Bible Groups - Digests of Bible Commentaries

The Acts of the Apostles - Chapter 11

The first part of this chapter appears to be merely a repeat of the previous chapter. Presumably Luke has some religious motivation for this repetition. With the Philip’s mission in Samaria, Luke showed the connection to the Jerusalem Church by the visit of Peter and John to confirm Philip’s work. The situation in Caesarea is more complex: the extension of the community is across radical demographic as well as geographic boundaries. Moreover the initiative has been taken by Peter - who can check his work? This “trial” in Jerusalem both enables Peter’s action to be defended and shown to be God’s action, and establishes a link between Jerusalem and this first Gentile mission.
1 It probably took several days for the Jerusalem Church to hear what had occurred in Caesarea. The Apostles and believers accepted Peter’s baptism of Gentiles in Caesarea - but it appears that only some were critical.
2 Being good Jews they would be scandalised that Peter had entered a Gentile’s house and eaten with him. One can imagine the speculation and rumour that developed - perhaps even rushing to judgement. So the “circumcision party” were critical of Peter - they are making the very distinctions the Spirit told Peter not to make..
3 Could be translated either as a question or as an accusation. Eating with them, or table-fellowship, anciently indicates sharing spiritual beliefs, and so sharing in Gentiles’ belief in idols. Their concern was more about the purity issue, rather than about the conversion of Gentiles! That issue, and whether Gentiles had to become Jews first, came later! But table fellowship is a real issue: how could meals shared with unclean people still be holy? Not only has Peter appeared to abandon his Jewish heritage, but he appears to have jeopardised the identity of the messianic community as the people of God, whose separateness (=holiness) was based on God’s commandments. Why do we find change so difficult? How can we become less defensive?
4 Peter effectively says “listen to the facts before you judge”. He narrates what happens “step by step” - the same phrase Luke uses to introduce his Gospel (Lk 1:3). He also includes the witnesses who went with him, and signs: the visions and orders by the Spirit, the culminating outpouring of the Spirit.
5 The story is told again, emphasising its supreme importance to the early Church. But this time from Peter’s viewpoint, so his vision comes first. Peter emphasises that the sheet came close to him, and he looked closely - this was no fleeting, blurred glimpse, he saw clearly.
6 The list of impure contents is enhance by including “beasts of prey”, ie carrion eaters.
8 Peter emphasises his previous adherence to the purity laws even more strongly: not only has he not eaten impure flesh, but it has not even entered his mouth.
9 The main point “Do not call unclean what God has made clean” is repeated in full 3 times in Chaps 10 & 11, it is so important.
12 Peter now understands that the Spirit had told him to make no distinction between them and us. He has “changed his mind” - are we open to changing our minds? The 6 brothers from Joppa who accompanied Peter to Caesarea, and into Cornelius’ house, and now as witnesses to Jerusalem, made a party of 7 (Cf the 7 table servants appointed in 6:3). They had made no objection to the Gentiles being baptised.
14 Peter extends his understanding further: it is not just an issue of table-fellowship, but of salvation. Note Luke’s subtle progression from “send for Peter” (10:5), “hear words from you” (10:22), “all that has been commanded you by the Lord” (10:33), to now “a message by which you ... will be saved”. Reminds us of Peter’s sermon at Pentecost (2:21,47).
15 The way the Holy Spirit fell upon the Gentiles was just like it had at Pentecost. This identity of experience is important as basis for asserting equality of membership in the community. The religion is being re-defined. This would allow Jesus’ message to be taken to the whole world, instead of limited to a backwater of Judaism.
16 Peter excitedly recalls that this fulfills Jesus’ prophecy before his Ascension - an example of the way the Apostles’ experience led them to recall and interpret sayings by Jesus. In this case something Jesus said to Jews, now seen to apply to all.
17 The key element in Peter’s argument: the same gift from God establishes membership in the messianic community, not ethnic origin or anything else. Therefore the Church cannot discriminate in its practice between those who have received this gift. Followed by a mixed construction: “who was I to prevent God” plus “was I powerful enough to prevent God”. Peter’s understanding has now been extended: he is thinking not just of table fellowship, but now also of the gift of salvation, given to Gentiles as well as Jews, which proves that God does not discriminate, but accepts the righteous from every nation. The implications of this equality of salvation will not be seen before chap 15.
18 The Elders in Jerusalem were silenced - ie “grew quiet”, desisting from criticism - by Peter’s argument, accepting that God has given salvific repentance - “conversion that leads to life” - to Gentiles. Clearly God was setting aside the legal barriers between Jew and Gentile to show that the Good news should be directed also to Gentiles. Not a grudging acceptance but genuine delight at God’s activity - they praised God. Can we be sure we let God direct Church life? Note that genuine repentance is the key to God’s blessing - “accepting Jesus as Saviour” is not enough. Would a greater emphasis on repentance enable Christ’s message to reach more people today? But this was perhaps seen at this time only as an exceptional situation. More discussion would be needed: adoption of a policy of mission to Gentiles would not come until the Meeting described in Chap 15.
19 Phoenicia stretched north along the coast from Caesarea to include Tyre and Sidon. Antioch in Syria, about 300 miles from Jerusalem, was the third city of the Roman world, after Rome and Alexandria, with about 500,000 people and a particularly large Jewish population. It will now form the centre of activities for the rest of Acts. The persecution after Stephen’s martyrdom scattered the Hellenist Jews as far as Antioch, where they told the Good News only to Jews.
20 But Hellenists from Cyprus (Barnabas’ birthplace) and Cyrene came and preached to Gentiles (“Greeks”, rather than other Hellenists) as well - more proactive than just accepting a Gentile household into the community, as did Peter. Cyprus is about 250 off the coast, while Cyrene is 1,000 miles along the African coast - the Church is spreading fast. But the vibrant missionary Antioch Church of mixed Jews and Gentiles is very different from the Jerusalem Church admitting a few Gentiles. Can koinonia be maintained?
21 “The hand of the Lord was with them” - ie the Lord worked wonders, to assist with conversions, as elsewhere. These conversions do not appear to have been restricted to “God-fearers” like Cornelius. Vv 20-21 are a model of compression: the community was distinctive in including Greeks, founded by messianic diaspora Jews by preaching the Good News about Jesus, accompanied by wonders, with substantial conversions, flourishing and graced by God. We also learn in Vv 26-29 that the community was visible enough to acquire a nickname, heeded prophets, and held fellowship with possessions.
22 The Church based on Cornelius’ household was - presumably - entirely Gentile. But now the Antioch Church included both Jews and Gentiles - the situation was even more complex. So Barnabas, a countryman of some of those who established the Antioch community, is sent by the Church in Jerusalem.
23 Barnabas has no need to preach, baptise or discern that the Spirit has been conferred: he quickly finds that the Holy Spirit has been at work already, through the activities of the Hellenists from the persecution in Judea; he can reassure Jerusalem that all is well, pastorally encouraging the Antioch Church in their faith. How can we help converts to “remain true to the Lord”?
24 Perhaps the highest compliment anyone could be paid! Could this be said of you?
25 Realising the size of his task in Antioch, Barnabas goes and looks for Saul, who has fled to Tarsus, about 100 miles away. The “Western Text” expands these verses to indicate that Saul could have chosen not to come, and suggests that it was Saul’s presence in Antioch that led to some crowd agitation. Presumably Saul needed some persuasion to come to Antioch, since it was the some Hellenists who had earlier tried to kill him (9:29) and some Cyrenians among the Hellenists who had opposed Stephen (6:9). Cyrene was another important centre of Jewish population, which revolted in AD 115-117.
26 Barnabas and Saul worked together teaching (rather than preaching - the Church was already well established here) in Antioch for a year. This period of working together in a local community provides a solid basis for their future work. Luke balances their relative importance: each is mentioned first 8 times. Being called “Christians” may have been initially by outsiders - Barnabas &c would still have seen their work as bringing Jews and Gentiles into the New Israel. But the change is significant: instead of being followers of the (Jewish) Christ, the “Anointed One”, they were now seen as followers of the person, Jesus Christ. With the influx of Gentiles, they could no longer be seen a sect of Jews.
27 Itinerant Prophets arrive from Jerusalem. Does the charism of prophecy still appear in individuals, as well as in the Church as a whole?
28 One of these, Agabus predicts a famine, which Luke, writing later, confirms occurred under Claudius. Suetonius and Tacitus write of famines during the reign of Claudius, AD 41-54, while Josephus writes about a famine in Judea in 464-48.
29 The common meal was the basic expression of Christian unity. The new Church in Antioch cannot physically share a table with the Jerusalem Church, but sending money to help in famine relief - literally “to send for a service” demonstrates their table-fellowship and so cements them into koinonia with the Jerusalem Church. This gift of money taken by Saul and Barnabas to Jerusalem could be confused with the collection Paul constantly refers to during his journeys: that collection appears to be delivered at the end of Paul’s missionary activities. Here it cements to Jerusalem the Antioch Church, Paul’s missionary base: perhaps Luke is anxious to establish sound links between Paul and Jerusalem before Paul’s journeys - or there were two such arrivals by Paul in Jerusalem with cash? But it appears certain that Paul did take money to Jerusalem at least once! Paul saw his collection for Jerusalem as a sign of koinonia between equals. Luke appears to be showing that Paul has delivered cash to the elders in Jerusalem as a symbol of connection to them as recognising their authority - Cf Barnabas’ gift (4:37) - ie an act of submission, before starting his missionary work, and so validating it.
30 The first time the term “presbyters” or “elders” is applied to Christian leaders, being a normal term for Jewish leaders (4:6, 23-25). The appointment of Christian elders indicates further that the Christian Church is separating from Judaism, while retaining some of its structures. The separation into “bishops, presbyters and deacons” was not established until the 2^nd century, and the term “priest” was avoided in the NT, except for Jesus. The relief was sent to “the presbyters”, not to the Apostles, who seemed to take no part in the administration of local churches.