Acts 10

H. Leo Boles Commentary On Acts 10 PETER’ S VISION Acts 10:1-16 1 Now there was a certain man in Caesarea,—Caesarea at this time was the most prominent city in Palestine, and was virtually the capital; it was built by Herod the Great as a seaport, which he had founded on the ruins of Samaria; it was named “ Caesarea” after Caesar Augustus. “ Cornelius” is a Roman name, and this “ certain man” may have been a descendant of the great Cornelian family of Rome; however, there were many Romans bearing this name. He was “ a centurion,” which means that he was a leader of a hundred soldiers; “ centurion” comes from the Latin “ centurio,” and means one hundred. “ Of the band called the Italian band,” means that the soldiers that made or composed this “ band” or “ cohort” were from Italy; the Italian cohorts were sent to any part of the empire where they were needed. It is possible that the soldiers of this cohort could have been Roman citizens who lived in Caesarea. 2 A devout man who feared God—Cornelius is described as being “ de¬vout,” “ one that feared God with all his house,” one “ who gave much alms to the people,” and one who “ prayed to God always.” It seems that he worshiped God with all earnestness and devotion, and taught his house to do the same; he was liberal in that the Jewish people among whom he was stationed needed help and he gave of his means to help them; he continued praying to God and seemed to be anxious for greater knowledge of God’ s way. However, this good man, Cornelius, was an unsaved man; he was unconverted. 3 He saw in a vision openly,—Cornelius was not in a trance, but was engaged in prayer when an angel appeared to him. He was not in a dream, but “ saw in a vision” the angel. The Greek “ oramati” means “ something seen” ; it is not the same word as used for Peter’ s “ trance” in verse 10. The Jews had three regular hours of prayer; the hour when the evening sacrifice was offered in the temple was the hour also of prayer, and this was the time when Cornelius was praying. It was supposed to be about three o’ clock in the afternoon. Cornelius did not call the messenger “ an angel,” but the men sent to Peter spoke of an angel. 4 And he, fastening his eyes upon him,—Cornelius looked steadfastly at the angel, and became frightened and exclaimed: “ What is it, Lord?” It seems that Cornelius recognized the angel of God as a messenger from God; hence, he addressed the angel as “ Lord.” Such a messenger coming so unexpectedly frightened Cornelius. The angel responded and told Cornelius that his “ prayers” and his “ alms” had “ gone up for a memorial before God.” “ Memorial” means a remembrance; it comes from the Greek “ mnemosuon,” and is used only one other time in the New Testament by Jesus concerning the act of Mary of Bethany. (Matthew 26:13; Mark 14:9.) The prayers of Cornelius had as¬cended like incense and were remembered by God; he had faith to pray to God that God would in some way answer his prayer. 5-6 And now send men to Joppa,—The angel gives Cornelius definite instruction as to what he should do; Peter was at Joppa, and the angel instructs Cornelius to send men to Joppa and “ fetch one Simon, who is surnamed Peter.” The information that Corne¬lius is to receive must come through human agency. Note the sev¬eral particulars mentioned by the angel; men are to go to Joppa; they are to bring a man by the name of Simon; this Simon was called Peter; he lodged with another Simon who was a tanner; Simon the tanner lived “ by the sea side.” The Jewish name, “ Simon,” is mentioned, and then the name “ Peter,” which de¬scribes minutely the preacher for whom he should send. Next the city where he was sojourning, and the name and occupation of the man with whom Peter was dwelling; then the exact location of the house is given. With these minute and accurate directions the messengers of Cornelius could find Peter without any delay. Philip the evangelist was probably in Caesarea. (Acts 8:40.) Why was not Philip called ? We are not told; however, Peter had “ the keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 16:19), and he is to give by the Holy Spirit the conditions of salvation to the Gentiles; Peter is to open the door to the Gentiles. 7-8 And when the angel that spake unto him—So soon as the angel had finished his message to Cornelius, preparation began to be made to carry out in detail all that had been commanded. Cornelius selected “ two of his household-servants, and a devout soldier” and dispatched them immediately. The angel “ departed,” apparently as a man would walk away; it is not said that he “ van¬ished” as Jesus did after his resurrection. (Luke 24:31.) Cornelius promptly selected men whom he could trust— two of his household servants and a devout soldier. Probably the two ser¬vants were to bear the message to Peter and the soldier was to act as guard for them. It seems that they started that evening, and would be able to arrive at Joppa, thirty miles away, the next day soon after midday. Cornelius “ rehearsed all things” to these men before he dispatched them to Joppa. It seems that Cornelius put great faith in the message of the angels, and also equal faith in these three men whom he sent for Peter; he recited to them his vision and conversation with the angel; they reverently listened to him and hastened to obey his orders. 9 Now on the morrow, as they were on their journey,—The roofs of the houses in that country were built flat, and there was a stairway on the outside that led to the roof. The roof of the house was the place where worship and conversation were usually had. Samuel chose this place for his conference with Saul before he anointed him king. (1 Samuel 9:25-26.) The housetop was used for religious purposes also. (Jeremiah 19:13; Zephaniah 1:5.) We see from verses 23 and 24 that the journey from Joppa to Caesarea occupied more than one day, so that the vision of Cornelius took place on the day before the trance of Peter, and the messengers had time almost to accomplish their journey before Peter was pre¬pared to receive them; the distance between Caesarea and Joppa was thirty Roman miles. Peter had gone upon the housetop to pray; it was about the sixth hour, or about noon. The Jews had three periods in the day for prayer— third hour or nine o’ clock, sixth hour or noon, and the ninth hour or three. o’ clock in the af¬ternoon. 10 and he became hungry,—“ Hungry” comes from the Greek “ prospeinos,” and means “ very hungry” ; that is, exceedingly hun¬gry. His appetite for food was very strong; he “ desired to eat.” His hunger and longing for food was so strong that it was beyond his control; it was about noon and they were making ready the noon meal in Simon the tanner’ s house. While in this extremely hungry condition, “ he fell into a trance.” “ Trance” here comes from the Greek “ ekstasis,” which means that “ an ectasy came upon him,” in which trance he passed out of himself and from which one came to himself. (Acts 11:5 Acts 12:11 Acts 22:17.) A trance is dif-ferent from a vision. In a “ trance” the bodily senses are dormant or inactive, while in a “ vision” the bodily senses are active and awake. Peter had a mental vision, but not a dream, for the trance differs from the dream. 11-12 and he beholdeth the heaven opened,—In this trance Peter saw as it were “ a certain vessel descending” like a great sheet, which was let down through the opened heaven by four cor¬ners to the earth. What Peter saw was an extended sheet, the four corners of which were held up, as it were, by cords let down from the four extremities of the opened sky. Enclosed as it were in this great sheet were “ all manner of fourfooted beasts and creeping things of the earth and birds of the heaven.” The classification here included sheep, oxen, swine, and all other “ fourfooted beasts” and creeping things of all kinds and all kinds of birds; there was a mixture of both clean and unclean animals. The vision repre¬sented the whole animal creation, yet fish are not mentioned; per¬haps fish are not mentioned because the sheet had no water, though they were clean and unclean. (Leviticus 11:9; Deuteronomy 14:9.) It will be noted that there are three groups named: fourfooted beasts, creeping things, and birds; these three great groups were in the sheet, and “ all kinds” of each group. “ Wild beasts” is omitted in the best texts. 13 And there came a voice to him,—As Peter was hungry before he fell into the trance, here is presented the means of satisfy¬ing his hunger, and by the command in which he is directed to kill without distinction among all that he sees, this would indicate that the law of Moses concerning the choice among living creatures, or the distinction between clean and unclean animals, had been abrogated. Peter was told to “ rise” ; that is, from his knees in prayer, or his reclining posture. The animals were clean and unclean, but the clean animals had become unclean by contact with the unclean, and Peter is told by a voice from heaven to break the Mosaic law, and in his eating do away with the distinction between Jew and Gentile. 14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord;—Peter refused to ease his hunger by violating the law by which he had been governed as a Jew; he had never “ eaten anything that is common and unclean.” This was one of the distinctions which separated the Jews from the Gentiles; but Peter is to learn that there is a better, truer distinc¬tion between God’ s people than that of choosing diferent kinds of animals for food. Peter showed his usual abrupt determination by the answer that he gave; he is polite but firm in his refusal; he gives his reason for his firm decision. He had never violated this law and he firmly declares that he will not do so now. 15-16 And a voice came unto him again the second time,—After Peter’ s clear and emphatic refusal, the voice stated, “ What God hath cleansed, make not thou common.” The lesson for Peter was clear; he should not make “ common” that which God had “ cleansed.” “ And this was done thrice.” Does this mean that the whole vision was repeated three times, or that the voice gave the command three times? Some claim that the whole scene was re¬peated three times; but many others understand that the voice came three times to emphasize the one lesson: Peter was not to call the Gentiles “ common” or “ unclean” when God had arranged to give to them the blessings of salvation through Christ. It seems that the vessel was let down from heaven only once, and then taken back “ up into heaven.” Peter was to learn that all nations might be admitted to the kingdom of God upon the same terms of the gospel.

Acts 10:17-48 17-18 Now while Peter was much perplexed—It seems that Peter came out of “ the trance” and was disturbed or confused as to what was meant by the vision. He seems to have understood the vision, but did not know the application or spiritual significance of it. While he was in this “ perplexed” state, the three men who had come from Caesarea were at the gate of Simon the tanner’ s house, and making inquiry as to whether “ Simon, who was surnamed Peter,” was stopping there. The messengers from Cornelius, by inquiry, had found the lodging place of Peter and were making in¬quiry for him. Luke, the writer, takes pains to make clear the close connection of providential guidance in the successive steps that have brought the messengers of Cornelius from Caesarea to Pe¬ter in Joppa. Peter saw a little later very clearly that these were all providential and designed coincidences controlled by the hand of God. 19 And while Peter thought on the vision,—As Peter was trying to solve the mystery, the Holy Spirit said to him: “ Behold, three men seek thee.” Peter was turning over the vision in his mind and seeking for its significance, and the Holy Spirit now in¬tercedes and directs him. The “ voice” no longer seemed to come from heaven to the outward ear, but was heard as not less divine in the secret recesses of his soul, and he is further directed as to what he should do. 20 But arise, and get thee down,—Peter is told that he should not hesitate or doubt as to the meaning of the strange vision; he is to understand that it came from God and that he should follow it. He was to walk, as it were, blindfold, but he should trust in the assurance of faith in the hand that was guiding him. As once before (John 13:7) Peter knew not yet what his Lord was doing, but was to know hereafter; Peter and the messen¬gers from Cornelius were alike acting under the guidance of God. We see here the divine hand in bringing the preacher of the gospel into the presence of the unsaved. The two visions of Cornelius in Caesarea and of Peter in Joppa occurred in teaching the same truth: God calls Jews and Gentiles to salvation through the same gospel. 21 And Peter went down to the men,—Peter at once went down from the housetop and said to the messengers from Corne¬lius, “ I am he whom ye seek: what is the cause wherefore ye are come?” Peter was as yet ignorant of the reason of their coming. He had learned three things:

(1) that God was about to teach him some new truth, but the precise character of it was dimly seen; (2)that the Holy Spirit had sent these three messengers to him; (3)that he was to go with them.

The reason for their coming Peter could learn from the men; the light they would throw upon the vision was gradually to appear clearer and clearer to him. 22 And they said, Cornelius a centurion,—The messengers from Cornelius began at once and very briefly and pointedly told Peter the full message that they had brought from Cornelius. They described Cornelius as a “ centurion, a righteous man and one that feareth God, and well reported of by all the nation of the Jews.” After describing Cornelius they then told Peter that God had warned him “ by a holy angel to send” for Peter that he might “ hear words” from him. Very likely this reminded Peter of an¬other centurion whose name is not recorded, who was stationed at Capernaum, and had built a synagogue for the Jews. (Luke 7:5.) There was a message from God that Peter had that Cornelius needed to hear; Peter had the gospel as God’ s power to save, and Cornelius was an unsaved man; hence, he needed to hear the words that Peter had for him. 23 So he called them in and lodged them.—Here, according to the translators of the Standard Version, should close the twen¬ty-second verse. The New Testament was divided into verses by Robert Stephen in A.D. 1551, and his division into verses has been observed since that time; but it would have been better to have in¬cluded the words here in verse 22, and that division would have corresponded to the paragraph division. And on the morrow he arose— Peter had lodged the three men overnight and was ready the next morning to start on the journey from Joppa to Caesarea. He selected six Jewish brethren to go with him. (Acts 11:12.) These six brethren are called “ they of the circumcision that believed.” Peter took them for his compan¬ions that he might, if need be, afterwards appeal to them for testi¬mony of what was done, and to explain why he had acted as he did. Probably he informed them of the message which the ser-vants of Cornelius had brought, and of the vision that he had seen in the trance, as well as what the Holy Spirit had said to him. 24 And on the morrow they entered into Caesarea.—After keeping the three men overnight Peter arranged with six Jewish brethren to go with him to Caesarea; they arrived in Caesarea the second day about three o’ clock after they left Joppa. It seems that it took Peter and his company longer to make the journey from Joppa to Caesarea than it had taken the three men from Caesarea to arrive in Joppa. Cornelius was waiting for them to arrive; he did not know just what time Peter and his company would arrive, but he had “ called together his kinsmen and his near friends” to hear what Peter had to say. They returned to Caesarea the fourth day after Cornelius sent the messengers. (Verse 30.) It is very probable that Peter and his company did not leave Joppa so early and promptly as we might expect, since they did not arrive in Caesarea until about three o’ clock the following day. It will be noted that only the kinsmen of Cornelius “ and his near friends” were present when Peter arrived. 25 And when it came to pass that Peter entered,—When Peter entered the house of Cornelius, Cornelius graciously met him, “ and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.” Cornelius regarded Peter as a messenger from God and sought to do honor to him; “ worshipped” is from the Greek “ prosekunesen,” and means a high degree of reverence and not actual worship, for Cor¬nelius was not an idolator, and would not have worshipped Peter as a god. However, it seems that Peter understood Cornelius to be worshiping him. 26 But Peter raised him up,—It seems clear that Peter under¬stood that Cornelius was not merely doing him homage, but that his acts were intended as worship; hence, he corrected Cornelius and told him to “ stand up,” and then added, “ I myself also am a man.” Peter did not want to receive the homage that Cornelius was offering, for such belonged not to man, but to God alone. 27 And as he talked with him,—The introduction and conver¬sation began without, for they talked together and then Peter went in. When he came in he found “ many come together” ; the con¬versation without had taken some time as the term “ talked with him” implies a long conversation; the “ many” who were in the house shows the influence and prominence of Cornelius. 28 and he said unto them, Ye yourselves know—Peter now gives an explanation for his entering the house of Cornelius, a Gentile; he appeals to the knowledge of Cornelius and his friends, and they thus knew the strict regulations that the Jews observed in their association with the Gentiles. Peter says that “ it is an unlaw¬ful thing” for a Jew “ to join himself or come unto one of another nation.” “ Unlawful” comes from “ athemitos,” which means con¬trary to law or custom; it is used in this form only twice in the New Testament; Peter uses the term both times, here and in 1 Peter 4:3; it means a violation of established order. The position in which Peter found himself was strangely unfamiliar, so much so that he can scarcely help apologizing, even to Romans, for his con¬duct. The separative ceremonial law, partly Mosaic, and partly traditional with the Jews, had built up a barrier which was difficult to overcome. However, God had showed Peter by the vision on the housetop that he should call no “ man common or unclean.” Perhaps Peter saw this clearer now than he had done before. 29 wherefore also I came without gainsaying,—Peter had been deeply impressed with the lesson that had been taught him, and so soon as he learned what God wanted him to do without “ gainsaying,” or “ without answering back,” or doubting he obeyed and came at once. “ I ask therefore with what intent ye sent for me.” No time is wasted, no delay is had; Peter at once inquires why Cornelius, a Gentile, had sent for him. Perhaps Peter had not been instructed by the Holy Spirit; it was left for Cornelius to re-veal his vision to Peter. In this way Peter could take his own vi¬sion and that of Cornelius and put them together and learn what God wanted him to do. 30-31 And Cornelius said, Four days ago,—This statement, “ four days ago,” has been interpreted several ways, partly due to different readings of the Greek text; some read, “ From the fourth day until this very hour, the ninth, I was praying in my house; and behold a man stood in my presence in bright garments.” The Greek text appears to mean that four days before Cornelius was praying until the ninth hour, the very hour of the day which it was when he was talking to Peter. This makes the time of Peter’ s ar¬rival to be after the ninth hour of the day. Cornelius relates his experience to Peter, the six Jewish brethren, and the kinsmen and near friends who had assembled. These verses can best be understood and studied in connection with the other accounts given to¬gether in verse 3. There is no new point emphasized in the re¬hearsal given here by Cornelius. 32 Send therefore to Joppa,—Here also Cornelius repeats what is stated in verses 5 and 6 with no additional thought. The Authorized Version adds: “ Who, when he cometh, shall speak unto thee.” However, this phrase does not appear in the best Greek texts. 33 Forthwith therefore I sent to thee;—Cornelius had been instructed to send for Peter and he did not delay, but sent the three men the same afternoon that he had received the instruction. He commends Peter for coming so promptly by saying: “ Thou hast well done that thou art come.” He thus commends Peter and encourages him in the task that is now before Peter by saying: “ We are all here present in the sight of God, to hear all things that have been commanded thee of the Lord.” Cornelius not only com¬mends Peter for his courage in breaking away from Jewish cus¬toms, but he takes no offense at the implied superiority of the Jews over the Gentiles; he tells Peter that his circle of close friends are present to hear the message from God that Peter has. This audi¬ence was fertile soil for the preaching of the gospel to the Gentiles. They were not only “ present in the sight of God,” but they were there “ to hear all things” that God commanded to be done. Cornelius recognizes Peter as being a messenger of God, and hence he has a message from God. 34-35 And Peter opened his mouth, and said,—“ Opened his mouth” is a solemn form of beginning an address, and is used fre¬quently in the New Testament. (Matthew 5:2 Matthew 13:35; Acts 8:35 Acts 18:14.) “ Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of per¬sons.” Peter now is fully convinced that God had sent an angel to Cornelius and had given him the vision on the housetop that he might know that God was no respecter of persons; that the barrier between Jew and Gentile had been removed in Christ. God is no “ respecter of persons/’ but he is a respecter of character. A “ re¬specter of persons” is one who receives or treats others, not accord¬ing to what they are, but according to their outward circumstances, such as wealth or social position, nationality, or color. All men alike need salvation; God loves all men and Christ died for all; there is one and the same plan of salvation for all; hence, those who faithfully comply with the terms of salvation receive it. Peter now understands that the Gentiles are to enjoy salvation in Christ as are the Jews. God had sent him among the Gentiles and had prepared him by a vision for the venture, and he had learned that he, a Jew, had not defiled himself in God’ s sight by association with the Gentiles. Peter had also learned that the Gentile was the same in the sight of God as the Jew, and that God would treat him in the same way. 36 The word which he sent unto the children of Israel,—Peter further learns that the gospel which came to the Jews was also intended to go to the Gentiles, for “ he is Lord of all.” “ The word” which was preached concerning Christ by John the Baptist, and then by Christ and his apostles, and now by the disciples of Christ, was the gospel or “ good tidings of peace” which should be enjoyed in Christ. Since the gospel is a gospel of peace, obedience to it reconciles both Jew and Gentile in Christ. Christ is the Sav¬ior, not only of the Jews, but of Gentiles, of the entire world. 37 that saying ye yourselves know,—Peter affirms that Cor¬nelius and his company knew something about Jesus of Nazareth; Caesarea was in Palestine and all Palestine had learned of Jesus. Cornelius may have been in Jerusalem during the personal minis¬try of Christ; at any rate, Peter affirms that Cornelius knew of him since it had been “ published throughout all Judaea, beginning from Galilee.” During the personal ministry of Christ he had evangelized Judea and Galilee; since the death of Christ the apos¬tles had preached in Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria, and those who were scattered from Jerusalem had gone everywhere preach¬ing the word. (Acts 8:1 Acts 8:4.) Peter limits the publication of this gospel to the time of John’ s baptism. The oral gospel of the apos¬tles began with the baptism of John and ended with the death of Christ, so far as the limited commission was concerned. The works of Christ were so public and so widespread that some knowledge of them had come to Cornelius; hence, Peter has a foundation upon which to instruct Cornelius. 38 even Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed him—To distinguish which Jesus, Peter designates that it is “ Jesus of Naza¬reth.” God had anointed him with the Holy Spirit and had given him power to work miracles. He was anointed with the Holy Spirit when he was baptized. (Luke 3:22.) After his baptism he “ went about doing good,” and exercising the power that God had given him in “ healing all that were oppressed of the devil.” Those who had evil spirits and demons were oppressed by the devil. Peter here recognized the reality of the devil. The reason assigned for his being able to do this was that “ God was with him.” Nicodemus had confessed that “ no one can do these signs that thou doest, except God be with him.” (John 3:2.) 39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did—Jesus had made his apostles his witnesses. (Acts 1:8.) The apostles had followed him from his early ministry to his crucifixion; they had seen him after his resurrection and saw him ascend to the Father; hence, they could be his witnesses “ both in the country of the Jews, and in Jerusalem.” They had borne witness of him in Jerusalem and in Judea. Peter could say to Cornelius that he had heard of these things, but his apostles had seen them; Peter knew them at firsthand, so he was a competent witness. He could say that he knew when, where, to whom, and under what circum¬stances all these things which Cornelius had heard about were done. The Jews, in whose country and chief city these good things were done, slew this Jesus of Nazareth, “ hanging him on a tree.” Peter had used this expression once before. (Acts 5:30.) Peter represented in Acts 2:23 the crucifixion as an act of the rul¬ers and people of Jerusalem, and not of the Roman governor. 40-41 Him God raised up the third day,—Again Peter brings in contrast what the people did for Jesus of Nazareth and what God did for him— the people crucified him, but God raised him from the dead; the people were working contrary to God. Not only were the apostles witnesses, but God himself bore witness of Jesus by raising him from the dead. The Jews thought that they had destroyed Jesus by crucifying him, but this only gave God the occasion to prove more conclusively that Jesus was the Messiah, his Son. Peter makes it clear that Jesus appeared to the apostles, and not to “ all the people,” but just to chosen witnesses; these wit¬nesses were not deceived, for they “ ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead.” It is difficult for us to understand how Jesus could eat and drink after the resurrection as is stated here by Peter and also in Luke 24:41-43; yet Peter makes it clear that there was no possible way by which these witnesses could be de¬ceived. 42 And he charged us to preach unto the people,—Not only were Peter and others to be witnesses for Christ, but they were to preach him to others; in fact, they were to preach the gospel to the whole creation. (Mark 16:15.) Here Peter shows Cornelius his commission from Christ to preach what he had seen and heard and experienced. Among the things that he should preach was that Christ died for the sins of the world, that he was buried and raised from the dead and made his ascension back to the Father, and that he was “ ordained of God to be the Judge of the living and the dead.” Christ is now the Judge; his life and character are the standard by which every man is to judge himself; he shows the ideal way to live; he is also to be the Judge at the last day. “ Judge of the living and the dead” covers all past, present, and fu¬ture. 43 To him bear 3II the prophets witness,—All the prophets pointed to Jesus. Peter had declared “ all the prophets from Sam¬uel and them that followed after, as many as have spoken, they also told of these days.” (Acts 3:24.) The important thing that the prophets bore witness to, and that the apostles were witnesses of, is “ that through his name every one that believeth on him shall receive remission of sins.” Peter has made the claim that the entire Old Testament prophecy bore witness to the universality of the gospel, and that the condition of salvation was through obedience to Christ. The remission of sins is through the name of Jesus and belongs to those who believe on him; Peter had preached before that there is no “ other name under heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12.) On the day of Pentecost Peter had told believers, when they asked what to do, that they should “ repent ye, and be baptized … in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins.” (Acts 2:38.) 44 While Peter yet spake these words,—We may know that Cornelius and his company were listening with deep interest to Peter, with emotions as intense as those which possessed anyone, and suddenly “ the Holy Spirit fell on all them that heard the word.” He did not come by the laying on of hands, but came on these Gentiles as he did on the day of Pentecost on the Jews. (Acts 11:15.) Peter had not formally finished his address when the interruption of the Holy Spirit came. Joel had prophesied that God would “ pour forth of my Spirit upon all flesh” (Acts 2:17), and the Jews had received the Holy Spirit on Pentecost, and now he comes upon the Gentiles; hence, “ all flesh” had now received the Holy Spirit, for the race of man was divided at that time into Jew and Gentile. 45 And they of the circumcision that believed—Peter had taken six Jewish brethren with him; they are spoken of here as “ they of the circumcision.” From this point on Luke refers to the two classes of disciples, Jewish and Gentile. The Jewish disciples who had accompanied Peter from Joppa were amazed because the Gentiles had received the gift of the Holy Spirit. The miracle proved what Peter had said with a fullness of proof for which Peter himself perhaps was not prepared; these Gentiles had faith and the miraculous manifestation of the Holy Spirit may be called a baptism of the Holy Spirit. 46-47 For they heard them speak with tongues,—“ With tongues” means that they spoke with new and strange tongues as they did on the day of Pentecost. (Acts 2:4 Acts 2:11.) They were praising God with these new tongues. There was the same kind of need of the outward manifestation of the Holy Spirit at this time that there was on Pentecost. The speaking of tongues always ac¬companied the baptism of the Holy Spirit. This convinced Peter, and he asked who could forbid “ the water, that these should not be baptized.” He gave as his reason that they had received the Holy Spirit as the Jews had; hence, they were entitled to all the privi¬leges of the gospel. They had believed Peter’ s testimony; hence, had believed on Jesus; it is evident that they were penitent of all their sins because they could not be saved with their sins; now they are to be baptized. Baptism was one of the prerequisites to remission of sins. 48 And he commanded them to be baptized—Peter was speaking by the authority of God; he was speaking by the Holy Spirit; hence, God through Peter commanded them to be baptized “ in the name of Jesus Christ.” Peter and the six Jewish brethren who were present could baptize this company in a short time, but Peter commanded others to do the baptizing. Paul refrained from baptizing some, as may be inferred from his letters to the Corin¬thians. (1 Corinthians 1:14-17.) Peter may have acted from a similar motive. After they were baptized they earnestly requested that Peter and the Jewish brethren “ tarry certain days” with them. The implication is that Peter remained with Cornelius some time.

J.W. McGarvey Commentary On Acts 10Acts 10:1-2. The scene changes from Joppa to Cæsarea, about thirty miles northward along the Mediterranean shore; and we are introduced to another case for conversion, a Gentile and a soldier. (1) “There was a certain man in Cæsarea named Cornelius, a centurion of the cohort called Italian, (2) a devout man, and one who feared God with all his house, who gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God continually.” We desire to examine, with great care, the process of this man’s conversion, and begin by noticing the present religious elements of his character. He is a “ devout man”— a man of deep religious feelings. He is not a devout pagan, but he “ fears God,” the true God. He must, then, be somewhat acquainted with the Jewish religion.

He is not identified with the Jews, being uncircumcised. He is not a timid or unfaithful worshiper of God, but has taught all his family the same worship. He gives much alms to the people, and is a praying man. At first glance, it might appear strange that such a man should need conversion. There are many men, at the present day, in whose favor not so much can be said, who flatter themselves that their prospects for eternity are good. They are honest in their business, honorable in their intercourse with men, good husbands and fathers, generous to their neighbors, and benevolent to the poor; what have they to fear at the hands of a just and merciful God? They forget that their obligations to God are infinitely higher than those to men, even to the dearest friends on earth; and that, therefore, it is the most inexcusable of all sins persistently refuse him the worship which is his due. This offense takes the hue of the blackest ingratitude, when we remember the blood which has been shed to touch our hearts, and to open up to us the way of pardon and eternal life. Of this crime every man is guilty who does not worship the living God, and submit to the ordinances of Jesus Christ. But Cornelius was a praying man, a devout worshiper of God, besides possessing every other virtue claimed by self-righteous sinners; yet it was necessary for even him to hear “ words by which he might be saved.“ Until a man can claim for himself something more than is here said of him, he may not flatter himself with the hope of salvation. Under the former dispensation, the piety and fidelity of Cornelius would have given him an honorable place among the holy men of God; but this alone could not suffice him now. Jesus the Christ had stepped in between God and man, and opened, through the rent vail of his flesh, the only access to God. All heaven had confessed his authority, and the holy disciples on earth had come to the Father by him. But Cornelius was still calling upon God, without the name of Christ, and seeking to approach him by the old, not by the new and living way. He was in the same condition with any pious but unbelieving Jew of that or of our own age. It was necessary to his salvation that he should believe in Jesus and obey him. This would secure to him the pardon of his sins, which he had not and could not secure by worshiping according to the law. Acts 10:3-6. This defect in his religious character was not a fault; it was only a misfortune. He was doing the best he knew how; and, if we may infer what he prayed for, from what he obtained in answer to his prayers, he was praying for additional knowledge, and perhaps for an interest in the salvation offered through Christ. Such a prayer, offered by such a man, is always acceptable to God. On a certain day he had fasted till in the afternoon, and at three o’clock was praying within his house, when, (3) “He saw distinctly in a vision, about the ninth hour of the day, an angel of God coming in to him and saying to him, Cornelius. (4) He looked intently upon him, and was full of fear, and said, What is it, Lord? He said to him, Thy prayers and thine alms have come up for a memorial before God. (5) And now, send men to Joppa, and call for one Simon who is surnamed Peter. (6) He is lodging with a certain Simon, a tanner, whose house is by the sea-shore.

He will tell you what you ought to do.”Here is an unconverted man praying, and his prayer is answered. But the circumstances of the man, the nature of the prayer, and the answer given, are all essentially different from those of unconverted men who are taught to pray by the Protestant sects of the present day. The man was not instructed in a knowledge of the Redeemer, and the way of salvation, and of his own interest in the same, but neglecting his duty, as in the case with the modern sinner. Neither was he praying for pardon, while postponing obedience to the gospel, as in these cases; but his prayer was for a knowledge of his duty, and he had no one by to instruct him. The answer to his prayer was given, not, as is now so often pretended, by sending forth the Spirit into his heart to speak his sins forgiven, but by sending an angel to tell him where he can find a man who will guide him in the way of salvation. In the case of the eunuch, an angel appeared to the preacher and sent him to the inquirer. In this case, the angel appears to the inquirer, and tells him to send for the preacher. In both cases, the only work of the angel was to bring the two men together, face to face. Thus, again, we seen an insuperable necessity, in case of a scriptural conversion, for the presence and co-operation of a human agent, showing that the divine influences, whatever, and however numerous they may be, reach the heart through the word of truth. The prayer of Cornelius was answered, like that of Saul, by referring him to inspired authorities within the Church. This shows how vain, at the present day, must be every prayer for direct answers from heaven, in reference to the pardon of sins.

If a verbal answer to such prayers could be obtained, we are bound to conclude, from these precedents, that it would still be, “ Go to Damascus and it shall be told you,” or “ Send men to Joppa for Simon whose surname is Peter, and he will tell you what you ought to do.” Peter and Ananias are before us now, with the same instruction which they gave then, and it is useless for us to offer for what we have in hand, prayers which Saul and Cornelius offered for what had not yet been granted. The directions given by the two teachers, in these cases, and by other inspired men, is all that God granted to sinners then, and it is certainly all that we have a right to ask for now. The necessity for the spoken word in order to the conversion of men is not only exhibited in these mission of angels, but it also explains the occurrence, in the two cases of Cornelius and the eunuch, of an agency not discernible in other cases. If no heavenly messenger had been sent to Philip, he could not have known that there was an Ethiopian on the road to Gaza, reading his Bible, and ready to hear the gospel. And if no angel had appeared to Cornelius, he could not have known that he had any interest in the blood of Jesus, or any right to send for Peter. No human being could have informed him, because all others, including Peter, were as ignorant of it as himself. An interposition from heaven is necessary; but when it occurs, it provides only for just such demands of the case as could not be supplied without it. The multitude on Pentecost needed no such angelic aid, for the preacher was before them, and each party was conscious of the right to speak, on the one hand, and the right to obey, on the other.

So with us. When we wish any information, or the enjoyment of any religious privilege, we have the apostles before us, face to face. Their words are in our hands, and may be in our minds and hearts. We have no need for heavenly apparitions or illuminations; and if we expect them, we will be disappointed, or deluded. If a man in ignorance prays for a knowledge of salvation, this incident in the case of Cornelius, instead of encouraging him to pray on, actually answers his prayer, by telling him to send for some man who understands the gospel, and will guide him as Peter did Cornelius. Before proceeding further in this case of conversion, we wish the reader to observe that enough has occurred already to secure Cornelius’ recognition as a genuine convert, by the prevailing Protestant parties of this day. Let any man come before the Church with such an experience as his, saying, “ I have been for many years a devout man, worshiping God as well as I knew how, giving alms to the poor, praying continually, and teaching all my family the fear of God. Yesterday afternoon, at three o’clock, I was praying, according to my custom, when suddenly a holy angel stood before me, and said, Thy prayers and thine alms have come up for a memorial before God.” Who would doubt that he was “ powerfully converted,” or dare to insinuate that there was anything else necessary in this case? He would receive the right-hand of fellowship at once. Yet, so different was the apostolic procedure, that the man was now only prepared to hear words by which he might be saved. How long will religious men allow their inventions and traditions to nullify the word of God? Acts 10:7-8. (7) “And when the angel who spoke to Cornelius went away, he called two of his household servants, and a devout soldier of those who attended him, (8) and having fully related all these things to them, he sent them to Joppa.” The two servants are included in the household, who with him feared God, and the soldier selected had also learned the same great lesson. None but men of such character would be suitable messengers in a case like this. Acts 10:9-16. The scene of the narrative now changes again, from Cæsarea back to Joppa, and to the house of the tanner, where we left the Apostle Peter. Leaving the messengers of Cornelius on the way, Luke anticipates their arrival, and relates how Peter was prepared for the favorable reception of their message. (9) “Now, on the next day, while they were on their journey, and were drawing near to the city, Peter went up upon the house to pray, about the sixth hour. (10) He was very hungry, and desired to eat; but while they were preparing, he fell into a trance, (11) and saw heaven opened, and saw a certain vessel descending, like a great white sheet tied by the four corners, and let down to the earth; (12) in which were all kinds of four-footed animals and wild beasts and reptiles of the earth, and birds of the air. (13) And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill and eat. (14) But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing common or unclean. (15) And the voice spoke to him again the second time, What God has cleansed, do not you call common. (16) This was done three times, and the vessel was taken up again into heaven.” In order to fully appreciate the necessity for this vision, we must remember the prejudice of the Jews against uncircumcised Gentiles. Previous to the Babylonish captivity, they had too great an inclination to intimacy with their idolatrous neighbors; but that terrible affliction cured them of idolatry, and when they returned to their own land, they put away, at the instigation of Nehemiah, all the idolatrous wives among them. This was the beginning of a reaction toward the opposite extreme, and such a state of feeling was finally induced, that, in the traditions of the elders, it was regarded as a sin even to go into the house of one who was uncircumcised. The disciples of Jesus had been educated from their childhood to an intense degree of this prejudice, and there were facts in the history of Jesus calculated to foster rather than to eradicate it. They had heard him say, “ I am not sent save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” They had seen him work no miracle for a Gentile except under the protest, “ It is not proper to take the children’s food and cast it to dogs.” And when he had sent them out on their first mission, he had commanded them, “ Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and enter not into a city of the Samaritans; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” It is true, that in their final commission he had commanded them to disciple and immerse all nations; but they very naturally interpreted this in the light of past experience, and concluded that all nations were to be gradually absorbed into the Jewish commonwealth by circumcision, and afterward brought into the Church. They had not hesitated, therefore, to immerse proselytes, and even to give them office in the Church, though they still regarded it as a sin to enter the house of a Gentile who was uncircumcised. This fact in the mental state of the apostles shows that they were not guided by the Holy Spirit into all truth at once, but their knowledge was extended according to the demands of the occasion. It was a prejudice, however, belonging to them as Jews, which had prevented them, thus far, from perceiving the particular truth here involved; and this involves the conclusion that prejudices previously were capable of impeding the inspiring influence, so that special measures were required for their eradication. The time had now arrived when this prejudice must be uprooted from the heart of Peter. If it were a part of the work of the indwelling Spirit to act immediately upon the heart, then there need be nothing more done with Peter than for the Spirit thus to act. But there is not the slightest intimation of any such action. On the contrary, influences of an entirely different nature are brought to bear upon him, and to them the effect is plainly attributed. A series of significant objects are presented to his eye, certain words are addressed to his ear, and a combination of facts are brought to bear upon his understanding. Falling into a trance, while hungrily awaiting his noonday meal, he sees descending from heaven, and then spread out before him, a great sheet full of animals, both clean and unclean.

This vision conveys no meaning, until he hears the words, “ Arise, Peter; kill and eat.” He now understands it as indicating that he shall eat unclean animals. But this is so shocking to his sense of propriety that he exclaims, in perplexity, even to the invisible God who had spoken to him, “ Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing common or unclean.” But he is commanded, “ What I have cleansed, do not you call common.” The vessel is brought near to him, and the same words repeated three times. Then the vision closes, and he recovers from the trance. Acts 10:17-20. Restored now to his natural state of mind, Peter remains upon the housetop, reflecting upon the vision, and wondering if there was not some meaning in it besides that in reference to unclean animals. The question was soon solved. (17) “Now when Peter was doubting in himself what this vision which he had seen could mean, behold, the men who were sent from Cornelius, having inquired out the house of Simon, were standing at the gate; (18) and calling, they inquired if Simon surnamed Peter was lodging there. (19) But Peter was still thinking of the vision, and the Spirit said to him, Behold, three men are seeking you. (20) Arise, therefore, and go down and go with them, doubting nothing, for I have sent them.” In the skillful arrangements of divine wisdom, all the separate influences which are to remove Peter’s prejudices are adjusting themselves for combined and harmonious action. Those men have been on their journey two days, but God had measured their steps to the house of Simon, and timed the appearance of the vision to the motion of their feet, so that when they reach the gate he is still on the house-top absorbed in reflection; but ere they are admitted to the house, the Spirit has sent him down to meet them, and to go with them. Acts 10:21-22. He knows nothing, as yet, of the nature of their mission, neither does he yet understand any better than before the meaning of the vision. (21) “Then Peter went down to the men, and said, Behold, I am he whom you are seeking. What is the cause for which you are come? (22) And they said, Cornelius, a centurion, a just man, and one who fears God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews, was warned from God by a holy angel to send for you into his house, and to hear words from you.” Upon hearing these words, the whole truth at once flashed upon the mind of Peter, and the agencies which for two days had been preparing to uproot his prejudice, sprang upon it with their combined force. No less than an angel from God has sent these men to call me into the house of a Gentile, to preach the gospel to him. My vision of clean and unclean beasts is explained. God has cleansed the Gentiles, and I am no longer to call them unclean.

The Spirit has commanded me to go with these men, without doubting. The authority of God, of an angel, of the Holy Spirit, all impel me. I can resist no longer. His prejudice is gone, and doubtless he feels a new thrill of joy as his heart tremulously enlarges to take the whole world within the embrace of his philanthropy. Acts 10:23. As the Spirit had directed, he does not hesitate as to the line of duty, but at once announces to the messengers that the journey shall begin to-morrow. (23) “Then, calling them in, he lodged them; and on the next day Peter went out with them, and certain brethren from Joppa went with him.” It was a wise precaution that he took other brethren with him, so that the whole of this new movement might be properly attested by competent and disinterested witnesses. Acts 10:24. During the four days which had elapsed, Cornelius had made no secret of the vision he had witnessed, but had communicated it to such friends as were likely to take the same interest in it with himself. Having presumed, with all confidence, that Peter would come, and knowing the time that the journey would require, all was in readiness for his arrival. (24) “On the next day they entered into Cæsarea. Cornelius was waiting for them, having called together his kinsmen and intimate friends.” These friends and relatives, it must be remembered, and not the mere family of Cornelius, were the chief part of the audience about to be addressed by Peter. Acts 10:25-27. (25) “Now as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet and worshipped. (26) But Peter raised him up, and said, Stand up. I myself also am a man. (27) And conversing with him, he came in and found many who had come together.” It is not in keeping with the character of Cornelius to suppose that he rendered to Peter such worship as is due to God. But prostration was the common attitude of approach to a superior, as it yet is in eastern countries, and Cornelius was but complying with this custom. To Peter, however, it appeared as if he intended something more, and hence the rebuke. Acts 10:28-29. Upon entering the house of this Gentile, side by side with him, and into the presence of others who were likewise uncircumcised, Peter deemed it proper to inform them of his reason for thus departing from a well-known Jewish custom. (28) “And he said to them, You know that it is unlawful for a Jew to attach himself to, or to come into the house of one of another nation. Yet God has showed me that I should not call any man common or unclean. (29) Therefore, I came without objecting when I was sent for. I ask, then, for what purpose you sent for me?” This speech shows clearly that Peter had interpreted the vision of unclean beasts as referring to men as well as to animal food. Acts 10:30-33. (30) “Then Cornelius said, Four days ago I was fasting until this hour, and at the ninth hour I was praying in my house, and behold, a man stood before me in bright apparel, (31) and said, Cornelius, your prayer is heard, and your alms are had in remembrance before God. (32) Send, therefore, to Joppa, and call for Simon who is surnamed Peter. He is lodging in the house of Simon, a tanner, by the sea-shore. When he comes he will speak to you. (33) Immediately, therefore, I sent for you, and you have done well that you have come. Now, then, we are all present here before God to hear all things which are by God commanded you.” In this last remark Cornelius speaks for his friends who were assembled, as well as for himself. As was becoming the occasion, he had gathered in, to hear the expected messenger, only those who were willing to hear him as a messenger of God. In the statement that they were all present before God to hear what he had commanded, there was an implied pledge to obey what they might hear, and there is no doubt, from the sequel, that such was their purpose. Acts 10:34-35. The scene before Peter enlarges his conceptions of the purpose of God; for he now sees that his mission is designed not for the benefit of Cornelius alone, but for a large number of his Gentile friends; and if for all these, then, there is to be no further national limitation to the gospel. He gives utterance to this conception. (34) “Then Peter opened his mouth and said, In truth I perceive that God is not a respecter of persons; (35) but, in every nation, he that fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him.” This expansive thought was sufficient to burst asunder all the exclusive bonds of the Mosaic institution, and should be sufficient now to explode the equally injurious theory of an arbitrary predestination of certain men and angels to their eternal destiny. It is a positive declaration that God respects not persons but character. To fear him, and to work righteousness, and not any other distinction between persons, is the ground of acceptability with him. Acts 10:36-38. Cornelius has now related to Peter such an experience, as, we have seen above, would secure him recognition as a genuine convert to Christ among Protestant sects; but Peter was so far from regarding it in this light, that he proceeds to preach to them as he would to other sinners. We will consider his speech by the sections into which it naturally divides itself. (36) “You know the word which God sent to the children of Israel, preaching peace through Jesus Christ (he is Lord of all,) (37) the word which was published throughout all Judea, beginning from Galilee after the immersion which John preached, (38) concerning Jesus of Nazareth, how that God anointed him with the Holy Spirit and with power; who went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, because God was with him.” From this it appears that Cornelius and his friends were familiar with the personal history of Jesus, and even with the message of peace which God has caused him to preach to the children of Israel. The information which they lacked, therefore, was only that which referred to their own interests in that message. Acts 10:39. Not content with assuming that these facts were familiar to them, Peter gives them a surer foundation for their convictions, by presenting the testimony upon which he relies to prove the facts. (39) “And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem, whom they slew, hanging him upon a tree.” In view of the fact that Cornelius had been “ warned from God by a holy angel,” to send for Peter and hear what he had to say, no confirmation of this his testimony was needed. They were prepared to receive everything he might say to them as a message from God. Acts 10:40-41. The crowning fact of the gospel comes next in the statement. (40) “Him God raised up the third day, and showed him openly, (41) not to all the people, to be witnesses chosen by God beforehand, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he arose from the dead.” Here Peter states, by way of commending to his hearers the evidence of the resurrection, a fact which has been so differently construed by infidels, as to be made a ground of objection to it; that is, that the witnesses were chosen for the occasion. Whether Peter or the infidels are right in judgment, depends entirely upon the grounds of the choice. If they were chosen because of a dishonest desire to prove the fact, or because of the ease with which they might be deceived into the belief of a fact which had no real existence, then it may be rightly regarded as a suspicious circumstance. But the reverse is true in both particulars. Such was the situation of the witnesses, that there was great danger both to property and person, in giving their testimony, and therefore every motive to dishonesty prompted them to keep silent rather than to testify.

They were also the least likely of all the men of Israel to be deceived, because of their long familiarity with the person of him who was to be identified. Peter, then, was right; for the fact that such witnesses were chosen beforehand is proof that no deception was intended; while the fact that they “ did eat and drink with him after he arose from the dead,” rendered it impossible for them to be deceived. Acts 10:42-43. Having now followed the career of Jesus from the beginning to his resurrection and exhibition of himself alive to the witnesses, Peter proceeds in regular order to the next historical fact, the giving of the apostolic commission. (42) “And he commanded us to preach to the people, and to testify that it is he who is ordained by God the judge of the living and the dead. (43) To him all the prophets testify that every one who believes in him shall, through his name, receive remission of sins.” The declaration that every one who believes in him shall receive remission of sins has been construed as proof that remission of sins is dependent on faith only. But the fact that Peter is here stating what Jesus commanded the apostles to preach should prevent such a construction of his words; for, in the commission to which he refers, immersion is connected with faith, as a condition of pardon. His words must be construed consistently with this fact. There is no difficulty in doing this, for it is a common apostolic usage to employ faith as an equivalent for the conditions of pardon. To deny that immersion is for remission of sins, because, in a condensed statement like this, it is not specifically mentioned, is not less subversive of the truth than to deny that repentance is a condition because it is not mentioned. It is not sufficient to reply to this, that repentance was always implied in genuine faith; for it certainly was not more uniformly attendant upon faith than was immersion.

It would be difficult to find, in apostolic times, a penitent believer who was not immersed, without unnecessary delay, as a genuine believer who was not penitent. All believers who repented were invariably immersed. Of course, we exclude from this remark all cases which occurred previous to the date of the commission. If any one, dissatisfied with this explanation, is disposed to insist that Peter’s declaration, that every one who believes in Jesus shall receive remission of sins, must include those— if any there be— who believe, but are not immersed, we have but to show the absurdity of the assumption by referring to a parallel case in which there can be no dispute. The Apostle John says: “Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwells in him, and he in God.” He who would conclude from this remark, that the only condition of communion with God is to confess that Jesus is his Son, subverts the truth no more than he who makes the assumption in question; for the universality of the declaration is the same in both, and there is no limitation expressed in either. There is no one fact more distinctly stated in Acts that that believers should repent and be immersed for the remission of sins: hence, there can scarcely be a grosser perversion of the word of God than to construe other statements of the Scripture so as to deny the truth of this. A condition of pardon once stated can never be set aside by any less than express divine authority. It should be observed, further, that the statement in question is not absolutely that “ every one who believes in him shall receive remission of sins;” but that he shall receive it “through his name.” The expression, “ through his name,” was not thrown in here at random; for the inspired apostles never spoke at random. It has a well-defined meaning, and was intended to qualify the sentence of which it forms a part. What we receive through his name certainly can not reach us until we attain some connectionwith his name. But we are immersed into his name with that of the Father and the Holy Spirit; hence it is at the time of this immersion, that the believer receives remission of sins through his name. Acts 10:44-46. We are next informed of a fact which is new to this narrative, and was very surprising both to Peter and his companions. (44) “While Peter was yet speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were hearing the word, (45) and the believers of the circumcision who came with Peter were astonished, because on the Gentiles was poured out the gift of the Holy Spirit. (46) For they heard them speaking in tongues, and magnifying God.” The matter of astonishment to the Jewish brethren was not merely that these men received the Spirit; for if Peter had gone on to finish his discourse, promising them the gift of the Holy Spirit as he did on Pentecost, and had then immersed them, these brethren would have understood, as a matter of course, that they received the Holy Spirit. And if, after this, he had laid hands on them, as he did on the Samaritans, even miraculous manifestations of the Spirit could have created no surprise. The circumstances which caused the astonishment were: First, That the Holy Spirit was “ poured out” upon them directly from God, as it had never been before on any but the apostles; Second, That this unusual gift was bestowed upon Gentiles. In attempting to classify the manifestations of the Holy Spirit known in this history, we are compelled to distinguish the case before us from the gift of the Spirit enjoyed by all disciples in common, by the fact that these parties “ spoke in tongues;” and from the gift of the Spirit bestowed on the Samaritans, by the fact that it was bestowed without prayer or imposition of hands. We have no event with which to classify it except that which occurred on Pentecost. That these two events constitute a class by themselves is further evident from the fact that these two parties alone are said to be “immersed in the Holy Spirit.” These two are the only instances of immersion in the Holy Spirit on record, and they are distinguished from other gifts of tongues, in that they alone were bestowed without human agency. There is only one passage of Scripture in even apparent conflict with this conclusion, which, from the interpretation frequently given to it, demands some notice in this connection. It is the statement of Paul: “ By one Spirit we were all immersed into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free, and have all been made to drink of one Spirit.” If the apostle intends by this to assert that all the disciples “ were immersed in the Holy Spirit,” then this immersion was not peculiar to the apostles and the house of Cornelius. The question turns upon the reference of the word immerse; whether it is to immersion in water or immersion in the Spirit. It is settled by the fact that the immersion here spoken of is that which introduces “ into the one body.” We know by the commission that immersion in water brought its proper subjects “ into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” But when, and by whatever means, men were brought into the relation expressed in these words, it is indisputable that they were brought into the one body. It was immersion in water, therefore, by which “ all were immersed into one body.” Moreover, the immersion in the Holy Spirit did not have this effect; for the apostles were in the one body before they were immersed in the Spirit, and Cornelius was immersed in the Spirit before he was immersed into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This makes it certain that the passage in question is not in conflict with our conclusion. As to Paul’s assertion that the immersion into one body was “by one Spirit,” the words “ by one Spirit” are a declaration that the immersion had taken place under the direction of the one Spirit who was the author of all the gifts mentioned in the connection in which the passage occurs. The immersion of Cornelius and his friends in the Holy Spirit previous to their immersion in water has been urged as proof that remission of sins takes place before immersion. But it can furnish no such proof unless it be first proved that the Holy Spirit could not be imparted to a man who was yet unpardoned. If Cornelius had been a man of gross wickedness, there would seem to be some incongruity in such an impartation; but, in view of his real character, and the fact that God had previously sent an angel to express his approbation of his conduct, there appears no incongruity in this circumstance. This incident in the conversion of Cornelius can not, in any way, be held as a precedent for us; from the fact that it was a miraculous gift, and therefore peculiar to the age of miracles. It may as well be regarded as necessary to see the Lord as Saul did, in order to a genuine conversion, as to be immersed in the Spirit as Cornelius was. It is, therefore, a very gross deception to urge upon the people that they should receive the Spirit, after the precedent of Cornelius, before they are immersed. Acts 10:47-48. The true explanation of this unusual circumstance is given in the following words, together with Peter’s own explanation of it in the eleventh chapter: + The use that Peter made of it expresses the design of its occurrence. That use was to remove all possible objection to the immersion of the parties. In any other case which had occurred, or which occurred after this, no such objection could have existed. The very fact, therefore, which led to this unusual occurrence, was an exceptional circumstance, which furnishes the strongest proof that this case is not a precedent for imitation in this particular. Before he was interrupted, Peter had already proceeded so far with his discourse as to reach the subject of faith, and of remission of sins, and immersion must have been the next word upon his lips, if he had proceeded after the model of his sermon on Pentecost. The interruption, therefore, did not break the thread of his discourse, but enabled him to proceed with greater confidence to the very conclusion which he had intended. He first appeals to the brethren, to know if any objection yet lingered in their minds, and finding none, he commanded them to be immersed in the name of the Lord.Let us now recall the fact that Cornelius had been directed to send for Peter to hear “ words by which he and all his family might be saved.” Peter has come, and delivered his message. He has told him of Christ, in whom the man now believes. He has commanded him to be immersed, and it has been done. This is the whole story of the conversion. When it was accomplished, the painful anxiety which he must have experienced during the last four days was removed, and his present happiness is indicated by the cordiality with which he invited Peter to remain with him some days. We now have three individual cases of conversion before us, each detailed with great minuteness. In some particulars they are precisely alike; in others, they are quite different. But they are all three genuine cases of conversion; and, therefore, the points in which they differ are not essential to conversion, but are accidental circumstances arising from the peculiarities of the individual case. Now, in order that we may learn what is essential to conversion, and what among all the cases on record, are accidental circumstances, we must be guided by the following rule. Whatever is common to all cases is necessary to a scriptural conversion; but whatever we find in one case which certainly did not occur in all others, is a peculiarity of the individual cases in which it occurs. The points in which all the recorded cases agree are the points in which all subsequent conversions must agree with them.

The points in which they differ are points in which subsequent conversions may differ from them. In order to determine that certain features are not essential, it is only necessary to find cases in which they do not occur. In order to determine that any one is essential, we must find it in all cases, or find it prescribed in some general law expressly designed to govern all cases. While the three cases already before us are fresh in the memory, and before points of difference become multiplied by additional cases, so as to confuse the understanding, we propose to institute a comparison between them, in the light of the rule just prescribed. Leaving out of view the difference in character, occupation, and social position, of the eunuch, Saul, and Cornelius, which show only that the gospel is adapted to all men without regard to previous character or position, we will only notice those differences which might form the ground of erroneous conclusions. First, then, in the cases of the eunuch and Cornelius, there was the visible appearance of an angel; and many converts of modern times have related, as part of their experience in conversion, similar apparitions. But there certainly was not in Saul’s case the appearance of an angel; therefore, such an appearance is not necessary to conversion. Second, The Lord himself appeared to Saul and conversed with him; but he certainly did not to either the eunuch or Cornelius. It is not necessary, then, to see the Lord.

Third, Saul mourned and prayed for three days after he believed, and before he was immersed; but Cornelius and the eunuch did not; therefore, protracted sorrow and prayer are not necessary to conversion. Fourth, Cornelius was immersed in the Spirit, but Saul and the eunuch were not; therefore, immersion in the Spirit is not essential, but a circumstance arising from the peculiarity of a single case. The points in which these cases agree are chiefly these: they all heard the gospel preached, with miraculous evidence to sustain it; they all believed what they heard; they were all commanded to be immersed; they were all immersed; and after immersion they were all happy. If, then, we do not hereafter encounter recorded cases from which some of these items are certainly absent, we must conclude that at least all of these are necessary to scriptural conversion. When other cases are before us, we will institute further and more complete comparisons. We would be glad to know more of the history of Cornelius, so as to determine how far, even in times of peace, the profession of arms is compatible with the faithful service of the Prince of Peace. He is the only soldier of whose conversion we have an account in the New Testament, and of his subsequent career we know nothing. Whether, amid the scenes of blood and desolation not many years after most wickedly visited upon Judea by the army in which he was an officer, he resigned his office, or made shipwreck of the faith, we can not know till the great day. Let it be noted, however, that his is an instance of a soldier becoming a Christian, not of a Christian becoming a soldier. It furnishes a precedent for the former, but not for the latter. Whether Peter instructed him to resign his position in the army or not, is to be determined not by the silence of the historian in reference to it, but by first determining whether military service is compatible with the moral teachings of the New Testament. If Jesus and the apostles had been, for more than thirty years previous to the publication of Acts, teaching that Christians should not take the sword, it was not at all necessary for Luke to say that Peter so instructed Cornelius.

“ACTS OF THE "

Chapter Ten IN THIS CHAPTER

1. To study the conversion of Cornelius and his household, the first Gentiles to obey the gospel

2. To note the need for religious and devout people to be saved, despite their good works

3. To ascertain the purpose of the Holy Spirit falling upon the Gentiles, based on the context

SUMMARY Up to this time, the gospel had been preached only to Jews (also Samaritans, who shared a Jewish ancestry). With the conversion of Cornelius and his household, Gentiles were now granted repentance that leads to eternal life. Because the Law of Moses for generations had forbid socializing with Gentiles, it took a series of miraculous events to help Jewish Christians realize that they should no longer consider those of other nations as common or unclean.

We are told about Cornelius, a Roman soldier in Caesaria who was extremely religious. His fervent prayers and charity to the poor, though not saving him, were noticed by God. In a vision, an angel of God instructed him to send men for Peter who would tell him what he needed to do (Acts 10:1-8).

As Cornelius’ men were on their way, Peter had a vision in which the Lord told him to kill and eat unclean animals. When he refused, Peter was told what God has cleansed no one should call common or unclean. As Peter contemplated the vision, the Spirit told him that three men will seek him with whom he should go without doubting. The men arrived and informed Peter about Cornelius. The next day, Peter and some brethren from Joppa accompanied them back to Caesaria (Acts 10:9-23).

When he arrived, Peter found a waiting audience in home of Cornelius. Cornelius fell down and worshipped at Peter’s feet, but was kindly rebuked for doing so. Peter then explained how he has learned not to call any man common or unclean, and Cornelius related his vision and charge to send for Peter. Now that Peter was there, Cornelius along with his family and friends were ready to hear the things Peter had been commanded by God to say (Acts 10:24-33).

Perceiving that God was no respecter of persons, but now accepts people from every nation who fear Him and works righteousness, Peter proclaimed the gospel of Jesus Christ. He summarized the ministry of Jesus in Judea, His crucifixion, and His resurrection from the dead, who was seen by witnesses who ate and drank with Him. These same witnesses were commanded by God to preach that Jesus was ordained to be the Judge of the living and the dead. Also, the prophets bore witness that those who believed in Him would receive remission of sins (Acts 10:34-43).

As Peter was speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon those who heard the word. The Jewish brethren who had accompanied Peter were astonished, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles as evidenced by their speaking in tongues. Peter saw the clear implication of these events, that Gentiles could also be baptized (cf. Mark 16:15-16; Acts 2:38 Acts 8:12 Acts 8:35-38). Thus he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord (Acts 10:44-48).

OUTLINE I. SENDS FOR PETER (Acts 10:1-33) A. AND HIS VISION (Acts 10:1-8)1. Cornelius introduced a. A certain man in Caesarea, centurion of the Italian Regiment b. A devout man who feared God with all his family c. Who gave alms generously and prayed always 2. Cornelius’ vision a. About the ninth hour of the day he sees an angel of God b. Who tells him his prayers and alms have come up for a memorial before God c. He is told to send for Peter, who is lodging with Simon the tanner in Joppa 3. Cornelius’ action a. Calls for two of his servants and a devout soldier b. Tells them what happened and sends them to Joppa

B. PETER AND HIS VISION (Acts 10:9-23)1. Peter has a vision a. The next day Peter goes to the housetop to pray, about the sixth hour b. Hungry, he falls into trance while food was being prepared c. He sees a great sheet bound at the four corners

1. Descending down to the earth
2. With all kinds of animals, wild beasts, creeping things, and birds d. He is told to kill and eat
3. He protests that he is never eaten anything common or unclean
4. He is told “What God has cleansed you must not call common” e. This was done three times, and then it was taken back into heaven

2. Peter summoned to Caesarea a. As he wondered what the vision meant, the men from Cornelius arrive b. The Spirit tells Peter to go with them, doubting nothing c. Peter hears their story about Cornelius, and provides them lodging d. The next day Peter leaves with them, accompanied by some brethren

C. PETER MEETS (Acts 10:24-33)1. Cornelius welcomes Peter a. Waiting for Peter with family and close friends b. Falling down at Peter’s feet, he is told to stand up 2. Peter explains his presence a. It was unlawful for a Jew to keep company with those of another nation b. But God has shown him not to call any man common or unclean c. So he came without objection, and is ready to hear why they sent for him 3. Cornelius recounts his vision a. Which occurred four days previously, while he fasted and prayed b. When he was visited by a man in bright clothing and told to send for Peter c. So they are all present to hear whatever God has commanded Peter to say

II. THE OF THE (Acts 10:34-48) A. PETER’S SERMON (Acts 10:34-43)1. Introductory remarks a. He sees that God shows no partiality b. In every nation whoever fears God and works righteousness is accepted by Him 2. The ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus a. God sent Jesus, Lord of all, to the children of Israel, preaching peace (as they know)

1. Beginning from Galilee after the baptism of John
2. Proclaiming throughout all Judea b. God anointed Jesus with the Holy Spirit and power
3. Who went about doing good
4. Healing all who were oppressed by the devil
5. Witnessed by Peter and those who came with him c. God raised Jesus from the dead
6. Who was killed by hanging on the tree
7. Raised the third day, and shown openly to witnesses chosen before by God
8. Who ate and drank with Him after He arose from the dead

3. Concluding remarks a. Peter and others were commanded to testify that Jesus was ordained to the Judge of the iving and the dead b. All the prophets witness to Jesus, that through His name whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins

B. THE HOLY SPIRIT FALLS ON THE (Acts 10:44-48)1. The Holy Spirit’s action a. He fell upon all those who heard the word b. Those of the circumcision who believed were astonished because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also c. They heard them speak with tongues and magnify God 2. Peter’s reaction a. Questions whether anyone can forbid water baptism for those who received the Spirit just like they have b. Commands them to be baptized in the name of the Lord c. Invited to stay a few days

REVIEW FOR THE CHAPTER

1. What are the main points of this chapter?- Cornelius sends for Peter (Acts 10:1-33)

• The conversion of the Gentiles (Acts 10:34-48)

2. What position did Cornelius hold? (Acts 10:1)- Centurion of the Italian Regiment

3. List the qualities that characterized Cornelius (Acts 10:2)- A devout man who feared God with all his household

• Who gave alms generously to the people and prayed to God always

4. What did the angel of God say to him about his prayers and alms? (Acts 10:3-4)- They have come up for a memorial before God

5. Why was he told to send for Peter? (Acts 10:5-6)- Peter would tell him what he must do (KJV) (i.e., to be saved, cf. Acts 11:14)

6. What happened the next day as Peter was praying? (Acts 10:10)- He fell into a trance

7. What did he see? (Acts 10:11-12)- Heaven opening and a great sheet descending, filled with all kinds of animals, insects and birds

8. What did a voice tell Peter to do? How did Peter respond? (Acts 10:13-14)- “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.”

• “Not so, Lord! For I have never eaten anything common or unclean.”

9. What was Peter then told? (Acts 10:15)- “What God has cleansed you must not call common.”

10. How many times was this repeated? (Acts 10:16)- Three times

11. When the men from Cornelius arrived, what did the Spirit say to Peter? (Acts 10:19-20)- “Arise therefore, go down and go with them, doubting nothing; for I have sent them.”

12. What did the messengers tell Peter regarding Cornelius? (Acts 10:22)- He was divinely instructed by a holy angel to summon Peter and hear words from him

13. When Peter went with the messengers from Cornelius, who accompanied him? (Acts 10:23)- Some brethren

14. When Peter arrived, who did Cornelius have waiting for him? (Acts 10:24)- His relatives and close friends

15. When Cornelius met Peter, what did he do? How did Peter respond? (Acts 10:25-26)- Cornelius fell down at Peter’s feet and worshiped

• Peter lifted him up, telling him that he also was a man

16. What did Peter say had been unlawful for a Jewish man? (Acts 10:28)- To keep company with or go to one of another nation

17. What did Peter say God had shown him? (Acts 10:28)- Not to call any man common or unclean

18. After recounting his vision to Peter, what did Cornelius tell him? (Acts 10:30-33)- “We are all present before God, to hear all the things commanded you by God.”

19. What two things did these circumstances lead Peter to conclude? (Acts 10:34-35)- That God shows no partiality

• In every nation whoever fears God and works righteousness is accepted by Him

20. What does Peter say about the preaching of Jesus? (Acts 10:36-37)- That God sent Him from Galilee to proclaim peace throughout all Judea

21. What does Peter say about the miracles of Jesus? (Acts 10:38)- That God anointed Jesus with the Holy Spirit and power to do good

22. What does Peter claim for himself and others to be in regards to such things? (Acts 10:39)- Witnesses of all that Jesus did in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem

23. What did the Jews do to Jesus? (Acts 10:40)- They killed Him by hanging Him on a tree

24. What did God do? (Acts 10:41)- Raised Jesus on the third day

25. To whom did Jesus appear after His resurrection? (Acts 10:41)- To witnesses chosen before God

• To those who ate and drank with Him after He arose from the dead

26. What did Jesus command His witnesses? (Acts 10:42)- To preach and testify that Jesus was ordained by God to be Judge of the living and the dead

27. What did the prophets bear witness to regarding Jesus? (Acts 10:43)- That through His name, whoever believes in Jesus will receive remission of sins

28. While Peter was still speaking, what happened? (Acts 10:44)- The Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word

29. Who was astonished by this? Why? (Acts 10:45)- Those of the circumcision who believed, who had accompanied Peter

• Because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also

30. How was the outpouring of the Spirit manifested? (Acts 10:46)- They spoke with tongues and magnified God

31. What was Peter’s conclusion from this sequence of events? (Acts 10:47)- “Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?”

32. What did Peter command the Gentiles? (Acts 10:48)- To be baptized in the name of the Lord

Verse 1 This chapter is concerned exclusively with the conversion of Cornelius, the same event also being under consideration in Acts 11. Luke’s devoting so much space to the narrative of a single conversion indicates the importance of it. It was in the conversion of this Roman centurion that the issue of receiving Gentiles into Christ was finally decided. Yes, other Gentiles had been saved prior to this; but it was upon the basis of their having first been proselytes to Judaism. Many of the earliest Christians (most of whom were Jewish) were willing to welcome Gentiles into the faith AS first and Christians later. Cornelius’ baptism was the end of that, despite the fact of “Judaizers” continuing to advocate the old view for a considerable time afterward, as seen in the Pauline epistles. That the devout Gentile chosen by God for the special treatment accorded him in such things as (1) visitation by an angel, (2) hearing the gospel preached by one of the Twelve, (3) having the Holy Spirit fall upon him in a manifestation suggesting that of Pentecost, etc. - that the Gentile chosen for such blessings should have been a soldier must be regarded as significant. Ryle noted that “In no case is there the slightest hint that the profession of a soldier is unlawful in the sight of God."[1] There are some eight or ten centurions mentioned in the New Testament, and without exception they all appear in a favorable and commendable light. In the decadent condition of the Roman Empire at that time, the non-commissioned officers of the imperial army constituted something of a residual repository of the ancient virtues of honesty, sobriety, integrity and the fear of God. Only this could account for the number and character of the centurions mentioned in the New Testament. For a list of these and other comment, see Luke 7:2 in my Commentary on Luke. The absolutely unique aspect of the event related in this chapter should not be overlooked, there never having been the slightest hint anywhere in the New Testament that what happened at the house of Cornelius was to be considered any such thing as a normal Christian experience. Safeguards against such a misconception appear in every line of the narrative. As a matter of fact, God prepared both the apostolic preacher and the convert himself for the unique event by supernatural appearances to both of them. ENDNOTE: [1] J. C. Ryle, Expository Thoughts on the Gospels, Luke (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House), p. 205. Now there was a certain man in Caesarea, Cornelius by name, a centurion of the band called the Italian band, a devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, who gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God always. (Acts 10:1-2) THE OF Italian band … The word for “band” here actually means “cohort,” usually the tenth part of a Roman legion; but a detached cohort, as this evidently was at Caesarea, usually had a thousand men.[2] The commander of such a regiment was called a “chiliarch,” and his force was divided into hundreds, each commanded by a centurion. It is strange that the decimal system should have prevailed in that ancient army and that today the same system should be advocated as the best possible and extended to include all weights and measures. Feared God with all his house … The devout, God-fearing Cornelius had enlisted his entire household as participants in the worship and devotions which were practiced by them; and this stresses the quality of that house where Peter would “open the door of the kingdom to the Gentiles by the only possible `key’ - the word preached in the power of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 16:19)."[3] Yes, without doubt, this is another instance of Peter’s using the keys which the Master had mentioned. For a discussion of this subject, see my Commentary on Matthew, under Matthew 16:19. Gave alms … and prayed … This has reference to Cornelius’ gifts to the Jewish people according to many, but there appears in the text no reason for thus restricting it. He gave to all who were needy. Oddly enough, the order of the words here, “alms … prayed” is reversed in the words of the angel who placed the prayers first (Acts 10:4). There would appear to be a certain affluence, if not indeed wealth, belonging to Cornelius; and, while it is true of course that even the poor may be generous (and they often are), the mention of “much alms” points toward greater than ordinary ability. Coupled with the example of that centurion who built the Jews a synagogue (Luke 7:5), implying extensive wealth on his part, this tremendous financial ability of Roman centurions in the New Testament raises two questions: (1) Was the rank of centurion limited to the command of a hundred men as universally supposed? and (2) Why would men who were independently wealthy consent to the rank of a non-commissioned officer? The writings of Luke justify the understanding of the centurion as a much more important officer than is generally assumed. [2] A. C. Hervey, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, Publishers, 1950), Acts, p. 332. [3] E. H. Trenchard, A New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1969), p. 309. Verse 3 He saw in a vision openly, as it were about the ninth hour of the day, an angel of God coming in unto him, and saying to him, Cornelius.Although called a “vision,” the addition of the word “openly” would seem to require that this supernatural event be understood as the actual appearance of an angel of God to Cornelius. Again from Hervey: It was, as Meyer said, a clear angelic appearance. There was no indistinctness or confusion about it, and consequently it left no kind of doubt in the mind of Cornelius.[4]Cornelius … It is notable that the names of individuals are known by God and those representatives whom he commands to bear messages to men. Thus the angel called Cornelius by his name. Despite the fact of this man’s worship and alms-giving, already mentioned, there is absolutely no evidence that he was a proselyte to Judaism. Hervey observed that: He is spoken of simply as a Gentile and as uncircumcised, indicating that though he had learned from the Jews to worship the true God and to practice those virtues which went up as a memorial to God, yet he was in no sense a proselyte.[5]An angel of God … The Scriptures reveal no less than seven classes of functions performed by these holy beings on behalf of them who shall be saved, one of these being, as in evidence here, that of aiding providentially in bringing sinners into contact with the gospel. For more on this, see my Commentary on Hebrews and my Commentary on Luke. [4] A. C. Hervey, op. cit., p. 333. [5] Ibid. Verse 4 And he, fastening his eyes upon him, and being affrighted, said, What is it, Lord? And he said unto him, thy prayers and thine alms are gone up for a memorial before God.What is it, Lord? … The use of this word here, and by Peter in Acts 10:14, may not have been in exactly the same manner; but both instances suggest the supernatural nature of what was taking place. That one should have an angel speak to him is beyond all natural phenomena; nor should this fact be lost on believers. The Christian religion is a supernatural religion; and, if the supernatural elements in it can be denied, the entire system is not merely worthless, but detestable. Incidentally, the popular idea of winged angels is probably derived from the cherubim (Exodus 25:20) and from the seraphim (Isaiah 6:2); but there are no New Testament descriptions of angels with any mention of wings. A memorial before God … What interest attaches to these words! Man’s natural desire for a permanent memorial may truly be realized, but not in the types of monuments so often erected. The true memorial ascends to the presence of the Father in heaven, and it is made up of the prayers and alms of those who, upon earth, loved God and sought to know and do his will. Someone has remarked that “Cornelius was a do-gooder”; and while not wishing to deny this at all, this writer would like to point out that there is a remarkable distinction between Cornelius and the “do-gooders” promoting the public welfare today. The difference is this: Cornelius did alms with his own money, whereas another class of “do-gooders” practice all their mercies and charities by spending other people’s money, not their own. Verse 5 And now send men to Joppa, and fetch one Simon, who is surnamed Peter: he lodgeth with one Simon a tanner, whose house is by the sea side.The angel’s directions as given to Cornelius to enable him to contact Peter were full, explicit, sufficient and correct. The mention of Simon’s occupation was noted under Acts 9:43; and, if Simon was the head of a large tanning industry, which is a definite possibility, the mention of his being a tanner would greatly have facilitated finding him. The big question that appears here, however, is, “Why did not the angel himself tell Cornelius what to do to be saved?” The sole purpose of Cornelius’ sending for Peter was to speak words “whereby thou shalt be saved” (Acts 11:14); and the thought inevitably surfaces as to why the angel himself did not speak those words. As Root noted: Jesus committed this task to man and does not intend to relieve him of it. An angel sent Philip to the Ethiopian; but it was the man Philip that told him what to do to be saved. Also, Jesus himself appeared to Saul; but it was Ananias who was commissioned to tell Saul what to do to be saved; and this same pattern is here. Not the angel, but Peter would tell Cornelius what to do to be saved.[6]Milligan also answered this question the same way: Because Jesus had committed to the apostles, and through them to the church, the word of reconciliation (Acts 1:8; 2 Corinthians 5:18-19; 1 Timothy 3:15; and 2 Timothy 2:2).[7]The importance of Peter’s participation in this event was stressed by Lange, thus: It was so ordered that the first pagan should be baptized and received into the church, not by an ordinary member of the church, nor by an evangelist like Philip, but by one of the Twelve themselves, and indeed by that one, who had by his words and deeds, become the most prominent of their number.[8]Also, as noted in the introduction to this chapter, this was one of the factors establishing this event as altogether unique. [6] Orin Root, Acts (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company, 1966), p. 75. [7] Robert Milligan, Analysis of the New Testament (Cincinnati, Ohio: Bosworth, Chase and Hall, Publishers, 1974), p. 349. [8] John Peter Lange, Commentary on Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1866), p. 192. Verse 7 And when the angel that spake unto him was departed, he called two of his household-servants, and a devout soldier of them that waited on him continually; and having rehearsed all things unto them, he sent them to Joppa.The scope and extent of the centurion’s authority appears in this verse to have been far beyond what is usually associated with the commander of a hundred men. Several of the soldiers were assigned to wait on Cornelius continually, and one of these was dispatched with the two servants sent to Joppa, perhaps to serve as an escort or guard. Moreover, the two household-servants appear in context as two of many, certainly not as the only two he had. Also, the authority to initiate and order a military mission involving a soldier plainly belonged to Cornelius, indicating an authority more like that of a colonel or general in present-day armies, rather than that of a captain, with which rank centurion is usually equated. The detail thus dispatched by Cornelius left almost immediately; because their arrival time at Joppa, some 30 miles distant, on the following day about noon, demands the understanding that they departed for Joppa about 3:00 o’clock that same afternoon of the angel’s visitation, the same being the ninth hour (Acts 10:3). See under Acts 10:9. The promptness and obedience of Cornelius to the angelic command are evident. Having rehearsed all things unto them … A mutual love and trust between Cornelius and his subordinates appear in such a thing as this. Rather than writing a letter, Cornelius fully explained the details and purpose of his mission to trusted servants and sent them on their way. Verse 9 Now on the morrow, as they were on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray, about the sixth hour: and he became hungry, and desired to eat: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance.THE LORD APPEARS TO PETERAbout the sixth hour … This was noon, of course; and, as Bruce said, “Noon was not one of the appointed times for prayer, but pious Jews prayed three times a day (Psalms 55:17)."[9] Those who observed that custom prayed at noon. It is remarkable that Peter, a fisherman, should have been one of the most devout of his race, a fact indicated by his practice of a long-ingrained habit of prayer at noon, as here. While they made ready … One is amazed at a comment of Bruce, who said of Peter in this situation that “He probably called down for some food; and while this was being prepared, the revelation came to him in a vision."[10] It should be remembered, however, that Peter was not staying at the Waldorf, and that such a thing as room service on top of the house would not have been available in a tanner’s residence. No, it was noon; and the usual preparations for the midday meal in Simon the tanner’s house were being made, perhaps delayed a little; and, as many a preacher has done since, Peter dozed while the ladies prepared dinner. He fell into a trance … This, of course, is something utterly different from merely falling asleep. Milligan said that “A trance denotes a state in which the soul seems to be freed from the body; so that it can then perceive things which lie beyond the reach of the natural senses."[11] Nothing much is known of the condition into which Peter fell during the revelation recorded here; but it may be assumed that the kind of trance into which he fell was not the ordinary state of the so-called “trance” into which some are said to enter now. In the Old Testament, the example of Balaam reveals that he, before uttering his prophetic oracles, Saw the vision of the Almighty, falling into a trance, but having his eyes open (Numbers 24:4). He hath said, which heard the words of God, and knew the knowledge of the Most High, which saw the vision of the Almighty, falling into a trance, but having his eyes open (Numbers 24:16). All of the mention here of what Peter “saw” would indicate that this “trance” also was one in which his eyes remained open, thus revealing his condition to have been like that of the prophets of old who received words from Almighty God. [9] F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, Publishers, 1954), p. 218, [10] Ibid. [11] Robert Milligan, op. cit., p. 150. Verse 11 And he beholdeth the heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending, as it were a great sheet, let down by four corners upon the earth; wherein were all manner of four-footed beasts and creeping things of the earth and birds of the heaven.All manner … is the significant word concerning all those creatures let down. In Leviticus 11, one may find a list of clean and unclean creatures, the latter being forbidden for Jews to eat; but the collection of creatures Peter saw was clearly remade up of many that were unclean. God was about to open Peter’s eyes to the truth stressed by Paul, that “Every creature of God is good (to eat); and nothing is to be rejected, if it be received with thanksgiving, etc.” (1 Timothy 4:4). Of course, this was no new doctrine “discovered” by the apostles; Jesus had plainly taught this, but it took a miracle to get Peter to believe it. See Mark 7:15-19. A similar thing may also be noted in the fact of Peter’s Pentecostal declaration that the promise of the gospel was “to them that are afar off,” plainly including the Gentiles; but the miracle before us was required before Peter could understand that this meant the Gentiles could receive the gospel without being circumcised and keeping the law of Moses. Verse 13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter, kill and eat. But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common and unclean. And a voice came unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, make not thou common.No so, Lord … In all ages, there have been those who, while acknowledging Jesus as Lord, nevertheless presumed to contradict what the Lord taught. This phenomenon was pointed out by Jesus himself in Luke 6:46. For a sermon on this topic, see my Commentary on Luke, under 6:46. I have never … What men have always done, or what their habitual behavior is, usually determines their reaction to any given circumstances. Peter did not yet know, despite all the teaching he had received of the Lord, that the Mosaic restrictions on diet were no longer binding on Christians; therefore, based upon that misconception on his part, Peter’s refusal seemed perfectly right and proper to him; but it was wrong. God, at that very moment, was in the act of teaching him the fundamentals of the new dispensation. Verse 16 And this was done thrice: and straightway the vessel was received up into heaven.We agree with Milligan who understood this verse as teaching that “The whole scene, including the sights and sounds, the vision and the dialogue, was repeated three times."[12] The purpose of this, of course, was to emphasize it. It will be remembered that when Joseph interpreted the dream of Pharaoh, in two similar events of the good ears being destroyed by the blasted ears, and the fat cattle being devoured by the lean cattle, the dreams were one. “The seven good kine are seven years; and the seven good ears are seven years: the dream is one.” (Genesis 41:26). ENDNOTE: [12] Ibid. Verse 17 Now while Peter was much perplexed in himself what the vision which he had seen might mean, behold, the men that were sent by Cornelius, having made inquiry for Simon’s house, stood before the gate.The timing of all events is ordered by the infinite God; and it is obvious in Acts that the inspired prophets and evangelists of the apostolic age regarded the timing of events with the utmost attention. Thus, it appeared inActs 5:9 that the return of the young men who had buried Ananias, their feet being that very moment “at the door,” was one of the circumstances that enabled Peter to know that Sapphira would also die. Here also, the appearance of the three messengers from Cornelius coinciding so exactly with a vision repeated three times to Peter, certainly must have assisted the apostle in relating the two occurrences. It would appear from the time of their arrival that Cornelius had not delayed his response to the angel’s command, a noon arrival of his emissaries in Joppa being just about the earliest that was possible in view of the distance. Verse 18 And called and asked whether Simon, who was surnamed Peter, was lodging there. And while Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold three men seek thee.These verses emphasize the coincidence mentioned in the comment on the preceding verse. Providences of this kind can occur only when God wills them; and, although it would be rash to suppose that in our own times we are able properly to interpret such things, nevertheless, we may in awe and reverence behold them. Illustration: Bernard Lemmons and Lennos Norton, a preacher and elder of God’s church respectively, were in an automobile accident on a New Jersey thoroughfare; and Brother Norton’s face and throat were cut when his head went through the windshield. Twenty minutes before that accident occurred, however, one of the most skilled surgical nurses in New York City, who was returning from having spent the night with a friend in New Jersey, had suffered a minor accident with her car when it hit the same icy strip that caused Brother Lemmons to lose control of his car. Although the nurse did not particularly need an ambulance, someone had called it anyway; and that ambulance arrived almost simultaneously with the occurrence of the near-fatal accident to Brother Norton. The nurse tied off key arteries and saved his life. That this event had elements of Providence in it is clear enough. The services of that surgical nurse, and the timely arrival of an ambulance dispatched to the scene twenty minutes before the accident occurred, were both absolutely necessary to saving his life. There are many providences in life, and our hearts should be attuned to take account of them. Verse 20 But arise, and get thee down, and go with them, nothing doubting: for I have sent them.Peter did not depend upon the coincidence of events for the decision he had to make; but the Spirit spoke to him in audible, intelligible words, commanding what he should do. We do not know just how that was done; but it is clear enough that more was involved than some mere feeling or impression made subjectively upon Peter. I have sent them … These words appear to identify the speaker with the person Peter addressed as “Lord” in Acts 10:14. “On that occasion the voice seemed to come from without; and it may have been a voice that Peter well remembered, and immediately recognized."[13] We believe it was probably the same here. ENDNOTE: [13] F. F. Bruce, op. cit., p. 220. Verse 21 And Peter went down to the men, and said, Behold, I am he whom ye seek: what is the cause wherefore ye are come? And they said, Cornelius a centurion, a righteous man and one that feareth God, and well reported of by all the nation of the Jews, was warned of God by a holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words from thee.Coupled with the revelation already given to Peter, this message left Peter no choice except to receive it as a command from God; and so he received it. Verse 23 So he called them in and lodged them. And on the morrow he arose and went forth with them, and certain of the brethren from Joppa accompanied him.This was Peter’s first break with the exclusiveness of the law of Moses. The Gentiles he invited into the house, shared the meal which by that time had been prepared for him, and kept them overnight, the lateness of the hour requiring that they should wait until the morrow to start to Caesarea. By this one act, Peter swept aside the prejudices of a lifetime, letting in the fresh air of the kingdom of heaven. Brethren … accompanied him … As an act of prudent foresight, Peter took the precaution of taking witnesses with him. He no doubt anticipated that what would be done in Caesarea might lead to misunderstandings and disputes, unless every word and act should be certified by competent witnesses. Significantly, the guidance of God’s Spirit did not diminish Peter’s responsibility to act prudently in all things. Verse 24 And on the morrow they entered into Caesarea. And Cornelius was waiting for them, having called together his kinsmen and his near friends.The godly life and righteous desires of Cornelius had been shared with all who were in any sense near or intimate with him, this giving a glimpse of how one’s influence reaches others. They entered into Caesarea … “This was a memorable event, being the first invasion of the Roman Empire by the soldiers of the cross."[14]ENDNOTE: [14] A. C. Hervey, op. cit., p. 334. Verse 25 And when it came to pass that Peter entered, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.Worshiped him …WORSHIP DEFINEDAll five New Testament words translated “worship” indicate that worship is an act, not some kind of subjective feeling. Note these:

(1) [@proskuneo] means “to bow down toward” and is used of: (a) worshiping God (Matthew 4:10; John 4:21 f; 1 Corinthians 14:25; Revelation 4:10, etc.). (b) worshiping Christ (Matthew 2:2 Matthew 2:8 Matthew 2:11 Matthew 8:2 Matthew 9:18 Matthew 28:9 Matthew 28:17; John 9:38; Hebrews 1:6, etc.). (c) worshiping a man (Matthew 18:16). (d) worshiping the dragon (by men) (Revelation 13:4). (e) worshiping the beast (Revelation 13:4 Revelation 13:8 Revelation 13:12 Revelation 14:9-11). (f) worshiping the image of the beast (Revelation 13:15 Revelation 14:11 Revelation 16:2). (g) worshiping demons (Revelation 9:20). (h) worshiping idols (Acts 7:43). (2) [@sebomai] means “to revere,” stressing the feeling of awe; but the word is used of reverencing God (Matthew 15:9; Mark 7:7; Acts 16:14 Acts 18:7 Acts 18:13), and also of reverencing a goddess (Acts 19:27). (3) [@sebazomai], akin to (2), above, means “to honor religiously” (Romans 1:25). (4) [@latreuo] means “to serve or to render religious service” (Philippians 3:3; Acts 7:42 Acts 24:14 (in some versions) (5) [@eusebeo] means “to act piously toward” (Acts 17:23). Thus, the New Testament Greek words confirm the usual dictionary definition of “worship” as a transitive verb meaning “to pay an act of worship, to venerate, or to adore.” There is no New Testament definition of “worship,” but it is always associated with doing, rather than with feeling, although, of course, feeling is present in true worship. However the notion that worship is some kind of communion with God is ridiculous, never being true at all except in the most poetic and romantic sense. The action of worship, whether presented to God or to idols, is the same in both instances, according to the New Testament, as indicated in the words above; and of course no communion with an idol is possible. Contrary to the facts which are clearly discernible from the above considerations, there is nevertheless a hurtful heresy to the effect that “worship is an attitude of mind.” Philip Wendell Crannell asserted that “Worship is not a physical or material offering but an attitude of mind."[15] Such a notion should be rejected. Note the following: A. The public assemblies of Christians, dating from the resurrection itself, specifically commanded by the apostles and forming an essential element in the worship of Christ, are physical acts of presentation before the Lord, as evidenced by Romans 12:1. B. The Quaker conception that the Lord’s Supper is a “spiritual act,” requiring no physical emblems such as bread and wine, is incorrect. Faithful observance of the Lord’s Supper is a physical act; and without that physical act, there is no observance of it. To be sure, “the proper attitude” is a part of it also, but only a part of it. True and faithful observance of the Supper is worship. C. Giving money or wealth to the support of God’s work is worship in the truest and highest sense, properly attended of course by an attitude of loving obedience to the Father; but that attitude is not the worship; it is the giving of one’s means that is worship. D. Praying is a physical thing, involving the total person in both mind and body; but it is nonetheless the action of an appellant seeking the blessing and forgiveness of God. No attitude may take the place of petitions addressed to God through Jesus Christ. E. Singing is likewise physical, as well as spiritual and mental. Singing is something that Christians do, not merely something they feel. That there is a way to do this, involving the spirit and the understanding (1 Corinthians 14:15), does not and cannot nullify the fact that singing is something the Christian does. Once the premise is allowed that worship is not anything that men do, but a subjective condition or disposition of the mind, then the inevitable corollary follows that whatever is done has nothing whatever to do with worship! Crannell expressed such a deduction as follows: Anything that stimulates and expresses the worshipful spirit is a legitimate aid to worship, but never a substitute for it, and harmful if it displaces it.[16]Such a view justifies every innovation ever introduced into the worship of Christ, as well as every innovation that may be dreamed up in the future! This conception of what worship is cannot be otherwise than profoundly wrong. Worship in any real sense is doing what God has commanded us to do; and, although it must be admitted that subjective feelings inevitably arise in the doing of those things, they must be looked upon as a consequence of worship and not as worship itself. The author of Hebrews said, “Through Christ let us offer up a sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of lips which make confession to his name” (Hebrews 13:15); but such praise is not a sacrifice, so long as it is merely “in mind.” It is when it passes the portal of the lips that it becomes a sacrifice of praise to God. Thus, Cornelius’ worshiping of Peter refers not merely to some attitude within Cornelius’ heart but to what he did in Peter’s presence. [15] Philip Wendell Crannell, International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (Chicago: The Howard Severance Company, 1915), p. 3112. [16] Ibid. Verse 26 But Peter raised him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.In further development of the thoughts concerning worship presented under the foregoing verse, this event should be studied in connection with Revelation 19:10 and Revelation 22:8-9. Peter did not know the subjective state of Cornelius’ mind; but what Cornelius did was wrong and under no circumstance to be allowed, regardless of the state of his mind in so doing. In the case of John in the passages cited, he KNEW the subjective state of his own mind, and that he the act of worship as being unto God, and not unto the angel; but, despite the fact of his subjective attitude being correct, the angel disallowed such an act anyway. Thus worship appears in both circumstances as something other than the subjective condition. See my Commentary on Romans, Romans 1:23. Verse 27 And as he talked with him, he went in, and findeth many come together.What a great opportunity was this to preach the truth. After the preliminary noted in the next few verses (Acts 10:28-34), Peter preached the gospel to all who were there assembled, with the amazing result that the total company obeyed the gospel, the same being perhaps the only occasion ever known in which an entire company of many souls unanimously accepted the truth. Verse 28 And he said unto them, Ye yourselves know how it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to join himself or come unto one of another nation; and yet +unto me hath God showed that I should not call any man common or unclean: wherefore also I came without gainsaying, when I was sent for. I ask therefore with what intent ye sent for me?This introduction by Peter was probably spoken as much for the brethren who were with him as it was for the benefit of the company before whom he spoke. We learn from Acts 11:12 that there were six of these witnesses who had accompanied Peter; and the apostle’s strategy here was clearly directed to their enlightenment. Root believed that “Peter did not yet realize that he was there to preach the gospel; and if this seems absurd to us, it is because we fail to realize the gulf between Jew and Gentile."[17] Considered apart from the presence of the six brethren who accompanied Peter, Root’s opinion would appear true; but the view here is that Peter fully anticipated the entire event, and that it was precisely in view of what Peter had already concluded would take place in Caesarea that he invited the brethren to accompany him. One of another nation … Bruce informs us that this expression is frequently used in the Septuagint (LXX) to denote “an uncircumcised Philistine."[18] It is in this that all thought of Cornelius’ possibly being a proselyte disappears. Cornelius at once responded with a resume of the circumstances which had prompted his request. [17] Orin Root, op. cit., p. 79. [18] F. F. Bruce, op. cit., p. 222. Verse 30 And Cornelius said, Four days ago, until this hour, I was keeping the ninth hour of prayer in my house; and behold, a man stood before me in white apparel.Four days ago … The travel time between Caesarea and Joppa was two days, the distance each way being thirty or thirty-five miles. Both going and coming, they would “probably have stopped the night at Apollonia, which was half way, on the coast road."[19]The ninth hour of prayer … was 3:00 o’clock in the afternoon. See under Acts 10:10. A man … in white apparel … In the writings of Luke, the “white apparel” is often mentioned in describing the appearance of an angel. It should also be noted that the angel did not walk in, he merely appeared in the presence of Cornelius. ENDNOTE: [19] A. C. Harvey, op. cit., p. 334. Verse 31 And saith, Cornelius, thy prayer is heard, and thine alms are had in remembrance in the sight of God.This repeats the information already given in Acts 10:2, the only significant difference being the mention of the prayers ahead of the alms. Verse 32 Send therefore to Joppa, and call unto thee Simon, who is surnamed Peter: he lodgeth in the house of Simon a tanner, by the sea side. Forthwith therefore I sent to thee; and thou hast well done that thou art come. Now therefore we are all here present in the sight of God, to hear all things that have been commanded thee of the Lord.Thou hast done well that thou art come … The meaning here is not exactly certain, being (1) either the equivalent of a “thank you” for Peter’s response, or (2) a complimentary notice of the dispatch with which Peter had come, or perhaps something of both. All here … to hear all things commanded thee of the Lord … Cornelius, by such a remark, made it clear that his only concern was in knowing what God’s message was, concerning himself and the household he had assembled. Never did a gospel minister have a greater opportunity than that afforded on such an occasion as this. “All things …” could hardly have failed to ring a bell in Peter’s heart; for he had heard the Lord command that “all nations” should be taught “all things” whatsoever Jesus had commanded (Matthew 28:18-20). His duty, therefore, was crystal clear; for here was a Gentile household belonging to the “all nations,” declaring that they were assembled to hear “all things” the Lord commanded. Verse 34 And Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: but in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is acceptable to him.PETER’S ADDRESSPeter opened his mouth … This is the same expression found at the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:1), where it is related that “Jesus opened his mouth, etc.” This indicates formal preparation and the deliberate presentation of significant truth. Bruce said that such an expression “is used to introduce some weighty utterance."[20] Peter’s first sentence swept away the racial prejudice of centuries. The first sweeping declaration that God’s salvation was available to people of “every nation” was perhaps the only thing in Peter’s sermon that was any different from the sermons he had been preaching throughout Palestine for years prior to the events here; and, as might have been expected, the sermon following this epic opening remark took the form which “the message” always took in Peter’s preaching. That oral message, reduced here to writing by the evangelist Luke, had been available for years prior to the conversion of Cornelius, and was available throughout Peter’s lifetime. There would have been no problem whatever in Luke’s procurement of a “verbatim” record of that formalized apostolic sermon. He might have procured it either from Peter or from Paul, or from any one of a thousand Christians throughout the world of that period, all of whom had long ago committed the last syllable of it to memory. That period, prior to the New Testament writings, in which the gospel was orally proclaimed, was, in the historical sense, so brief as to be negligible. To refer to Peter’s speech recorded here as “traditional” is ridiculous; and, although the form of Peter’s presentation of the message had probably jelled into something of a pattern, it was, nevertheless, Peter’s eye-witness account of experiences and information in which he had participated personally. As Paul noted, “the greater part (of those witnesses and participants) remain until now” (1 Corinthians 15:6). If one wishes to know what the [@kerygma] really was, let him read the New Testament; it is the [@kerygma]! Before passing to a consideration of the rest of Peter’s speech, an event, the chronology of which is given in the next chapter, should be noticed: And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them, even as on us at the beginning (Acts 11:14). Acts 10:44, says that “While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Spirit fell on all them that heard the word.” While Peter yet spake … does not contradict Peter’s own statement that the Holy Spirit fell upon them as he “began to speak.” Thus the truth appears that it was at the beginning of Peter’s message when the Holy Spirit fell upon that company, thus disconnecting the event from the message of salvation that Peter delivered. The importance of this distinction will appear later. ENDNOTE: [20] F. F. Bruce, op. cit., p. 224. Verse 36 The word which he sent unto the children of Israel, preaching good tidings of peace by Jesus Christ (he is Lord of all).Peter’s entire speech, as recorded here, requires only fifty-eight seconds to be read aloud, which fact underscores the error of Dibelius, who said that “in the conversion of a centurion, such a comparatively long speech can have no place. (It) is a literary composition of the author Luke."[21] There can be no way of viewing this as “such a long speech”; such a criticism exposing the bias and unreliability of the criticism. The same author declared that, “Except for Acts 10:34-35, there is nothing in the present speech relevant to the special question of Gentile evangelization."[22] But that remark is an unbelievable affirmation that (1) the lordship of Jesus Christ, (2) the mighty works of the Master, (3) the death, burial and resurrection of Christ, (4) the final judgment of all men, (5) the remission of sins through faith in Christ, and (6) the fact of Christ’s being appointed to be the Judge of all men in the last day - that none of these things is relevant to evangelizing Gentiles! Dibelius’ contention in this is as wild, irresponsible and unbelievable as any comment this writer has ever seen. It is repeated here only to illustrate the monstrous errors men will swallow in their efforts to discredit some portion of the New Testament. All of the mighty teachings listed in (1) through (6) above are not merely relevant to the evangelization of every man on earth, whether Jew or Gentile; but they are the sine qua non of the whole system of Christianity as delivered by Christ and his apostles. [21] Martin Dibelius, Die Bekehrung des Cornelius (Gottingen, 1951), p. 97. [22] Ibid. Verse 37 That saying ye yourselves know, which was published throughout all Judaea, beginning from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached.Ye yourselves know … Cornelius and his assembled friends were far from being raw pagans; and the publication of the gospel had already been so extensively achieved, that Peter presumed their knowledge of the saying that “Jesus is Lord of all,” and perhaps also their knowledge of some of the other great Christian teachings being enunciated. Verse 38 Even Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed him with the Holy Spirit and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.Anointed with the Holy Spirit … The anointing of Jesus with the Holy Spirit occurred at his baptism, at which time the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove alighted and remained upon him; also, at that same time, the voice from heaven declared him to be the Son of God, beloved of the Father. Healing all that were oppressed with the devil … The view that Satan oppresses men’s bodies with diseases appears in this, as also in Luke 13:16. Verse 39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the country of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom also they slew, hanging him on a tree.The scandal of the cross was emphasized by the words `hanging him on a tree’; but, in the apostolic preaching of that event, it is clear that they also grasped the glory of it: that “by his stripes” we are healed, and that “God laid on him” the iniquity of us all. Verse 40 Him God raised up the third day, and gave him to be made manifest, not to all the people, but unto witnesses that were chosen before of God, even to us, who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead.This is the heart of Christianity. If this is not relevant to every man on earth, then nothing is relevant. The facts in view here are the cornerstone and foundation of all faith and doctrine in Christ. This is the essential theme that both launched and sustained the triumph of Christianity over the pagan religions of antiquity. The apostles did not preach what they had merely heard, but what they had heard and seen. Hervey rightly affirmed that “This constant reference to eyewitnesses is an indication of the historical character of Christianity, and of the importance of Christian evidences."[23]ENDNOTE: [23] A. C. Hervey, op. cit., p. 336. Verse 42 And he charged us to preach unto the people, and to testify that this is he who is ordained of God to be the Judge of the living and the dead.In these dynamic words, Cornelius was made aware of the great truth that Jesus Christ will judge every man at the last day. Implicit in such an epic fact is the teaching: (1) that all men shall be raised in a general resurrection, (2) that Christ is risen from the dead, (3) that he has ascended to heaven, (4) that all power and authority in heaven and upon earth are his, and (5) that salvation may be found only in him. Verse 43 To him bear all the prophets witness, that through his name every one that believeth on him shall receive remission of sins.Whosoever believeth shall receive remission … is not a statement of the “sole condition” of salvation, as often alleged, but a revelation that only believers shall be saved. Within seconds, or minutes, after this, Peter commanded his hearers to be baptized (Acts 10:48). Verse 44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Spirit fell on them that heard the word.This event actually occurred “as Peter began to speak,” being intended not to save Cornelius (for Peter would tell him “words whereby he and his house should be saved” as in Acts 11:14), but for the purpose of convincing Peter and his companions that the gospel should be preached to Cornelius and company without reservation or prior requirement. It is in the necessity for this that the unique character of this entire episode is evident. Regarding the fact of the Holy Spirit in this instance falling upon people who had not been baptized, whereas on Pentecost the promise of the Holy Spirit was made to depend upon the repentance and baptism of believers, many strange and untenable theories have been erected. Trenchard, for example, thought that here, “The Pentecostal baptism was extended to Gentile believers on the sole ground of repentance and faith."[24] However, there is no mention of repentance in this passage; and, as the Spirit fell on them “as Peter began to speak,” it is incorrect to say that they were “believers” when that occurred. It is a mistake to make this unique occurrence a normal Christian experience. Murray-Beasley was certainly correct when he declared that: This gift of the Spirit without baptism must be viewed as exceptional, due to a divine intervention in a highly significant situation, teaching that Gentiles may be received into the church by baptism, even when they have not removed their uncleanness through circumcision and sacrifice.[25]It is that “exceptional situation” mentioned by Beasley-Murray that must be emphasized here. The divine manifestation of the Holy Spirit falling on those Gentiles of Cornelius’ household was not for the purpose of saving them, in any sense, but for the purpose of convincing the apostle Peter and his companions of the propriety of welcoming the Gentiles into the church of God upon the same conditions as everyone else. And again from Beasley-Murray: Whatever the relationship between baptism and the gift of the Spirit elsewhere in Acts, there appears to be no doubt as to the intention of Act 2:38; the penitent believer baptized in the name of Jesus Christ may expect to receive at once the Holy Spirit, even as he is assured of the immediate forgiveness of his sins.[26][24] E. H. Trenchard, op. cit., p. 3. [25] Beasley-Murray, G. F., Baptism in the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, Publishers, 1962), p. 108. [26] Ibid. Verse 45 And they of the circumcision that believed were amazed, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Spirit. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God.The outpouring here was like that on Pentecost (Acts 11:15), only in this case it was not upon the apostles, but upon those who were hearing an apostle. The clear intention was that of sealing absolutely the reception of Gentiles into the church of Jesus Christ upon the same basis as others. Verse 46 Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid the water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.Commanded them to be baptized … Peter did not jump to the conclusion, as many moderns have done, that “Glory be; this does away with baptism altogether”; but, as Bruner noted: It was impossible for the apostles to associate the gift of the Holy Spirit with anything but baptism; the new converts were immediately baptized.[27]Moreover, the fact that baptism for Gentiles was necessary to their salvation, no less than it was declared to be on Pentecost, appears in the facts (1) that an angel of God told Cornelius that Peter would tell him words whereby he would be saved (Acts 11:14), and (2) that in all of the words spoken by Peter there was but one commandment, that requiring them to be baptized. In the name of Jesus … They are in error who view baptism as here commanded in the name of Jesus to be any different from that enjoined in the great commission, “to baptize … into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Sprit” (Matthew 28:18-20). Baptism is invariably “in the name of” Jesus Christ, meaning by his authority; but the purpose is the unity of the convert with the sacred triple name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The baptism “in the name of Jesus” is at the same time “into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” As Campbell said, “The authority by which any act is performed must never be confounded with the meaning, or intention, of it."[28][27] Frederick Dale Bruner, A Theology of the Holy Spirit (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, Publishers, 1971), p. 193. [28] Alexander Campbell, Acts of Apostles (Austin, Texas: Firm Foundation Publishing House), p. 76.

Question by E.M. Zerr For Acts Chapter 101. In which CaesaTea did Cornelius live? 2. What was his nationality? 3. State his official position. 4. What kind of man as to piety? 5. Whom did he fear? 6. What shows his influence over his household? 7. State what service he rendered the people. 8. To whom and when did he pray? 9. Was he a saved man when the vision came? 10. What was he doing the ninth hour? 11. Who came to him? 12. How did the vision affect him? 13. State the credit given his past deeds. 14. To where and for whom must he send men? 15. At what place was he staying? 16. For what purpose does he need Peter? 17. Why did not the angel tell him these words? 18. Did Cornelius obey the angel? 19. When did he send the men? 20. Whom did he call and send? 21. Did they know why they were going to Joppa? 22. How many days to make the journey? 23. Who had a prayer service about this time ? 24. Where did he have it? 25. At what time of day? 26. What was the condition of his body? 27. Tell what came over him. 28. What descended? 29. Describe its form. 30. State what it contained. 31. And the orders given Peter. 32. State his reasons for refusing ? 33. To what law did he refer? 34. What lesson was God here teaching ? 35. How often was the vessel let down? 36. How often did the voice speak to Peter? 37. In what frame of mind did the vision leave him ’ 38. Who had now arrived? 39. Tell who next spoke to Peter. 40. What assurance was given him ? 41. When did he begin the journey? 43. Did he go alone ? 44. In the mean time what had Cornelius done? 45. As Peter entered the house what did Cornelius do 46. Repeat the statement of Peter at this time. 47. To what former law did Peter then refer? 48. But what had enlightened him in the matter? 49. What question did he then ask Cornelius ? 50. After telling his story what did Cornelius say? 51. Peter then said he perceived what? 52. Who is accepted of God? 53. To what nation is this restricted ? 54. Who was the theme of Peter’ s discourse ? 55. At what event had the story begun? 56. What had God done to Jesus of Nazareth ? 57. What had the Jews done to him? 58. And what did God do then? 59. By whom is the great event witnessed ? 60. What had they been commanded to preach? 61. Tell what reference Peter made to the prophets. 62. While Peter spoke what fell? 63. On whom did it fall? 64. What astonished the Jews here? 65. Compare Holy Ghost V 44 with gift of H. G. V 45. 66. What power was conferred by this gift? 67. What did Peter want with water now? 68. Why did he think the Gentiles entitled to it ? 69. State the command he then gave. 70. What request was made of the apostle ?

Acts 10:1

1 Act 10:1. This Caesarea was on the coast of Palestine. It was the official headquarters for the Roman government in that province. That is why Cornelius was stationed there, he being a military officer of the government, a centurion or commander of a hundred soldiers. Italian band means soldiers recruited from captives out of Italy.

Acts 10:2

2Act 10:2. Cornelius was a Gentile and lived under the Patriarchial Dispensation, which made it appropriate for him to worship God in the manner described. That dispensation, like the two others, had its better as well as less devoted members, and Cornelius was one of the best. He was a busy man in practical matters, so his praying to God always means he was continually a praying man.

Acts 10:3

3Act 10:3. He saw evidently denoted it was so plain that it could not leave any doubt as to what he saw. God was about to put an end to the Patriarchial Dispensation, and selected one of the best men in that system for the occasion. That was significant and showed that the change was not made just because the system was an absolute failure. The angel was not to tell Cornelius what to do to be saved, but to direct him to a man who would tell him. (See the comments at chapter 8:26.)

Acts 10:4

4Acts 10:4. Was afraid means he was overcome with awe at the appearance of this being. It was at the ninth hour which is three o’clock P. M., in broad daylight, so that no mysterious condition surrounded the place. He used the word lord in the sense of “sir,” a title of great respect, and inquired what he wanted of him. Before telling him of his duty, the angel first quieted his fears with some words of commendation for his past life. Memorial is from which Thayer defines, “a memorial (that by which the memory of any person or thing is preserved), a remembrance.” It denotes that God had not overlooked his righteous life, and was going to use him as the first Gentile to be offered membership in the Christian Dispensation.

Acts 10:5

5Acts 10:5. Up until now Cornelius had lived in accordance with the obligations of the Patriarchal Dispensation. That system was for the Gentiles and had been in force since the days of Adam. In the meantime the Jewish Dispensation had been “added” (Galatians 3:19) as the system for the Jews, and that was lifted from them by the cross (Colossians 2:14), leaving the Gentiles still under the Patriarchal Dispensation for a few years. Now that, too, was to be discontinued, and Cornelius was to do something else. That placed him under a new obligation, cancelling the authority of the former system. From now he was expected to do something else in order to be saved, and he was told to send for Peter at Joppa that he might tell him what it was.

Acts 10:6

6Acts 10:6. Specific directions were given so that the right Simon would be called for. Oughtest is from DEI which Thayer defines, “It is necessary, there is need of, it behooves, is right and proper,” and he explains it at this place to mean, “Necessity in reference to what is required to attain some end.” It has been rendered “must” 58 times in the King James translation. He shall tell thee. This is in keeping with the Lord’s plan not to tell sinners directly what to do to be saved. (See chapter 8:26.)

Acts 10:7-8

8Acts 10:7-8. Most public officers have their servants to wait on them in the affairs of the home, and military men who compose a bodyguard. Cornelius sent a group of three from these two classes to go to Joppa.

Acts 10:9-10

0Acts 10:9-10. The story now leaves the three men in their journey but nearing the city of Joppa the following day. Meanwhile Peter went upon the roof of the house to pray. Homes had fiat roofs and they were occupied in much the same way as verandas are used today. It was at noon and Peter was hungry, but the meal was not ready, hence it furnished an opportunity for the Lord to add another portion to the story. A trance differs from a dream in that it occurs while the person is physically awake, but is lost to the immediate surroundings; a sort of “daydream.” When the Lord uses that plan for making a special revelation, he will cause the person to “draw in his mind from the things around him,” and see with his mind’s eye the things He wishes him to see.

Acts 10:11

1Act 10:11. Saw heaven opened refers to the region above him that could be seen with the natural eye under ordinary circumstances. A square piece of cloth could be gathered up by the four corners and thus form a vessel in which objects could be held. The four corners represented the “four corners of the earth,” and denoted that God was about to offer an additional opportunity to mankind for salvation, that would include the Gentiles or nations of the whole earth.

Acts 10:12-13

3Act 10:12-13. The Jews were restricted against eating certain kinds of animals that were considered unclean (ceremonially). They likewise held themselves above the Gentiles and regarded them as “dogs” (Matthew 15:26-27). The time had come when the Lord was going to consider any of the nations of the world good enough to be offered the Gospel, and he was introducing the subject by this object lesson. It was to be literally true that under the new dispensation no religious objections would be made against any kind of meat (1 Timothy 4:3-4). Likewise, no discriminations were to be made against any race of mankind, whether Jew or Gentile.

Acts 10:14

4Acts 10:14. Peter took the language of the Lord to be used literally of these living creatures, and that perhaps He was putting him to the test. Common means food that the common classes of mankind used.

Acts 10:15

5Acts 10:15. What God hat% cleansed is explained at verses 12, 13.

Acts 10:16

6Acts 10:16. This (conversation) was done thrice, the second being mentioned in the preceding verse. After the three times, the vessel was taken back out of Peter’s sight.

Acts 10:17

7Acts 10:17. Peter pondered over the vision as to what it signified, and by that time the men sent by Cornelius had arrived at Simon’s gate.

Acts 10:18

8Acts 10:18. The men specified whom they wanted according to the instruc-tions they received from Cornelius.

Acts 10:19

9Acts 10:19. The Lord was supervising this whole drama and bringing the various parts of it together at just the right time. Peter was still wondering about the vision at the time these men were making their inquiry. The “voice” of verses 13 and 15 is here seen to have been the Spirit, speaking on behalf of the Lord.

Acts 10:20

0Acts 10:20. The purpose of the Spirit in speaking was to reassure Peter that the call was legitimate. That would prepare him to receive whatever message they gave him.

Acts 10:21

1Act 10:21. Peter identified himself to the three men, which was the only response we have recorded as to their inquiry when they arrived at the gate. The Spirit had not told him what the men wanted, but simply assured him they were there because of Him.

Acts 10:22

2Act 10:22. In answer to Peter’s question the men told their story. The original for warned at this place is defined by Thayer, “To be divinely commanded, admonished, instructed.” Admonition always implies that some danger is possible for the one being admonished. Cornelius had been asked to learn his duty from Peter, and should he neglect it his soul would be in danger. This verse adds the information that Cornelius (though a Gentile) had a good reputation among the Jews.

Acts 10:23

3Act 10:23. It being evening of the day after the men started from home, Peter procured lodging for them over night; the next chapter will explain about certain brethren.

Acts 10:24

4Acts 10:24. Morrow after means the next day after the group left the house of Simon the tanner. By way of tabulating the days, if the men left the house of Cornelius on Monday, they got back on Thursday. Cornelius was not selfish about the good words he expected to hear, but had assembled his relatives and friends who were waiting for Peter.

Acts 10:25

5Acts 10:25. It was very natural for Cornelius to offer worship to the man who was to show him the way of salvation. We do not know what actions he attempted further than his falling down at the feet of Peter. For information on the various meanings of the word “worship,” see the notes on Matthew 2:2.

Acts 10:26

6Acts 10:26. Peter’s remark that he was himself also a man indicates that what Cornelius was attempting to offer was a kind due only to the Lord.

Acts 10:27

7Acts 10:27. The above conversation took place near the entrance of the house of Cornelius. Peter then went on in and observed that quite an audience had assembled.

Acts 10:28

8Acts 10:28. The first part of this verse states the long-standing attitude of the Jews toward the Gentiles. Peter makes his application of this vision of the sheet and the conversation in connection with it. In that instance nothing was said about common or unclean men; only articles of food. But the apostle understood the lesson and stated it to this assembled audience.

Acts 10:29

9Acts 10:29. Acting upon the lesson as he understood it, he came without gainsaying, which means without calling it in question. Being convinced that whatever was the purpose in calling him, it was proper, he asked them what that purpose was.

Acts 10:30-32

2Act 10:30-32. This paragraph corresponds with verses 3-6 in its main thoughts. It adds the information that he was fasting at the time the man (angel) appeared.

Acts 10:33

3Act 10:33. Cornelius was the spokesman in this reply to Peter’s question. He was appreciative of the fact that Peter had come at his request. In the original conversation there was nothing said directly about the commandments coming from the Lord, but Cornelius recognized that He was back of all this, because the angel told him it was God who had remembered his good deeds. We are all here . . . to hear. This denotes an audience that was open to the words of the Lord.

Acts 10:34

4Acts 10:34. Opened his mouth. (See the comments at Matthew 5:2.) God is no respecter of persons is from which Thayer defines, “an accepter.” It has the idea of one who can be bribed or induced to show partiality in bestowing mercy.

Acts 10:35

5Acts 10:35. Through the combination of several circumstances, Peter was convinced that all races were equally acceptable to God if they feared him and lived righteously.

Acts 10:36

6Acts 10:36. Peter then began his sermon about Jesus, whose life’s story was begun among the children of Israel, and which declared that Jesus was Lord (or ruler) of all.

Acts 10:37

7Acts 10:37. The work for Jesus began with the introductory labors of John in the wilderness, and consisted of his baptism of the people, connected with belief of the story that Jesus was to come.

Acts 10:38

8Acts 10:38. Literal anointing was done by rubbing oil over a person being introduced into an office. Figurative anointing was done by bestowing the Holy Spirit upon someone who was expected to have a prominent work under God. When the word is extended to apply to unofficial persons, it means to be endowed with the words which the Holy Spirit gave the disciples through the apostles. (See 1 John 2:27.) Jesus was anointed with the Holy Ghost and power at his baptism (Matthew 3:16-17). Devil is from which means the being called Satan, who is considered responsible for the entrance of sin and disease into the world.

Acts 10:39

9Acts 10:39. We are witnesses was made possible by the arrangement recorded in Mark 3:14, which also is in line with Peter’s statement in chapter 1:21, 22.

Acts 10:40-41

1Act 10:40-41. Openly does not mean generally, but evidently, “by many infallible proofs” (chapter 1:3). The witnesses were the apostles, who were chosen beforehand for that purpose. Having seen Jesus alive, and eaten with him and handled him, they could testify from personal knowledge that Jesus lived again after his three days and three nights in the tomb.

Acts 10:42

2Act 10:42. Unlike his previous speeches, Peter did not accuse his hearers of guilt when he mentioned the death of Jesus, but the event needed to be told in connection with the resurrection. For the meaning of ordained, see the notes at John 15:16. The quick are the people who will be living when Jesus comes. The dead will be raised, and all will be judged by this One who was ordained for that work. (See chapter 17:31.)

Acts 10:43

3Act 10:43. All the prophets witness. The Gentiles were not expected to be acquainted with the Old Testament prophecies. The purpose Peter had in mentioning this was to show Cornelius and his group that it had long been God’s will to offer salvation to all the world who would believe, whether they were Jews or Gentiles.

Acts 10:44-45

5Acts 10:44-45. It is better to consider these two verses together because of their relation to each other. Notice that the terms Holy Ghost and gifts of the Holy Ghost are used for the same event, showing that the Holy Ghost was the thing given. The gift was not bestowed to make them disciples, for they were told next to be baptized. The reference to the astonishment of the disciples of the Jewish nation, and the argument Peter makes in verse 47, shows that God bestowed the gift as an evidence that from then on the Gentiles would be acceptable to become converts to Christ. (See Romans 15:16.)

Acts 10:46-48

8Acts 10:46-48. These verses may be bracketed and entitled, “end of the Patriarchal Dispensation.” Speaking with tongues was necessary as evidence that these Gentiles had received the Holy Ghost. Upon all the accumulated evidence before Peter, which began with his trance on the roof of the house, he proposed baptism in water for these believers. In His name. The first word is from EN, and means upon the authority of the Lord. It shows Peter’s right to command the baptism, and not as a “formula” to be uttered by the baptizer. It was natural for them to wish Peter to spend some time with them.