 notes; Joh 12:39-40 notes. This is just a statement, in accordance with what everywhere occurs in the Bible, that all things enter into the eternal plans of God; that nothing happens by chance; that there is nothing that was not foreseen; and that the plan is such as, on the whole, God saw to be best and wise, and therefore adopted it. If there is nothing unjust and wrong in the actual development of the plan, there was nothing in forming it. At the same time, no man who disbelieves and rejects the gospel should take refuge in this as an excuse. He was “appointed” to it no otherwise than as it actually occurs; and as they know that they are voluntary in rejecting him, they cannot lay the blame of this on the purposes of God. They are not forced or compelled to do it; but it was seen that this consequence would follow, and the plan was laid to send the Saviour notwithstanding.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Whereunto also they are [3] set, or placed, i.e. by God’s permission; not that God is the cause of their sins or damnation, (whose will is that every one be saved) but his justice has appointed and decreed punishments against those who, by their own wilful malice, refuse to believe and to follow his doctrine: their stumbling against this stone is wilful and obstinate. (Witham)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

In quo et positi sunt: Greek: eis o, in quod, Greek: etethesan, which cannot agree with Greek: logos, or Greek: githos, but seems to agree with the whole sentence, which is to be understood of God’s permission and punishment for their obstinacy.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence; i.e. a stone at which they stumble, a rock at which they are offended; and so it implies Christ not to be the cause of their stumbling, but the object of it; they of their own accord, and through the pravity of their nature, without any just occasion given by him, being offended, either because cause they find not that in him which they expected, viz. outward encouragements; or find that in him which they do not like, the holiness of his law, and purity of his doctrine, contrary to their corruptions and lusts, and especially his requiring of them faith in him for the justification of their persons, which was so contrary to the pride of their hearts, and which was one great reason of the Jews stumbling at him, as seeking to establish their own righteousness, and therefore not submitting to the righteousness of God, Rom 9:32,33, compared with Rom 10:3. This stumbling includes not only their falling into sin, but into destruction too, the punishment of sin, Isa 8:14,15; whereof Christ can be no more than the inculpable occasion, but their own unbelief the proper cause.

Which stumble at the word, being disobedient; these words may have a double reading: one according to our translation; and then the sense is, that stumble at the word of the gospel, i.e. are disobedient to it, in rejecting Christ therein offered to them: or, that stumble, being disobedient to the word; i.e. stumble at Christ preached to them in the word, and therefore will not obey it; they show that they are offended at Christ, by their not receiving his doctrine, nor accepting his offers.

Whereunto also they were appointed; either this may refer:

1. To 1Pe 2:6, where Christ is said to be laid (the same word in the (greek with that which is here translated by appointed) in Sion, as a chief corner-stone, elect and precious, on whom whosoever believeth, shall not be confounded. The apostle then adds, that even these unbelievers were appointed (viz. in their external vocation, as being taken into covenant with God) to be built on Christ by faith but they stumbled, by their unbelief, at the word of the gospel, and consequently at this stumbling-stone. And then it is a high aggravating the unbelief of the Jews, that they, being God’s peculiar people, should reject that salvation which was sent to them, and to the first offer of which they were designed, Act 13:26,46,47. Or:

2. To the words immediately going before, which stumble at the word, being disobedient; and then the sense is, (speaking concerning the reprobate Jews), that God appointed them to this stumbling, in his decreeing not to give them faith in Christ, but to leave them to their unbelief, and to punish them justly for it: see Rom 9:17; 1Th 5:9; Jud 1:4. The scope of the apostle in this whole verse seems to be, to keep weak Christians from being offended at the multitude of unbelievers, and especially at their seeing Christ rejected by the Jewish rulers and doctors; and this he doth by pointing them to the Scripture, where all this was long since foretold, and therefore not to be wondered at now, nor be any occasion of offence to them: see the like, Joh 16:1,4.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense. St. Peter combines Isa_8:14 with his first quotations, as St. Paul also does, (Rom_9:33) both apostles quoting from the Hebrew, not from the Septuagint, which is quite different, inserting two negatives. The living Stone is not only made the Head of the corner to the confusion of the disobedient, but becomes also to their destruction a Stone of stumbling; they fall on that Stone, and are broken. (Mat_21:44) That Stone is a Rock (petra), the Rock of Ages, the Rock on which the Church is built; but to the disobedient it is a Rock of offense (petra skandalou). Skandalon (in Attic Greek skandalhqron) is properly the catch or spring of a trap, which makes animals fall into the trap; then a stumbling-block anything which causes men to fall. We cannot fail to notice how St. Peter echoes the well-remembered words of our Lord, recorded intra Mat_16:18, Mat_16:23. Peter was himself then a pe skandalou, a rock of offense. Even to them which stumble at the Word, being disobedient; literally, who being disobedient stumble at the Word the relative referring back to "them which be disobedient" in ver. 7. This seems better than (with Huther and others) to take tw logw with ajpeiqountev, "who stumble, being disobedient to the Word." jApeiqountev, literally," unbelieving," contains here, as frequently, the idea of disobedience, willful opposition. St. Peter seems to come very near to St. John"s use of Logov for the personal Word, the Lord Jesus Christ. Whereunto also they were appointed. "Whereunto" (eijv o) cannot refer back to ver. 5; God had appointed them to be built up in his spiritual house, but they were disobedient. It must refer either to ajpeiqountev sin is punished by sin; for sin in God"s awful judgment hardens the heart; the disobedient are in danger of eternal sin (Mar_3:29, according to the two oldest manuscripts) or, more probably, to proskopousin; it is God"s ordinance that disobedience should end in stumbling; but that stumbling does not necessarily imply condemnation. (see Rom_11:11) The word, the preaching of Christ crucified, was to the Jews a stumbling-block. (1Co_1:23) But not all stumbled that they might fall. Nevertheless, perseverance in disobedience must end in everlasting death.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Who stumble, whereunto also they were appointed - They who believe not, stumble, and fall, and perish forever; God having appointed from all eternity, "he that believeth not shall be damned."

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

stone of stumbling

Christ crucified is the Rock:

(1) Smitten that the Spirit of life may flow from Him to all who will drink Exo 17:6; 1Co 10:4; Joh 4:13; Joh 4:14; Joh 7:37-39.

(2) To the church the foundation and chief corner Stone Eph 2:20.

(3) To the Jews at His first coming a "stumbling stone" Rom 9:32; Rom 9:33; 1Co 1:23.

(4) to Israel at His second coming the "headstone of the corner" Zec 4:7.

(5) To the Gentile world-power the smiting "stone cut out without hands" Dan 2:34.

(6) In the divine purpose the Stone which, after the destruction of Gentile world- power, is to grow and fill the earth.

(7) To unbelievers the crushing Stone of judgment. Mat 21:44.

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

8. A stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence. He is this to the disobedient. To believers, “precious;” to the disobedient, a stone over which they stumble and fall. Whereunto. Unto stumbling over the stone and falling. This is God's appointment to the disobedient. It is the result of their unbelief. The idea is that stumbling is their condition. When they reject Christ they stumble more and more.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

8. λίθος προσκόμματος. The stone of stumbling is the loose stone against which the traveller strikes his foot, while πέτρα σκανδάλου, the rock of offence, is rather the native rock rising up through the path, which trips him up. σκάνδαλον is constantly used of Christ as being a stumbling-block to the Jews.

προσκόπτουσιν—ἀπειθοῦντες, probably both words conjointly govern λόγῳ—who stumble at the word being disobedient to it.

εἰς ὃ καὶ ἐτέθησαν. (See S. and H. Rom. ix–xi and Hort, 1 Pet. p. 123.) The words must be neither explained away nor exaggerated. The stumbling of the disobedient, according to St Peter, was no accident nor due only to their own conduct, but part of God’s primal purpose. The corner-stone in Zion and the men who should stumble at it were both of God’s appointing. For this use of τίθημι, cf. Act 13:47; 1Ti 2:7; 2Ti 1:11; Joh 15:16. It is of course perfectly true that certain results are the inevitable nemesis attached to certain conduct, and in that sense it might be said that stumbling was appointed by God as the nemesis of disobedience. But this does not exhaust St Peter’s meaning. The stumbling seems to be regarded as not merely a secondary part of God’s purpose, conditional on man’s disobedience, but as part of His primal purpose. On the other hand St Peter does not say that any persons were reprobated to damnation. To the question, “Did they stumble in order that they might fall?” asked by St Paul in Rom 11:11, St Peter would without doubt have given St Paul’s answer, “God forbid, but rather through their fall salvation is come to the Gentiles.” St Peter, as we have seen, has throughout been emphasizing the fact that the privileges formerly restricted to Jews have now been extended to Gentiles, and there is little doubt that in quoting the passage about the stone of stumbling, employed by St Paul in discussing the apostasy of Israel, St Peter in these words εἰς ὃ καὶ ἐτέθησαν is briefly summarizing St Paul’s argument, in which he shewed that Israel’s apostasy, guilty though it was, was designed to subserve God’s eternal purpose of love. The stumbling of disobedient Jews made room for the admission of believing Gentiles, that thereby Israel in return might be roused to godly jealousy to value and accept the privileges which once they so madly rejected.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

8.] Appropriation of the honour implied in the last clause to believers: and per contra, to unbelievers, of another and opposite effect of the exaltation of this cornerstone.

8.] who stumble, being disobedient to the word (τῷ λόγῳ belongs to ἀπειθοῦντες, not as E. V. after vulg., Erasm., Luth., Beza, Estius, al., to προσκόπτουσιν, which is doubly objectionable, in, 1. making ἀπειθοῦντες a mere tautology from ἀπειθοῦσιν before: 2. giving a place not prominent enough to τῷ λόγῳ, whereas on the other rendering it takes its proper place, as being the means of growth to the Christian, and rejected by the disobedient: 3. confining the sense of ‘stumbling’ (see above) to a mere subjective one: 4. opposing the analogy of ch. 3:1 and 4:17. Cf. Wolf, in loc.: “Qui impingunt, nempe, in lapidem illum angularem, verbo non credentes (obedientes?): quo ipso et offensio ipsa et ejus causa indicatur”), for which (thing, fact, viz. the προσκόπτειν, τῷ λόγῳ ἀπειθοῦσιν, their whole moral course of delinquency and the πρόσκομμα at the end of it) they were also (καί, besides that they reach it, there is another consideration) appointed (set where they are, or were; viz. by Him who τίθησιν, above, the stone of stumbling. This exposition is certain, notwithstanding the protests of Œc., Did., al. Nor can I see how Bengel can escape, with his διττολογία, “Positi sunt respondet τῷ pono ver. 6; sed cum differentia. Nam Deus Christum et electos active dicitur ponere; infideles dicuntur poni, passive.” What inference would he deduce from this? Would he take themselves as the agents, as Œc., Did., “Ad non credendum a semetipsis sunt positi,” thus passing over καί, and making the clause a vapid tautology? Or would he say with Aretius, “Non Deus certe, sed Satan tales posuit,” thus making in the world’s moral arrangement, Satan a coordinate power with God?).

9,

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.