Studies in the Acts of the Apostles

[Resource Manager]

36. Saul's Baptism (9:9–18; 22:12–16)

 

Now the scene moves to the home of one of the brethren, called Ananias. He had been, and still was, a zealous observer of the Law. Probably for this reason he was in specially good standing with the Jews of Damascus, not only with the disciples but with all the rest (22:12). This fact surely implies that he was a long established citizen of Damascus.

 

Most probably the Lord's revelation to him concerning Saul came when, having heard by the Christian grape–vine of Saul's mission, he was praying that the Lord would protect his people from the impending onslaught. There is high witness to the quality of the character of Ananias in this personal appearing of the Lord Jesus to him. To whom else in the early church was this grace given? But how necessary this manifestation was in order to break through his sheer incredulity!

 

The reassurance given him in this theophany was appropriate enough: "I will show him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake."

 

Given a commission to go and find Saul, and restore his sight, Ananias demurred somewhat ingenuously: 'Lord, do you know what you are doing? Haven't you heard, as I have, what evil he has wrought among your followers in Jerusalem? And here he is bent on similar mischief, with the authority of the chief priests behind him!'

 

How did Ananias know that Saul had such high authority for his evil project? It is possible that the marvel seen on the Jerusalem road had set Saul's men talk­ing. Another possibility, hinted at elsewhere in Acts, is that the Christians had sympathisers in high places, who leaked helpful items of information. Nor should it be forgotten that Saul was known to have taken his terror campaign to other cities before coming to Damascus.

 

"He prayeth"

 

This good man's horror at offering fellowship to the Wolf of Benjamin was set aside by a simple assurance: "Behold, he prayeth." This fact in itself laid an imperative, as it always does, on the Risen Lord. Something must be done for this contrite soul.

 

On the Day of Atonement, when the high priest went into the Holy of Holies, he was bidden wrap himself in a cloud of incense, "that he die not" in the presence of the Shekinah Glory (Lev. 16:12,13). Saul, as he pressed on to Damascus, had suddenly found himself face to face with the Lord of Glory, and he "a persecutor and injurious" – he brought no incense, but breathed only "threatening and slaughter." So he "died", with his face to the ground, his eyes now seeing only the darkness of the tomb.

 

But now: Ananias, go and lay your hand on him, and give him the Light of Life, for "behold, he prayeth.” ’This was now his saving incense. That word "behold" might even mean that Ananias was given a vision of Saul fervently at prayer. His name, already shown to be susceptible of a sinister meaning can also be read as meaning: "one who is asking." The Lord's pregnant phrase: "Behold, he is praying" might imply: "Now, at last, he is praying." It would be natural enough for Saul, now fully convinced of the resurrection of Jesus and that he truly was Messiah, to spend a long time in black dark misery and hope­lessness telling himself again and again: "Mine iniquity is greater than can be forgiven" (Gen. 4:13RVm) – this even in spite of the assurance he had heard that he was destined to be a matchless witness for Christ.

 

But now faith prevailed and he prayed for forgiveness as no man (except perhaps Peter) had ever prayed, and al ready the messenger of heaven was on his way to the street called Straight, which to this day still runs east and west through the city.

[Resource Manager]

Straight Street

 

In "Innocents Abroad" Mark Twain tells how he and his party of tourists visited the city and concluded that "the street that is called Straight" is the only facetious remark in the Bible. "Straighter than a corkscrew, but not as straight as a rainbow."

 

Being no great Bible reader, Mark Twain could be expected to miss the point. This word "straight" was almost certainly meant in the idiomatic sense of "upright": "The street of honest business men." And of course Luke has included this relatively unimportant detail because of its ready Biblical associations; "the right ways of the Lord" (13:10), "make his path straight ... the crooked shall be made straight" (Lk. 3:4, 5).

 

The Lord Jesus also answered Saul's prayer by granting him to see in vision "a man named Ananias" coming to him, empowered to restore his sight. Since it is somewhat unlikely that in the vision Ananias was seen wearing a placard with his own name inscribed, it seems fair to infer that Saul was able to recognize him as Ananias; in which case the two men were already known to each other.

 

Ananias's mission

 

The incredulous astonishment of Ananias grew and grew as his Lord outlined the different destiny appointed for Saul. The heavenly Potter designed him as "a chosen vessel." Whereas he had seemed to the brethren to be fit only for reprobation, and therefore to be smashed (Lev. 11:33), he was in fact "a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use" (2 Tim. 2:21). Like an Old Testament prophet bringing "the burden of the Lord," he shall "bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel"–and indeed Paul's trials at which he told and re–told the story of his conversion did just that.

 

But bearing the burden of the Lord meant also suffering, as the bearing of the cross had meant for Jesus (9:15; Jn. 19:17 s.w.). He who had already brought such affliction into the lives of the Lord's people, both men and women, must know the same fiery trial in the cause of Christ: "I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake" (2 Cor. 11:25–28). The words refer to some future revelation (such as 22:17ff) given to Saul when he was fully ready for his work as a preacher of the gospel.

 

So, Ananias, marvelling, but with all misgivings set aside, went off to the house of Judas, that the enemy might receive his sight. The commission Saul was to fulfil on behalf of others applied to his own case first: "To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light ... that they may receive the forgiveness of sins" (26:18).

 

Speaking to the stricken man in Heb­rew, Ananias presented his credentials by showing that he knew (better than Saul's own friends) just what had happened on the road from Jerusalem. 'That Jesus has sent me to restore your sight, and to fill you with new power for his service.' It was manifestly true that Jesus had sent him, for otherwise why ever should he, a disciple, seek the com­pany of the arch–persecutor?

 

In a few words, with a series of illumi­nating allusions to Isaiah's great Suffer­ing Servant prophecy (see notes), Ananias outlined Saul's future work as a witness to all kinds of men, Jews and Gentiles alike, of what he had personally experienced concerning the risen Christ.

[Resource Manager]

Sight restored

 

Then, laying his hands on him, and doubtless putting fingers on those sight­less eyes, Ananias used the authority and power imparted to him, so that forthwith Saul's sight was restored: "there fell from his eyes as it were scales" – not that there was any kind of incrustation on those eyes, but phys­ician Luke compares the transformation to healings he had known where men, bleary–eyed with infection, had found sight restored when dried sores were peeled off. To a disciple like Ananias, Saul the persecutor had appeared as loathsome as one of these, but now there was normality and sight.

 

The guess has often been made that Paul continued to suffer from poor eyesight in later days, because he wrote to the Galatians: "ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and given them to me" (4:15). It is an unworthy inference, for it carries with it the preposterous implication that the Lord who could strike him blind in an instant could — or would! –only partially restore the sight he had taken away. Paul's reference more probably refers to his being struck in the eye when he was stoned at Lystra (14:19).

 

It seems a fair inference, though not certain, that the gift of the Holy Spirit (tongues? prophesying?) came on Saul at the same time as the gift of sight (cp. Mk. 16:18), that is, as with Cornelius and his household, before baptism (10:44).

 

All this happened in "the same hour" (22:13), and not forthwith, as soon as Ananias entered the house. So there is probably a hint here of time for Saul's personal outpouring of contrition and of new–born faith in Jesus of Nazareth; time also for Ananias to satisfy himself about the facts of Saul's conversion and his intentions for the future.

 

Baptism

 

Soon there came the splendid decisiveness of that ringing call: "And now, why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord" (22:16).

 

There is a remarkable and valuable implication about these words. As soon as that blinding light shone round him and the voice of Christ spoke to him, Saul knew the truth. In that moment he was instantaneously and fully converted to belief in Jesus as Messiah. Yet now, three days later, he was being urged to wash away his sins! Could there be any more decisive demonstration that for salvation a man needs not only conversion but also the open ineluctable sign of conversion. Not only must the Passover Lamb be slain and prepared, but also the blood of sacrifice must be openly displayed before God and men. Without any demur, Saul obeyed, "calling the name of the Lord upon himself"–this is, almost certainly, how the phrase should read (cp. Jas. 2:7RVm; 2 Sam. 12:28LXX). From this day forward he openly and proudly bore the name of Jesus of Nazareth. "I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ" was his telling understatement of faith.

[Resource Manager]

The imitation of Christ

 

The symbolism associated with the conversion of Saul has already been hinted at. Now it is appropriate to press this aspect of his experience a bit further.

 

It seems likely (see page 127) that the Lord's appearance to him happened about midday on a Friday. There he "died" and entered into darkness at about the very time that Jesus died on the cross. "Dead," he neither ate nor drank. Then, on the third day, his sight was restored – on the first day of the week, when Christ rose from the dead. This was the imperative of Ananias to him:

 

"Arise (anastas), and be baptized."

 

The names involved are also signifi­cant. To the Jew Damesek would sound marvellously like "The Blood of the Messiah." And Ananias is, of course, "the grace of Jehovah." It was when recalling that wonderful change brought about in him by knowledge of the resurrection of Christ that Paul declared with deep feeling: "By the grace of God I am what I am" (1 Cor. 15:10), and here the last phrase may be intended as a deliberate echo of the name Jehovah.

 

On this first day of the week "he took food, and was strengthened." If this statement is given just its face value, it is so obvious and pointless as to be superfluous. Of course he ate food when he broke his fast, and of course he felt better for it. Did Luke have to take the trouble to tell his readers that? Then why mention it?

 

It was the first day of the week, when the disciples met to remember their Lord, and now Saul was with them, a brother in Christ. So the first meal he ate would be the Love Feast and its accom­panying memorials of Christ. No wonder he was strengthened – enischuo, strengthened inwardly.

 

So what happened to Saul at Damascus was a typical imitation of the sufferings of Christ. It was a pattern which was to recur more than once in his experience as the years went by.

[Resource Manager]

Notes: 9:10–19

11. The house of Judas. This Judas would, of course, be anti–Christian in attitude. Yet Ananias would have a good reception there, for he was of "good report of all the Jews" (22:12).

Behold, he prayeth. The Law of Moses, which Saul had followed so assiduously all his days, nowhere commands prayer.

12. In a vision. Here, rather remarkably, is one vision inside another. There are two visions in 10:3,11.

13. Thy saints. The first New Testament occurrence of this term.

15. Bear my name. The cherubim chariot of the Lord? Ez. 1:20; Ps. 147:15; 2 Th. 3:1RV.

Vessel. Rom. 9:21–23.

Chosen. Jn. 15:19.

16. My name. Cp. also v. 15,21,27,28.

17. Saul. The Hebrew form of the name, as in v.4, but not v.1.

Appeared unto thee. So this was told to Ananias in the course of his vision.

Filled with the Holy Spirit. And again in 13:9. Cp. Peter's repeated experience; and cp. 2:4 (Jn. 20:22); 4:31.

18. As it had been. Cp: as it were, in Lk. 22:44.

Scales. Gk: lepides. If this read lepades, limpets, there would be allusion to Ps. 58:8, to which (in LXX) Paul alludes in 1 Cor. 15:8. But there is a marked lack of textual support for lepades.

19. Strengthened. The same word comes only in Lk. 22:43. But here in Acts only two manuscripts have the verb in passive. So it is just as likely that it should read: "and he strengthened (them, the brethren)," by his witness and confession of faith.

 

22:12–16

14. This verse seems to be one long allusion to Isaiah 53, thus:

 

Isaiah 53

know

11. by his knowledge.

his will

10. it pleased the Lord to bruise him.

the Just One

11. my righteous servant.

Gentiles, kings. (9:15)

52:15. many nations, kings.

the people of Israel

8. the transgression of my people

hear

1 RVm. that which we have heard.

the voice of his mouth.

7. he opened not his mouth.

 

15. All men; i.e. all kinds of men; cp. "Studies in the Gospels", p.51.

16. Calling on the name of the Lord. This is Ps. 116:17. Note the appropriateness of v.12–19 to Saul's baptism, and to any other true baptism.

[Resource Manager]

37. Saul in Damascus and Jerusalem (9:19b–31)

 

The phase of Saul's life immediately following his baptism is something of a headache to the commentators, especially to those who like to have their chronological framework nice and tidy. Certain phrases in this part of the record take some sorting out:

 

"Then was Saul certain days with the disciples" (9:19).

 

"After that many days were fulfilled, the Jews took counsel to kill him" (9:23).

 

"Neither went I up to Jerusalem ... but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus" (Gal. 1:17).

 

"Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days" (Gal. 1:18).

 

Add to these Paul's own reminiscence of the Lord's appearance to him in the temple (22:17ff), and the problem as to whether it belongs to the first visit to Jerusalem (Gal. 1:18) or later, and there are the makings of a nice chronological jigsaw puzzle.

 

One interpretation may be taken as fairly certain — that the "many days" (9:23) are the same as the "three years" (Gal. 1:18). Indeed, in 1 Kgs. 2:38, 39 the two expressions are used interchange­ably. This is supported by the mention of "his (Saul's) disciples" (9:25RV), an expression which pre–supposes a fairly long period of preaching in Damascus, long enough for Saul to gather round him a fair number of converts.

 

A chronological doubt removed

 

The most uncertain point is just when to fit in the sojourn in Arabia, of uncertain duration. The Acts 9 narrative allows of it in the middle of v.19, at the end of v.19, or at the end of v.22; and some would even put it at the end of v.25.

 

There is a double hint, universally ignored, so far as one can tell, which points to the first of these solutions, namely, that it was immediately after his baptism that Saul went into Arabia.

 

The Galatians reminiscence has this: "When it pleased God ... to reveal his Son in me ... immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood ... but I went away into Arabia" (1:15–17). This sentence, stripped of its encumbering clauses, is seen to carry a very decisive "immediate­ly." Also, "to reveal his Son in me" will soon be found specially significant in an almost literal sense. This unusual expression needs to be linked with another: "after that many days were fulfilled"– it is the word normally used to describe the fulfilment of prophecy or type; in this case, not the former, but, very beautifully, the latter, thus:

 

Baptism.

The wilderness of Arabia (for forty days?).

Return for three years of active preaching.

A Jewish plot against his life.

Escape.

Prayer in the temple (22:17).

The gospel going forth to the Gentiles.

Gentiles.

 

Already, then, for the second time, the experience of his Lord was being re–enacted in the life of this vigorous new disciple.

[Resource Manager]

Arabia

 

It is readily understandable that immediately after his conversion Saul would want time to himself, in order to re­think his basic principles, to re–assess the meaning of so many Scriptures which hitherto he had felt confident about, and to consider what was to be the pattern of his new life in Christ, and especially of his relations with his former rabbinic colleagues and with the Juda­ism which had always been the warp and woof of his life. Was he to be as vigorous a protagonist of the gospel as he had been of the tradition of the elders? Or, to save himself from ostracism by all the men of influence he had known hitherto, should he be content with a "low profile," a quiet life of winning influential friends for the Faith by dint of accommodating friendliness? This latter course would be a temptation. But had not the Lord plainly told him in the course of their blinding encounter that he was to be henceforth an apostle with a big and important mission?

 

In what part of Arabia this period of temptation and re–thinking took place is very uncertain. Many commentators lean strongly to the view that Saul went off to Sinai. Moses and Elijah each had their forty days there (and Jesus also?). And does not Paul himself refer to the Sinai region as Arabia (Gal. 4:24)? But from Damascus the double journey would be considerable. And if indeed this was the location of Saul's "retreat," why did he not call at Jerusalem en route? the fact is that he could have been in Arabian loneli­ness within a few miles of Damascus.

 

Preaching in Damascus

 

Back in Damascus, he lost no time in beginning there a vigorous mission to Jewry. It is surely unlikely that he made use of those letters from the high priests in order to reach the ear of packed synagogues. When it was known that he was discoursing, every Jew in the city would want to be present.

 

His main theme, naturally, was: Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah; he is the Son of God. This double idea, so basic to a right understanding of the Purpose of God, was first revealed in God's great Promise to David (2 Sam. 7:13,14), and trenchantly alluded to in David's prophetic psalms (2:6,7;89:26,27). It had been the ground of the condemnation of Jesus by the Sanhedrin: "I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God" (Mt. 26:63). And to these illegal tactics he had replied with a clear–cut affirmative. Later, at Golgotha, these evil men, glad to think that their biggest worry was now a threat no longer, expressed their relief in an unrestrained and undignified mockery of his claim: "If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross ... If he be the King of Israel ..." (Mt. 27:40,42).

 

For believers in his synagogue aud­ience it must have been a great thrill to hear Saul handling the Scriptures in his already inimitable fashion. And what a contrast with his flogging of the brethren in the synagogues of Jerusalem and elsewhere!

 

Naturally many of the Damascus Jews were astounded at what they heard: "Is not this he that destroyed them which called his Name on themselves?"

 

Now they were incredulously asking: "Is Saul also among the prophets?", whilst the brethren were almost as incredulously thanking God that already, even before the advent of Messiah's kingdom, the Wolf dwelt with the Lamb. In this campaign Saul now came with letters from God's true High Priest, and he came breathing out liberty in Christ and the forgiveness of sins.

 

In all the disputation that ensued, "Saul increased the more in strength." The passive form of the Greek verb implies that strength was imparted to him, and this by means of Holy Spirit power, for the word nearly always has that particular usage in the New Testament. Thus, out of the eater came forth meat.

 

His mode of argumentation was that which became his normal practice. The word translated "proving" (9:22) means, more literally, "fitting together," like blocks of stone for a building, Saul's building blocks being Old Testament passages which became all the stronger for being fitted together (cp. Eph. 4:16; Col. 2:2,19; and contrast v.20: "pro­claim," i.e. out of his own experience).

[Resource Manager]

Hostility, Plotting

 

In reply to this increasingly powerful advocacy of the cause of Christ, the Jews marshalled their only alternative, the "logic" of violence, and now came the first of many such ex­periences when the apostle was "in peril from mine own countrymen" (2 Cor. 11:26); as he had schemed for Stephen's death, so now they for his.

 

The governor of Damascus, Aretas of Petra, being well disposed to the Jews (because of mutual hostility to the Herods), lent his men to guard the gates day and night against any possible flight by Saul.

 

The plot to take the apostle some­how became known, so his converts organized an escape. Some sympathetic home had a window in the city wall, and from this in the middle of the night Saul was let down in a large basket. Then, doubtless, someone accompanied him and steered his flight to safety. Did he, that night, ponder at all the resemblance of his experience to that of David on a grim night when Saul was the pursuer and not the fugitive? (1 Sam. 19:12; Ps. 59).

 

Throughout this episode, Saul seems to have been singularly passive — they "took him" and "let him down." He may have been a sick man at this time, and had to have everything done for him. This would explain why, years later, he referred to this experience as one of the most humiliating things to happen to him (2 Cor. 11:32, 33). Probably he was taken to the home of one of the brethren who lived outside the city confines, and when he felt fit for it, perhaps some nights later, the long journey to Jeru­salem was begun.

 

Discouragement in Jerusalem

 

Back in the holy city, in the spirit of one of the Lord's parables (about taking "the lowest room;" Lk. 14:10), he made no attempt to seek out the apostles and present himself as an accredited addition to their company. Instead, he found some meeting of the brethren, and sought their fellowship, only to be rebuffed. What a dramatic irony there was about this situation! They had heard James the son of Zebedee exhort against giving undue respect to "a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel" (Jas. 2:2,3), and they read the words regularly in their copy of his exhortations.

 

But now here was the very man about whom those words had first been penned in the days when Saul the Pharisee was visiting their synagogue to learn more about the evil teaching of this sect of the Nazarenes; and since, to them, he was still Saul the persecuting monster, they shrank away from him in fear and would have nothing to do with him. This was the man who had vilely and callously dragged off brethren and sisters to prison, rough interrogation, hard treatment, and even death, who had plundered their homes and left behind him a trail of havoc and poverty. So of course this leopard had not changed his spots. Now he was feigning to be a convert just so that as a spy he could learn about their leaders, their perverted teaching, their hypocritical way of life, and their cunning secret organization. Convinced that this move heralded another reign of terror, they left him severely alone, and gave themselves to prayer against the tide of violence soon to swamp their lives.

 

Saul, dismayed and doubtless over­wrought at the sore discouragement of this impasse, tried again and again (so the text implies) to convince the brethren that here was a different Saul, new–born in Christ, but he made no headway at all. If his story was true, why had he not brought a letter of recommendation from brother Ananias in Damascus? That purple story about frantic escape by night was obviously made up simply to cover his lack of credentials. The whole thing was too impossible. They may be babes in Christ, but they were not fools!

[Resource Manager]

Barnabas to the rescue –

 

At last, desperate to resolve this frustrating situation and craving the comfort of fellowship at the Lord's Table, he sought out his former Sanhedrin colleague Barnabas. He had heard that this old friend of fine reputation, who as a rich young ruler had gone to Jesus willing to follow him in everything but open discipleship, was now a disciple after all and greatly esteemed ("Studies in the Gospels", ch.148).

 

How long did it take to convince Barn­abas that that cock–and–bull Damascus story was literal truth? Barnabas had seen a miracle happen in his own person, so he was the more ready to believe the same about Saul.

 

The prestige of Barnabas now trans­formed the situation. He took Saul to Peter and James, the only apostles in Jerusalem at the time (Gal. 1:18, 19).Saul was evidently reluctant about this – was he so utterly discouraged by this time? – so the gentle kindly Barnabas had to take a strong line with him (so the text implies) to get his agreement to this move.

 

– and Peter

 

It worked, especially when big–hearted Peter made the fine gesture of saying: "Brother Saul, as long as you are in Jerusalem, you stay at my house!"

 

From that day Saul was accepted into the leadership of the ecclesia: "He was with them coming in and going out at Jerusalem" (9:28). On this the Century Bible myopically says: "Observe the absence of all suggestion that the apostles did more than recognize Saul's brotherhood in Christ." This comment misses completely the force of the Biblical idiom for leadership and shepherding of the flock. Its first occurrence comes in Moses' plea that God would "set a man over the congre­gation, which may go out before them, and which may go in before them, and which may lead them out, and which may bring them in; that the congregation of the Lord be not as sheep which have no shepherd" (Num. 27:16, 17; see the notes for a list of other fine passages).

 

Hostility in Jerusalem

 

Now Saul settled down to a vigorous campaign which he doubtless hoped would convert Jerusalem into a city truly "Holy to the Lord." He began in Stephen's own synagogue with debates against the Grecian Jews, and soon found that the reaction to his Biblical reasoning was exactly the same as his had been in earlier days. So for a while he left Jerusalem in order to concentrate on further evangelism in the rest of Judaea, away from the bigotry of the capital (26:20).

 

But as soon as he appeared in Jerusalem again his traditionalist adversaries "went about (i.e. they set about scheming) to slay him."

 

However, the believers had some secret sympathizer with access to the counsels of power, and thus full details (epiginosko) were leaked to the brethren.

 

But Saul apparently was unwilling to recognize the wisdom of flight. He would wear down this prejudiced hostility by his assiduous attendance at temple services.

[Resource Manager]

A further revelation

 

But it was in the temple where the decision was taken out of his hands. There, at the time of prayer, he again beheld the Lord of Glory, and heard a peremptory: "Make haste, and get thee quickly out of Jerusalem: for they will not receive thy testimony" (what an under­statement!).

 

Saul remonstrated, even as Ananias had done, and about the same matter:

 

'Lord, they know my history; they know the vile ferocity with which I persecuted; they know how I had Stephen done to death. So, seeing the change in me, they are bound to listen."

But Jesus knew better.

 

'Away you go! Leave this stubborn unbelief, and take my gospel to the Gentiles – they will hear' (22:17–21).

 

That sharp imperative: "Make haste, and get thee quickly out," establishes that this vision, told by Saul in later days, was seen by him at the time suggested here. It is a kind of undesigned coincidence, explaining the untoward brevity of this Jerusalem visit.

 

Again, but for this revelation would not Saul have strongly resisted the efforts of the brethren to get him away to safety? It is easy to see that his natural reaction would be: "And if they do kill me, what does it matter? That is only what I deserve, that they should do tome what I did to Stephen!'

 

To Antioch and Tarsus

 

Yet instead of this insistence, he was utterly passive whilst the brethren organ­ized his flight: "they brought him down to Caesarea, and sent him forth to Tarsus" (9:30).

 

According to his own account (Gal. 1:21) he went first to Syria – probably by coasting vessel to Antioch and the flourishing ecclesia there. Thence he went home to Tarsus, no doubt hoping to teach his new faith to his parents and family.

 

The indications are that this en­deavour proved a bitter disappointment, for — years later — he was to speak of having "suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung that I may win Christ" (Phil.3:8). If this loss was not disinheritance by a wealthy parent, what else might it have been? Ramsey has also suggested that Paul's remarkable double insistence (Col. 3:21; Eph. 6:4) that fathers provoke not their children to anger, lest they be discouraged, is an echo of a mighty family row which blew up when Saul went back home to Tarsus a disciple of the Nazarene.

 

Peace!

 

Meantime "the ecclesia (singular!) throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria had rest." No more persecution. The vulture was become a dove. All through this area the brethren who had known the searing hot wind of his implacable hostility could now relax. At first he had brought back to Jerusalem conflict of a different sort — bitter controversy in the synagogues and plots for his assassination. Saul was this kind of man. Whether champion of Law or Gospel he could not help but be the centre of vigorous activity and excite­ment. But now, he was gone away to his native Tarsus, and the brethren heaved sighs of relief. At last, peace!

 

But only for a while.

[Resource Manager]

A Summary

 

It might be useful to bring together here an outline of the probable sequence of developments in Saul's experience at this time:

1. Damascus – "certain days" (9:19).
   
2. Arabia– forty days?
   
3. Damascus — three years (9:23; Gal. 1:18; cp. 1 Kgs. 2:38,39).
   
4. Flight.
   
5. At Jerusalem with Barnabas, Peter, and James (two weeks at Peter's house; Gal. 1:18).
   
6. Preaching in Judaea (26:20).
   
7. Back in Jerusalem. Vision in the temple (22:17ff).
   
8. Syria (Antioch), Cilicia (Tarsus)
   
9. Next visit to Jerusalem 14 years after his conversion (Gal. 2:1).
   

 

Notes: 9:19–31

21. Said. Gk. implied: 'they kept on saying, Is not this ...? Yes, it is!

Destroyed. Gal. 1:13, 23 only. This word describes the sack of a city. So it was not an ill–conceived experiment in communism that brought the Judaean church to abject poverty, but the plundering campaign initiated by Saul. Hence his great eagerness later to make this good by the widespread collection in Gentile ecclesias for the Judaean poor. Note especially Gal. 2:10.

Came. Gk. perfect tense might imply that he still had that secret intention. Suspicion everywhere! The change in him was just incredible.

22. Confounded: threw into confusion; s.w. 19:29,30; 21:31.

Proving. 17:3 has a different word, implying a different method – setting Scripture and historical facts concerning Jesus side by side.

23. The Jews. This does not contradict 2 Cor. 11:32. Caligula, newly emperor, did some re–arranging of the rule of his eastern provinces. It is probable that giving Aretas authority in Damascus was one of these friendly gestures. The Jews acted with the connivance of Aretas.

25. Here some important MSS read: his disciples; i.e. converts made during his Damascus preaching.Basket. In 2 Cor. 11:33 a different word. But there is evidence that both were used to describe a large fish basket.

26. Assayed ... afraid ... believed not. These verbs are all continuous in form, emphasizing what happened time and again. For the idea of spying, see Gal. 2:4; there are many more passages besides this, but not quite so pointed.

28. Coming in and going out. Num.27:21;Dt.31:2;1 Sam. 18:13;2 Chr.1:10; Josh.14:11; Acts 1:21; Jn. 10:9; (finding not nomos, but nome) Ps. 121:8.

In Jerusalem. More correctly: 'into', this suggests that Peter's present home was outside the city – at Bethany?

29. To slay him. This plot would put to sleep the last lingering suspicion about Saul.

30. Caesarea. So he probably stayed with Philip, Stephen's friend; 21:8.

31. Then should read therefore, that is, because the persecutor was now converted.

Judaea, Samaria, Galilee. Judaean Jews despised the Galileans, and Galileans the Samaritans. Yet in Christ these were all one ecclesia.

Walking. Halachah; not according to the traditions of the rabbis, but in the fear of the Lord and according to the Sermon on the Mount.

Edified. Gk. they were upbuilt, as a house. It is a favourite word in Paul's epistles.

[Resource Manager]

38. Aeneas, Dorcas (9:32–43)

 

The spotlight now switches, for three chapters, from Saul to Peter. As though preparing the way for the conversion of the first Gentile, Luke tells of two remarkable miracles wrought by the Holy Spirit through Peter.

 

The apostle was evidently doing a tour of inspection to satisfy himself that all was well with the communities of be­lievers in western Judaea. More than half–way to the coast he came to Lydda. The brethren there were interested in a man, apparently not a disciple, who had suffered paralysis in his legs for eight years — ever since the crucifixion. Very probably Aeneas was a Gentile, for there was no better–known Greek name.

 

A Christ miracle

 

Peter remembered how on a number of occasions his Lord had shown a kindly interest in Gentiles, so he addressed the sufferer with stirring words of comfort.

 

"Aeneas, Jesus Christ healeth thee; arise, and make thy bed."

 

And instead of retorting with some resentful rejoinder, the man believed, made the effort, and with delight found that he was able to do as he was bidden. For the first time in eight years he stood on his own two feet.

 

How long after that did he remain a Gentile?

 

Word about that miracle went through Lydda and all that part of the Sharon plain like a prairie fire, and all the people (this must mean with very few exceptions) turned to faith in Christ. It was a massive and almost instantaneous conversion. Yet the entire story takes less than four verses.

 

Another Gentile "disciple"

 

Nine miles away at Joppa (Jaffa) on the coast there was intense sorrow in the ecclesia at the loss of a deeply–valued friend. Amongst the sisters in the ecclesias she was known by her Aramaic name Tabitha (derived from a Hebrew word meaning "beauty" and also "roe deer"); but she was equally well–known by the Greek equivalent of that: Dorcas, which also means "roe — or gazelle," being derived from a Greek word des­cribing the large lustrous eyes of those timid creatures. Probably Dorcas was herself well–equipped in that respect!

 

As will be seen by and by, there are certain hints suggesting that, even though the word "disciple" is used with reference to her, she was probably not baptized into Christ but a kind of proselyte—of—the—gate, standing in the same relation to the ecclesia that Cornelius, as a proselyte—of—the—gate, did to Jewry.

 

She was a woman of exceptional kindness and endowed with a remark­able flair for needlework and all kinds of "dressmaking." The widows of the ecclesia specially lamented her, for her generosity had been their life–line and her gifts of beautiful garments a great joy and comfort to their old age. No doubt they had often quoted the encomiums of Proverbs 31 with reference to her.

 

But now she was taken from them. Within three days — so Jewish custom demanded — she must be interred. But the news of the healing of Aeneas at Lydda brought hope. Making all haste two of the Joppa brethren came to Peter, earnestly requiring him to come with them, and that without delay. But there is no word of expectation of a mighty miracle. The apostle made no demur. He came forthwith.

 

Arrived at the house, he was taken to the upper chamber where the dead woman lay. There widows forlornly filled the room with their lamentations as they displayed in their own persons (Gk.) the loveliness of the garments wrought by the kindness and patient skill of their dead friend.

 

Peter acted decisively. Quietly but firmly he ushered everyone out of the room; and then, turning away from the corpse he prayed that the power of the Holy Spirit might cope with the present need of the stricken sisters.

 

Then, with a loud clear command which must have been heard downstairs, he bade Tabitha arise.

 

She did, but not immediately. First she opened her eyes and looked about her. Then, seeing Peter, she sat up. He promptly held out a hand, and helped her to her feet, at the same moment calling those whom he had just sent downstairs. It was only old age that prevented a stampede on that staircase. Within seconds there was such a reunion as they had never thought possible.

 

Again the word of the miracle travelled all through the town. Everyone marvel­led, and a great proportion of the people believed.

[Resource Manager]

Miracles with meaning

 

Luke's account of these marvels is fascinating in itself. Yet the reflective student cannot help but suspect that in inserting these brief but attractive episodes he had some other purpose than to impress the reader.

 

The palsied man who was bidden make his bed brings to mind one of the best–known and most obviously sym­bolic miracles of the Lord Jesus. On that occasion the palsied man, so readily identified with the spiritually–helpless Gentile could only be healed when brought to Christ through the aid of four fine friends. To get within range of the Lord's healing power he must be brought into the synagogue, to the Law of Moses, even if it meant breaking up the synagogue (see "Studies in the Gos­pels", chapter 34). But once healed, he could leave the synagogue and the Law, a new man, with sins forgiven and the power to master what had been his dominating weakness.

 

From this point of view Peter's miracle was a most fitting foreshadowing of the conversion of Cornelius.

 

Even more fitting was the story of the restoration of Dorcas. But first, the evidence must be considered that she should be seen not as a Jewess already converted to faith in Christ, but as a Gentile sympathizing strongly with these Nazarenes, yet unable to join the movement because the Jewish believers were not yet ready to grant to Gentiles the fellowship of their Faith:

1. It is known that Livia, the wife of Caesar Augustus, had in her retinue a woman called Dorcas who was famous for the superb quality of her needle­work. If she were a different Dorcas from the one restored by Peter, the coincidence is very striking. The dating allows of her being now somewhat older and retired from royal service.
    
   
2. The emphasis on her being "full of good works and almsdeeds," in sharp contrast with Christian justification by faith, is appropriate; for in what better way could she show her intense sym­pathy with a movement which, as yet, she was forbidden to join?
    
   
3. When restored, "she opened her eyes." It is the very phrase used by Jesus to describe the coming enlight­enment of the Gentiles (26:18).
    
   
4. "Not delay to come" means, more precisely, "Do not hesitate or scruple to come" – a very appropriate phrase if Dorcas was only a Gentile sym­pathizer.
    
   
5. The close similarity to the raising of the daughter of the ruler of the synagogue can hardly be accident. Luke has clearly framed his account to make the connection obvious';
    
   
1. A much–lamented death.
   
2. An appeal to the man of God to come and help.
   
3. The need for haste.
   
4. They are all put forth from the chamber.
   
5. "Taking her by the hand, he said unto her:
   
6. "Talitha (Tabitha), kumi (arise)."
   
7. Both Talitha and Tabitha are inter­preted in the narrative (Mk. 5:41).
   
8. "She arose" – "He raised her up."
   
9. This girl, although close to the synagogue, was not as yet (at the age of twelve) admitted to syna­gogue fellowship.

 

A continuation of this parallel is suggested.

 

Thus, once again, there is here a superbly appropriate introduction to the Cornelius story. With what artistry Luke has put his history together!

 

Nor is this all.

[Resource Manager]

Peter's gesture

 

"It came to pass that Peter tarried many days in Joppa with one Simon a tanner."

 

But the tanner's trade, with its constant inevitable contact with unclean animals and defiling carcases, was an occupation abhorrent to strict Jews. The rabbis laid it down that if a tanner married without mentioning his trade, his wife could divorce him. If the brother–in–law of a childless widow was a tanner, then the duty of levirate marriage could be set aside. A tanner's yard must be at least fifty cubits distance outside a town, and even further off if on the western side.

 

Yet, Peter, who must have had many a home in Joppa eager to receive him, lodged at Simon's house. It was a gesture, surely, to show where his growing understanding of the gospel was leading him.

 

 

Notes: 9:32–43

32. Throughout all quarters (note the italics) could read: "through all the ecclesias;" cp. Gk. in 20:25; Rom. 15:28.

33. Eight years. Professionally Luke mentions the duration of the disease; cp. 3:2; 4:22; 14:8; Lk.13:11. Eight is the number of resurrection and the New Creation; 1 Cor. 12:29–31; Jn. 20:26; Gen. 7:13; Jesus = 888; v.34: "arose" (Gk.).

34. He arose, thus making the cure beyond doubt.

35. Could read: "all that dwelt ... who had turned to the Lord, saw him."

Sharon intended perhaps to echo: "the excellency of Carmel (Caesarea) and Sharon, they shall see the excellency of the Lord ... Strengthen ye the weak hands, and confirm the feeble knees" (Is. 35:2, 3).

36. Note that, wealthy enough to give alms, she was not content with that, but filled her life with good works also.

39. Widows are mentioned no less than twelve times in the writings of Luke.

The phrase "saints and widows" (v.41) might well imply that these widows were a special group supported by the ecclesia; 1 Tim. 5:9.

43. Simon a tanner. Rom. 12:16.

[Resource Manager]

39. Cornelius (10:1–8)

 

Caesarea was a fine modern city. It had been built in the best Roman style by Herod the Great to the honour of Augustus Caesar. And to this day Caesarea is still intensely Roman. The time was now ripe for it to be the scene of a unique caesarian birth, with Peter chosen to fill the role of mid–wife.

 

For among its inhabitants Caesarea counted a Roman soldier of quite extra­ordinary spiritual qualities, and him the Lord would have as the first Gentile convert to the Faith.

 

Cornelius — his name might well signify that he was a freed slave of a famous Roman family – was a relatively unimportant officer in the army, with status perhaps equivalent to that of a modern lieutenant. His unit was the Italian band which was made up of Roman volunteers, men who were more interested in the army as a way of life than as a livelihood.

 

What a character!

 

Luke evidently had a great admiration for Cornelius, for there are few characters sketched by him in such explicit and approving fashion.

 

He was "a devout man, one that feared God." Shunning the crudities of contemporary idolatry, like many of the better educated and spiritually minded Gentiles, he had been glad to learn the much more satisfying faith of Judaism. But, like most such, he was content to go only so far in his acceptance of the Jewish way of life. Not for him the rite of circumcision or the complicated pattern of punctilious rabbinic rules and regu­lations covering every detail of an outwardly sanctified life. So he was content to be a "God–fearer," "a proselyte of the gate," a respectful camp–follower of the Jewish religion who, with wise instinct, concentrated on inner sanctification. True, "he gave much alms to the people (of Israel)," dealing his bread to the hungry, caring for the poor that were cast out, and providing garments for the naked (Is. 58:7), needy Jews reaping his carnal things– his token of gratitude that they had sown to him their spiritual blessings (1 Cor. 9:11).

 

But, more than this, "he prayed to God alway." Devotion to God was, with him, a normal pattern of life, even though hitherto there had been no outward token that his prayers were heard. In these religious practices he must have been quite exceptional, for he was "of good report among all the nation of the Jews." What kind of a man was this Gentile, to be spoken of with appre­ciation, or even admiration, throughout Judaea?

 

Specially impressive are the indications that, as with Abraham (Gen. 18:19), his pious way of life was readily taken up by the soldiers and servants of his household – "he feared God with all his house" (v.22). And evidently also "his kinsmen and near friends" (v.24) were influenced by his fine example.

 

There was nothing of Roman hauteur about him, for he talked confidentially and on equal terms with his servants (v.7, 8), and when at last Peter came to his home, he prostrated himself in worship before him (v.25).

 

Continuing military service?

 

But the main problem concerning Cornelius is this: How could even such a man come to a true and full faith in Christ whilst committed to being a legionary? How can a man be an officer in the British army and also a fully–committed disciple of the Lord? Clearly, the answer is: He couldn't. He can't.

 

There are one or two small indications that Cornelius had himself already provided this kind of answer, and had retired from military service. He lived in his own house, not in quarters; he had round him household servants and devout soldiers, and many kinsmen and friends (v.7, 24, 30). This is not the picture of a man living the rootless life of a serving officer.

 

Indeed, it must have been obvious to Cornelius that his faith in the God of Israel made him into a kind of Naaman who, until he was away from the service, would feel the need to seek forgiveness for his seeming idolatry; for worship of the emperor as a god and formal reverence to the pagan symbols in the legion's standards were a normal and unavoidable part of a Roman soldier's routine. So it may be taken as fairly certain that a man as dedicated as Cornelius already was, would be forced out of active service by the strength of his convictions.

[Resource Manager]

Earlier contact with Jesus?

 

Very tentatively, it may be possible to trace the earlier history of this worthy man further back still.

 

The gospels give prominence to two Roman centurions sympathetic to the cause of Christ. There was the one whose afflicted servant Jesus healed in Galilee (Lk. 7:2), the synagogue builder who would not have Jesus sacrifice his reputation throughout Jewry by coming under a Roman roof. And there was the centurion who was on duty at the crucifixion.

 

Elsewhere ("Studies in the Gospels," number 225), it has been shown that there is good reason to believe that the latter of these two (who may also have been the former, chosen for Passover duty at Jerusalem because of his known Jewish sympathies?), came to faith in Christ through his experiences that day and at the tomb of the Lord. Certainly nothing could be more appropriate than that the last hours of Jesus would begin the conversion of the firstfruits of the Gentiles.

 

The considerable hindrances which Judaism set between an eager Gentile and the gospel were so formidable that it required special divine directives to both Cornelius and Peter before the barriers went down.

 

The vision

 

Cornelius was not only praying but also fasting to the Lord (v.30; was he observing in his own way the Day of Atonement?) when an angel of glory – "a man in bright clothing" (v.30) – appeared to him, addressing him by name as though he already belonged to the Israel of God: "O Jacob, fear not ... I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine" (Is. 43:1).

 

But Cornelius did fear. He, an ex­perienced Roman soldier used to danger, was "affrighted" (RV), for this was no trance or vision but an openly manifest appearance, a reality.

 

"Sir, what is it?" he asked in awe, meaning not "Who are you?" but "What is your message?"

 

The message was first, reassurance, and then a positive directive. Cornelius had doubtless prayed: "Let my prayer be set forth before thee as incense; and the lifting up of my hands as the evening sacrifice" (Ps. 141:2). It was just then the time of the evening sacrifice, "the ninth hour." And the angel of the Lord replied appropriately: "Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God." Three separate phrases here use the language of sacrifice, the word "memorial" especially referring to the frankincense which sanctified a meal offering of good works in the temple (Lev. 2:2; 24:7).

 

Next came the encouraging instruc­tion: 'Send men – now! – to Joppa, and bid them fetch to your house Simon Peter who is lodging outside the town, close by the sea, with Simon the tanner. When he comes, he will tell you what is necessary (Gk.) for you to do, what you need to do to be saved' (11:14). The plain implication of these words is that in spite of all his sincerity and godly life Cornelius was not yet in the way of salvation! It will be seen later that all Peter added to his present understanding and pious living were Baptism (v.48) and the Breaking of Bread (11:3).

 

Then if the thing were so urgent and important, why should not Cornelius go in person to where Simon Peter was? Because there were others to be con­sidered besides himself — his soldier–servants, his household, his kinsmen and friends (v.2, 24, 33).

[Resource Manager]

Prompt action

 

So without a moment's delay — the angel was scarcely gone from his pre­sence (so Gk.)–Cornelius summoned two servants and a soldier and proceeded to tell them in detail about this angelic appearance. Normally "the servant knoweth not what his master doeth." But these did. Then what sort of master–servant relationship was this? And what kind of a master was Cornelius?

 

It was already mid–afternoon, but nevertheless Cornelius bade his men make immediate departure so that, lodg­ing overnight on the way, they might complete their thirty–mile journey in good time next day. In remarkably quick time they were on the road, as eager as their master. And since by noon next day – only eight hours of daylight – they had covered the thirty miles to Caesarea, they must surely have done some of their journey by moonlight.

 

 

Notes: 10:1–8

1. Caesarea. It is surely probable that the groundwork of preparation of Cornelius and his friends was done by Philip; 8:40; 21:8.

The Italian band. Nothing else is known about this military unit except that it was on duty in Syria in A.D.69.

2. Gave alms... prayed. Also, he fasted (v.30). These three aspects of godliness come together in. Mt. 6:1–18.

3. In a vision. But it was real enough; v.30.

Evidently means 'an open divine manifestation, a Phanerosis.'

The ninth hour. He evidently observed the Jewish hours of prayer. This, and mention of "the people" to describe the Jewish nation, suggests that he was already a half–Jew. Is it just coincidence that the ninth, sixth (v.9), and third (2:15) hours are carefully specified in connection with important preaching and also in Mt. 20:3, 5? Luke (Samaritan; ch. 110) appears to use Jewish time, not Roman; 23:23; Lk. 23:44.

D N D N D N

A B C E

D = Day

N = Night.

A = Cornedius's vision.

B = Arrival of messengers in Joppa

C = Beginning of return journey.

E = Arrival at Caesarea.

6. Simon, a tanner; according to Mt. 10:11. How this incident emphasizes that there was no pride in either Pe

[Resource Manager]

40. Peter's Vision (10:9–16)

 

The day after Cornelius's men left Caesarea for Joppa, Peter at the home of Simon the tanner was observing an extended Day of Atonement fast as a way of proclaiming before God that the problem on his mind, of whether the gospel should be taken to Gentiles as well as Jews (and if so how), was a most urgent responsibility regarding which he was sorely in need of guidance.

 

A major fellowship problem

 

The issue had doubtless already been raised with him by Saul during those two weeks of fellowship together in Jeru­salem (9:35). Had not the Lord Jesus worked no less than three very significant miracles in all of which suppliant Gentiles had been healed?–but every one of them at a distance. Then what could this mean for the apostles now continuing the work? When the Lord had said: "Ye shall be witnesses unto me... unto the uttermost part of the earth" (1:8), had he merely meant the furthest corners of the Land of Israel (since the same word means both "earth" and "land")? or the Jews scattered to every province of the empire? or Gentiles everywhere without exception or distinction?

 

Then, too, there was the highly explo­sive issue which would inevitably arise if Gentiles were accepted into the Faith: Were they all to meet together in social and religious fellowship? Since even believing Jews were so completely wedded to their religious food laws and all the additional procedural scruples insisted on by the rabbis, how could Jews and Gentiles possibly mix together?

 

It was a headache of no small dimen­sions, and Peter knew he must pray and Pray again about it. So at noon, in accordance with the faithful pattern followed by the patriarch David (Ps. 55:17) and the beloved prophet Daniel (6:10) and the Lord Jesus himself on the day of his crucifixion, the time of prayer was not neglected.

 

The text almost seems to imply that from the rooftop Peter saw the approach­ing deputation in the distance, without – of course – realising that they were of special interest to himself. Even so it was with divided attention that Peter knelt to give himself to importunity regarding this obsessive issue, for now his well–built frame clamoured for food – "he would have eaten," literally, "he wanted to taste (food);" he'd be glad of a snack. But no! first things first. And he gave himself to prayer.

 

On the housetop (Lk.5:19) how was he to let down the eager Gentile into the presence of the healing Christ? Only by breaking up the synagogue and inter­rupting the authority of the Law taught there. (See "Studies in the Gospels", cp.34).

 

Did he express his problem and his aspiration in the words of one of his favourite psalms (1 Pet. 3:10ff)?

 

"O magnify the Lord with me, and let us exalt his name together. I sought the Lord, and he heard me ... They (the believing Gentiles?) looked unto him, and were lightened: and their faces were, not ashamed ... The angel of the Lord encampeth round about them that fear him, and delivereth them. O taste and see that the Lord is good: Blessed (for­given) is the man that trusteth (has faith) in him ... The young lions (of Judah) do lack and suffer hunger: but they (the Gentile believers) that seek the Lord shall not want any good thing. Come, ye children, hearken unto me: I will teach you the fear of the Lord" (Ps. 34:3–11).

[Resource Manager]

Peter's lesson

 

Thus occupied, Peter "fell into a trance"–the phrase emphasizes a special divine revelation – and in his vision he saw a great linen sheet, a mainsail (s.w.27:40), being lowered from heaven. Well might this new divine in­struction take such a form, for was not Peter a fisherman, and had he not, from the roof of that house close by the seashore, seen ships disappearing over the horizon? and had he not wondered uneasily whether he ought not to be in one of them, taking the message of salvation to ignorant Gentiles far away? It was from Joppa that Jonah had sought to evade his duty to take the will of Jehovah to the benighted Assyrians of his day. Was Joppa now to see a like dereliction of duty in Simon, son of Jonah? (Jonah 1 .2, 3; 3:2, 3; 4:11).

 

In his vision Peter saw that that impressive mainsail was held at its four corners by four angels (of the camp of Israel?). And as they lowered it yet further, he stared in amazement at the indescribable conglomeration of living creatures assembled there — every beast, wild and tame, large and small; every bird in creation; every creeping thing, even including serpents.

 

One of the angels spoke with author­ity: 'Rise from your knees, Peter, you are hungry; then kill one of these for sacrifice, and when you have offered to the Lord, cook and eat it as a peace–offering.'

 

But the mere sight of that medley of creatures brought all Peter's innate Jewish prejudices strongly to the fore:

 

'Not one of them, sir! God forbid! I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean.' Most of them were "common" because forbidden by the Law of Moses. The others, which were not proscribed by the Law, were made "unclean" through their contact with the rest. Peter's instinctive and wrong reaction was a declaration of "block disfellowship." 'None of them are fit for me, because even the clean are contaminated by their associations.' Since the apostle's day many another has made the same blatant error.

 

How like Peter to be yet again correcting the will of his Master (Mt. 16:22; Jn. 13:8); and just as impulsively as ever, too, for was it not obvious that every clean animal was there in the great sheet, along with all the rest? But he must needs speak his emphatic blanket refusal. The prophet Ezekiel, faced with a similar divine dictum, had reacted in exactly the same way. Indeed Peter had echoed his very words (so Ez. 4:14LXX).

 

The angel spoke again, more sharply this time:

 

"What God hath cleansed, do not go on calling common," the implication clearly being that if there is here nothing "common" there is certainly nothing "unclean."

 

Yet still Peter could not bring himself to master his lifetime's prejudices.

 

So the invitation and the warning were repeated no less than three times more, by each of the other angels in turn. Yet still Peter did not bestir himself to do as he was bidden. Even heaven's invitation to "kill in sacrifice" (Gk.) showed that God was willing to accept any of those creatures as an offering. Yet here was a servant who was set on being greater than his Lord! Did Peter actually refuse four times? When Pharaoh's dream was, in effect, given to him twice, the reason was "because the thing is established by God, and God will shortly bring it to pass" (Gen. 41:32). Then what was Peter to learn from a fourfold imperative?

 

The vision concluded, the apostle needed but little time to ruminate on the meaning of his experience. Had not his Lord said?: "They shall come from the east, and the west, and from the north, and the south (the four corners of that great sheet), and shall sit down in the kingdom of God" (Lk. 13:29).

 

But how could Jew and Gentile poss­ibly have fellowship together in Christ, since the Gentile way of life was so abhorrent to every Jew, especially regarding food and eating together. Any attempt at a universal, truly catholic, church would surely be split down the middle from the very start. How was this spiritual impasse to be resolved?

[Resource Manager]

The problem resolved

 

Years before Cornelius came on the Christian scene, the Lord Jesus had anticipated the problem and had spoken clearly regarding it: "There is nothing from without a man, that, entering into him, can defile him" (Mk. 7:15). "This he said, making all meats clean" (7:19RV). Here was an explicit ruling that, although the Mosaic food laws had much to teach, they must no longer be insisted on. In other words, the Jewish believer, and not the Gentile, must be ready to make the big concessions in religious practice. The supreme doctrine of the One Body must sweep lesser considerations out of the way.

 

On this issue the apostle Paul was to show himself kindly and considerate, yet at the same time most firm in his ruling and his practical counsel: "Every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: for it is sanctified by the word of God (to Peter) and prayer (of thanks at the meal–table)" (1 Tim. 4:4,5).

 

Yet in matters of this sort, there must be a large–hearted spirit of tolerance of a differing point of view. This issue – what to eat and what not to eat, who to eat with and who not to eat with – must now be regarded as a matter of lesser import­ance. Fellowship in Christ must always have top priority. So Paul, out of the wisdom given unto him, was able to write (in the face of his own innate Pharisaic prejudices.):

 

"He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks... I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him that esteemeth anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean... The kingdom of God is not meat and drink ... All things are indeed clean; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence (i.e. causing another to stumble)" (Rom. 14:6, 14, 17, 20).

 

The language of Peter's vision is shot through with the same basic principles, not so explicitly expressed. In the great sheet "were from the beginning (Gk: huparcho) all fourfooted beasts..." The allusion is to man's mandate of domi­nation over all creatures, and to the fact that "God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good" (Gen. 1:26, 31).

 

Again, the heavenly voice said:

 

"What God cleansed" – Greek aorist, with reference to something already accomplished in past time, not just when the words were spoken. Accomplished when? At, and by, the death of Christ — when else? and thus Jews and Gentiles were brought together into One Body, "both reconciled unto God in one body by the cross" (Eph. 2:16).

 

But how was Peter to know without any shadow of doubt that this was a divine revelation that had come to him, and not just an ordinary dream? There was, of course, the character of the vision itself. But what clinched it was the superb coincidence, that at that moment, "Behold, three men seek thee," asking aid on behalf of a godly Gentile who himself has seen an angelic vision.

 

So that meal which Peter had so hungrily awaited was now shared with three Gentile strangers. The barriers were down already.

[Resource Manager]

Notes: 10:9–16

10. Very hungry. The prefix in prospeinos is emphatic.

Fell into a trance. "Fell" is the same word as in 8:16. "Trance" is not the same as "vision" in v.3. The angel seen by Cornelius was real enough. The sheet and living creatures seen by Peter were not.

11. Sheet. The word implies linen; now see Rev. 19:8.

Four corners. There is not much point in supplying such a detail as this. But archai can also mean "angels", as in Rom. 8:38; for more details, see "Principalities and Powers," by H.A.W. "Held by four angels" makes better sense of the Greek, and also explains the repeated instruction to Peter.

12. For the symbolism of this verse, cp. Gen. 1:26; Ps. 8:4–8; Is. 11:6–10; Hos. 2:18. Is it strange that there are four such passages. Gk: huparcho might imply God's Gentile purpose from the beginning (Mt. 28:19). And how remarkable that the heavenly vision did not contrive to include fishes. Was this because Peter had been once for all called away from his fishing (Jn. 20; "He is risen indeed," ch.17)? Or for some other reason?

14. Not so, Lord. Other examples of men demurring from the will of God: 22:19, 20; Ex. 4:13; Dt. 3:26.

I have never eaten. But he had lived many days in the environment of the uncleanness of a tannery; 9:43.

15. Cleansed... common. All men are one or the other. There is no middle ground.

16. Into heaven. 'So, Peter, God accepts these creatures whether you do or not!'

[Resource Manager]

41. Peter comes to Cornelius (10:17–33)

 

With the angelic voice still ringing in his ears: "What God hath cleansed ...;" Peter came to, deeply perplexed about what he had seen and heard. There was no doubt in his mind that the vision carried some profound meaning. But what? Was it intended to be about food or about people? Was it intended to teach him that the Mosaic food laws, and all the trivia the rabbis had tacked on to them, were now of no consequence? Or was he to infer that unclean Gentiles were not unclean before God?–the gospel was for them also? To be sure, the two problems necessarily went hand in hand, for how could Gentiles share fellowship in Christ except believers shared the holy meal, the Love Feast, together? It was difficult to believe that many Jewish brethren would be ready for such a revolutionary move. With strong memories of his Lord's friendliness towards believing Gentiles, Peter him­self was almost ready for the big step forward. And he felt sure that Saul of Tarsus was. But who else? It was a most difficult problem. He began to see that his vision showed the answer. But would the telling of it convince his bigoted brethren also?

 

The messengers

 

Whilst Peter pondered conclusions and policies, the messengers sent by Cornelius arrived. They had been asking their way through the town: 'Where is the house of Simon the tanner?' and every­body knew that it must be Simon the fisherman they really wanted, for was he not the most talked–of man in Joppa these days?

 

Now they were at the gate, calling out, repeatedly: 'Is this where Simon Peter lodges?'

 

Even as Peter heard them, he heard also another voice; it was the voice he had heard in his vision: "Behold, three men seek thee. Arise, therefore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them."

 

There at the gate they told their story, and were promptly brought in and given hospitality. Just as Abraham's steward, sent to find a worthy wife for Isaac, found his problem and his prayer and the proper person all meeting together at the same time and place (Gen. 24:21), so also Peter. Now he was completely con­vinced, and knew just what he should do.

 

It is noteworthy that this part of the narrative seems to be specially tailored to impress Judaist readers with the dramatic change in attitude now taking place. There were no scruples now about sharing a meal with these visitors –"then called he them in, and lodged them"–and once he had heard their story in fuller detail (about their Gentile master fasting and praying!), he doubted nothing as to the duty that lay before him. And the angelic instruction to Cornelius had been to send for Peter to come "into his house."

 

The Judaist brethren

 

But the real headache was how to convince his Jewish brethren who were far from being ready for such a drastic upheaval in their religious ideas. So the rest of that day was taken up with calling together as many of the brethren as possible and getting their agreement that at least Cornelius be visited by Peter in accordance with the two–fold angelic revelation.

 

But Peter foresaw difficulties if he made this new move on his own. So at last six of the brethren (11:12), "they of the circumcision," agreed to accompany him next day. That phrase: "they of the circumcision," used before ever accept­ance of Gentile converts became a burning issue, seems to imply that already the mere anticipation of the problem had divided the church into two groups, pro and con. This doubtless was why so many years had been allowed to slip by without any Gentile missionary work being attempted.

[Resource Manager]

The journey

 

Next day the party of ten men set off for Caesarea. Did those brethren reflect on the "coincidence" that in Jewry it has always needed ten men to make up a synagogue? During that journey of nearly two days progress was markedly slower than Cornelius's three servants had made. However it gave opportunity at mealtimes and overnight lodging for those Jewish brethren to face up afresh to the challenge to faith and insight awaiting them in Caesarea.

 

Nearing the city, one of the servants went on ahead (so Bezan text) to alert Cornelius, so as to allow time for the centurion to assemble a house full of kinsfolk and friends, Gentiles all of them.

 

By its awkward phraseology the Greek text seems to imply some sort of hold–up before the travellers entered the house. Were "they of the circumcision" having last–minute misgivings as to whether they ought to do anything so radical as entering the home of a Roman soldier? Peter was careful to say: "/(not we) came without gainsaying." Apart from all considerations of principle, the social consequences for each of these Jewish brethren could be considerable (cp. Jn. 18:28; Gal. 2:12). According to rabbinic precept, their action was "unlawful" (v.28).

 

Peter and Cornelius meet

 

Was it the way in which Cornelius came out to meet them, and his winning humility in worshipping at Peter's feet, which won their assent?

 

Peter brusquely rejected this vener­ation. He lifted Cornelius to his feet. 'No more of this,' he said, 'l am no angel, but a mortal man like yourself.' That emphasis was intended for his Jewish brethren as well as for Cornelius.

 

Rather ingenuously the centurion insisted on explaining in great detail why he had sent for the apostle, even though Peter had already heard it several times from the servants. But the details would surely impress Peter's colleagues–fasting, prayer, an angel, "thy prayer (for help to salvation) was heard," "thine alms remembered before God", "now we are all here present before God."

 

The apostle, on his part, explained how his natural Jewish prejudices had been forever trust aside by the repeated imperatives of the revelation he had received.

 

When the travellers felt ready for the encounter, they were brought into a room full of expectant friends whom Cornelius had brought together. A strange situation, truly! – an assembly of Romans, the master race, all waiting eagerly for instruction from a Galilean fisherman! And before Peter could utter a word he was assured that whatever he said would be received as an inspiration from God.

 

The narrative puts a remarkable re­peated emphasis on Peter's message–"he shall tell thee words whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved" (11:14; cp. 10:6, 22, 29 Gk., 32, 33). Yet, as will be seen the apostle told them only what they already knew (v.37). The only additional instruction was a command to be baptized (v.48).

[Resource Manager]

Notes: 10:17–33

17. Doubted in himself. Jn. 13:7 is relevant. RV: "much perplexed" is a good translation; Gk: di–aporeo–the prefix is intensive.

Behold. The word emphasizes how the coincidence of this vision with the arrival of the visitors, telling about another vision, brought complete conviction in Peter's mind.

19. The Spirit. The angel of v.3 and v.13: "for I have sent them" (v.20). Cp. 8:26,39.

Three men. Two servants and a common soldier are dignified by the word andres – because of their piety and their errand.

20. Doubting nothing. In passive or middle, this verb means "doubt;" but in active (as in 11:12) it means "making a distinction." Was Peter trying to find reasons for evading the logical conclusion of his vision?

With them. Gk: sun, not meta. And so also in v.27.

21. Cause. Normally this Gk. word describes a point of legal argument. Here, a religious question — or did Peter think the Roman soldier was here to arrest him?

22. Of good report among all... the Jews. Surely this is only to be explained by Lk. 7:5.

Warned by God. Every occurrence of this interesting Greek word describes a divine revelation.

24. Wear friends. The adjective means "necessary." Those whom Cornelius couldn't bring himself to leave out, or those who refused to be left out?

25. Coming in; that is, into the house. In v.27, into the room where all were assembled.

26. Took him up. Was Cornelius elderly? The wordy and repetitious character of v.30–33 might imply that he was an old man. But see v.25 in Codex Beza.

I myself also am a man. Why doesn't the pope – Peter's successor? – say the same thing, and make a like refusal?

Today also in the ecclesias there must be no veneration of man by man (Rev. 19:10; 22:9; contrast Rev. 1:17).

28. An unlawful thing. Edersheim illustrates the tension here by mentioning that if a Gentile invited to a meal in a Jewish house were left alone in the room, then all the food in it was to be regarded as unclean.

Another nation. Contrast this mild expression with the loaded phrase in 11:3: "men uncircumcised."

But God... The conjunction is really "and,". It implies: "and (when I insisted on this)..."

31. Thine alms are had in remembrance in the sight of God. It was surely rather ingenuous of Cornelius to mention this.

33. Thou hast well done. An idiomatic way of saying: 'Thanks for coming;' cp. Phil. 4:14. What other Jew besides Peter would have done this?

Present before God. Cornelius has his priorities right.

All things that are commanded thee. Why not "commanded us?" And why not "you"?

[Resource Manager]

42. Peter's Gospel to the Gentiles (10:34–43)

 

It may be taken as certain that, like the other speeches reported in Acts, the exposition of Christian truth laid before his Gentile audience by Peter was only a summary. Indeed, later he implied that what he had to say was only an exordium (11:15). But it certainly calls for special attention as representing what may be regarded as the bare minimum of Christ­ian knowledge which could be required of new converts before baptism, and all of it very markedly Christ–centred, in a way that all too often is not very evidently the case nowadays!

 

It is also important to observe that the apostle was making no attempt to in­struct his hearers regarding the fund­amentals of the Faith. This was not necessary, for "that word ye know." Peter was only recapitulating what these friends of Cornelius were already familiar with.

 

Philip's preaching?

 

How they had come by this instruction in Christian faith is not indicated. It may be that the enthusiasm of Cornelius had led him to seek fuller knowledge con­cerning the Jesus of Nazareth who had already made an impressive impact on his life (see chapter 39), and that then the learner had turned teacher for the benefit of his eager friends. Or – and this seems more likely — that fine evangelist Philip was now living in Caesarea (8:40; 21:8), and, though no longer peripatetic he was still very much a preacher of the gospel, daring to embark on the instruction of willing Gentiles, but realising clearly enough that it was not for him to use the keys of the kingdom which had been committed to Peter.

 

No respect of persons

 

The apostle's first point–indeed it was this truth that had brought him to Caesarea – was this: "I perceive (I am, at last, grasping the idea) that God is no respecter of persons." Why had it taken Peter so long to learn this principle which had already been clearly enun­ciated over and over again in the Old Testament Scriptures (e.g. Gal. 2:6,7–the context, as here, being circum­cision)? Presumably because of the rooted Jewish conviction that if a man had the blood of Jacob in his veins he was by that natural fact qualified for God's high esteem, whatever his person­al faith or righteousness; therefore the Law's insistence that God is no respecter of persons must apply within Israel, and not in His attitude to Jew and Gentile. Peter's brethren were still unwilling to learn this. Hence the apostle's emphasis here, primarily for their benefit. Their exclusive Judaism had hitherto made God a respecter of persons. It must do so no longer.

 

Now it must be readily recognized that in every nation the fear of God and the life of righteousness win the favour of heaven.

 

Peter's phrase: "he that worketh right­eousness," has been read as teaching a doctrine of salvation by works. Other considerations suggest differently:

 

1. Peter's own insistence (v.43) that "whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins."
   
2. The apostle was quoting Pr. 12:22, where the LXX actually has "he that worketh faith is accepted with him."
   
3. "This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent" (Jn. 6:29). Cp. the Lord's interpre­tation of his own parable: Mt. 21:28–32. See also Mk. 3:34, 35.

 

The apostle's words are to be read as a summary description of sincere God­fearing Gentile adherents to the synagogue.