Contending against Gentile conversion,
1-3
Verse 1: The word “that the Gentiles
had also received the word of God” traveled faster to “the apostles and
brethren that were in Judæa” than Peter traveled to Jerusalem. Some saw in the
Gentiles receiving the word a bypassing of circumcision and the law.[i]
Verse 2: Upon Peter’s arrival “they that
were of the circumcision” disputed with Peter concerning his going in to the
Gentiles and preaching to them. “They that were of the circumcision” here in
Jerusalem are not the same as the six “they of the circumcision” of 10:45, who
traveled with Peter from Joppa to Cæsarea.[ii]
Those six were astonished and agreed with Peter. These in Jerusalem complained
and contended against Peter. If Peter were “Pope,” they would not have
aggressively questioned his actions.
Verse 3: The chief concern expressed
by the naysayers is that Peter “wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat
with them.” Interestingly, Peter “wentest in” and “didst eat” with the Gentiles
before the confirmatory gift of the Holy Ghost – based on the explanatory
vision from God.
Verse 1 shows the occasion for Peter’s
defense, verse 2 the charge against him, and verse 3 the rebuttal of the charge
made in his defense.
Peter defends the decision of preaching to the Gentiles, 4-17
Verse 4: Peter goes over the incident
thoroughly, from beginning to end, from his standpoint. He is gentle, patient,
and humble (cf. II Timothy 2:24ff.). Luke began with the vision of Cornelius. Peter,
not there in Cæsarea when Cornelius received a vision, begins with the vision
he received. Acts chapters 10 and 11 tells the story thrice – (1) from God’s
point of view, 10:1-23; (2) Cornelius’s point of view, 10:30-33; and (3)
Peter’s point of view, 11:5-16.
Verses 5-10: These verses restate the
vision of Peter, first recorded in Acts 10:9-16. For verse 6 “fourfooted beasts
of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air”
compare Acts 10:12 and Psalm 148:10. The record and retelling of the vision
represent two levels of meaning in it: (1) physical/food, and (2)
spiritual/fellowship.
Verses 11-12b: These verses summarize Acts
10:19-23, with the added detail of the number of men who accompanied him to Cæsarea – six. In
10:23, they are identified as “certain brethren from Joppa” without a number
given. “these six brethren accompanied me” suggests that they are also present
as witnesses at this meeting in Jerusalem.[iii]
Verses 12c-14: These verses relate to Acts
10:24-33, Peter entering into “the man’s house” and conversing with him. Peter
interprets his mission as telling these Gentiles “words, whereby thou and all
thy house shall be saved.” Salvation is here connected to the word of God.
Compare Ephesians 1:13 “in whom ye also trusted, after that ye
heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that
ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise.” John Gill
insists these words “would be a means of instructing him and his family in the
right and true way of salvation.”[iv]
In the retelling of the story, Peter
does not mention Cornelius’s name. He is a representative Gentile in a
principle that God establishes. Bock writes, “It makes the story one of
principle. The issue is not Cornelius, but what Cornelius represents: a Gentile
saved directly by the act of God.”[v]
This event in Cæsarea at the house of
Cornelius is often referred to as “the Pentecost of the Gentiles.”[vi]
Verses 15-16: Peter only briefly
mentions his own speaking, and focuses on the confirmation worked by God. God
initiated the fall of the Holy Ghost on them, and he did it before Peter has
finished speaking. “And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on
us at the beginning.” Peter’s defense indicates the Pentecost event was
historical and unique, not an ongoing event. If what happened on Pentecost had
been a common daily, weekly, or monthly occurrence, Peter would not have had to
go all the way back to Pentecost – possibly 8 to 10 years past – to find a
referent in common with what happened at Cornelius’s house. Peter does not say,
“the Holy Ghost fell on them, as has been happening to us all along through
these past eight or so years.” As Israel was baptized unto Moses as a once for
all event, so was Christ’s church baptized once for all. “Israel did not take
each generation back to the Red Sea to be baptized. Neither has any true New
Testament Church had to wait for a Pentecost from on high, and ever afterwards
the power has been available to true churches which are commissioned to go and
not to wait again for a Pentecostal enduement.”[vii]
Verse 17: Peter places the “blame”
squarely where it belongs – on God! “what was I, that I could withstand God?”
If any brethren wish to contend with Peter, the preaching to, salvation of, and
fellowship with the Gentiles – then they must contend with God.
The Jerusalem church accepts and acknowledges the work of God, 18
[ii] “They that were of the circumcision. This phrase marks the beginning of evil and separation in the Apostolic Church. The words had previously been used to denote all Jewish Christians, but now they seem to refer to one party among the Jewish believers, to the Judaizers who were unable to believe that Gentiles could enter the church save through Judaism.” Lindsay, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 123.
[iii] If he is pointing to six men present with him, this opens the possibility that more than six went.
[iv] John Gill’s Exposition, online. https://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/acts-11-14.html “…though Cornelius was really a pious man, and therefore in the way of salvation, yet he had not been instructed in the peculiar principles on which God bestows pardon and eternal life.” Ripley, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 157.
[v] Bock, Acts, p. 408.
[vi] This phrase goes back at least before the 1700s in the French theologian Pasquier Quesnel, circa 1692. “This is, as it were the Pentecost of the Gentiles, the beginning of the accomplishment of the promises in respect of us, and our first entrance into the body of Jesus Christ.” See The New Testament, with Moral Reflections Upon Every Verse, Translated from the French of P. Quesnel, by Richard Russell, Volume 3, London: R. and J. Bonwicke, 1725, p. 132.
[vii] Roy Culley, The Holy Spirit, pp. 96-97.
No comments:
Post a Comment