Act 11:1-18 | RWP | e4.org | In Judea ( κατα την Ιουδαιαν ). Throughout Judea (probably all Palestine), distributive use of κατα . The news from Casearea spread like wildfire among the Jewish Christians. The case of the Samaritans was different, for they were half Jews, though disliked. But here were real Romans even if with Jewish affinities. Had received ( εδεξαντο ). First aorist middle indicative. The English idiom requires "had" received, the Greek has simply "received."

‏ Acts 11:1-18

In Judea ( κατα την Ιουδαιαν ). Throughout Judea (probably all Palestine), distributive use of κατα. The news from Casearea spread like wildfire among the Jewish Christians. The case of the Samaritans was different, for they were half Jews, though disliked. But here were real Romans even if with Jewish affinities.

Had received ( εδεξαντο ). First aorist middle indicative. The English idiom requires "had" received, the Greek has simply "received."

They that were of the circumcision ( ο εκ περιτομης ). Literally, those of circumcision (on the side of circumcision, of the circumcision party). The phrase in 10:46 is confined to the six brethren with Peter in Caesarea (11:12). That can hardly be the meaning here for it would mean that they were the ones who brought the charge against Peter though Hort takes this view. All the disciples in Jerusalem were Jews so that it can hardly mean the whole body. In Ga 2:12 the phrase has the narrower sense of the Judaizing or Pharisaic wing of the disciples (Ac 15:5) who made circumcision necessary for all Gentile converts. Probably here by anticipation Luke so describes the beginning of that great controversy. The objectors probably did not know of Peter's vision at Joppa, but only of the revolutionary conduct of Peter in Caesarea. These extremists who spoke probably had abundant sympathy in their protest. The apostles are mentioned in verse 1, but are not referred to in verse 2. Apparently they are in contrast with the circumcision party in the church.

Contended ( διεκρινοντο ). Imperfect middle of the common verb διακρινω, to

separate. Here to separate oneself apart ( δια ), to take sides against, to make a cleavage ( δια, two, in two) as in Jude 1:9. So Peter is at once put on the defensive as the contention went on. It is plain that Peter was not regarded as any kind of pope or overlord.

Thou wentest in ( εισηλθες ). Direct form, but Westcott and Hort have it εισηλθεν (he went in), indirect form. So with συνεφαγες (didst eat) and συνεφαγεν (did eat). The direct is more vivid.

Men uncircumcised ( ανδρας ακροβυστιαν εχοντας ). "Men having uncircumcision." It is a contemptuous expression. They did not object to Peter's preaching to the Gentiles, but to his going into the house of Cornelius and eating with them, violating his supposed obligations as a Jew (Hackett). It was the same complaint in principle that the Pharisees had made against Jesus when he ate with publicans and sinners (Lu 15:12). The Jews had not merely the Mosaic regulations about clean and unclean food, but also the fact that at a Gentile table some of the meat may have been an idol sacrifice. And Peter himself had similar scruples when the vision came to him at Joppa and when he entered the house of Cornelius in Caesarea 10:28). Peter had been led beyond the circumcision party.

Began ( αρξαμενος ). Not pleonastic here, but graphically showing how Peter began at the beginning and gave the full story of God's dealings with him in Joppa and Caesarea.

Expounded ( εξετιθετο ). Imperfect middle of εκτιθημ, to set forth, old verb, but in the N.T. only in Acts (7:21; 11:4; 18:26; 28:23), a deliberate and detailed narrative "in order" ( καθεξης ). Old word for in succession. In the N.T. only in Lu 1:2; 8:1; Ac 3:24; 11:14; 18:23. Luke evidently considered this defence of Peter important and he preserves the marks of authenticity. It came originally from Peter himself (verses 5, 6, 15, 16). "The case of Cornelius was a test case of primary importance" (Page), "the first great difficulty of the early Church." Part of the story Luke gives three times (10:3-6, 30-32; 11:13f.). See the discussion chapter 10 for details given here.

Let down ( καθιεμενην ). Here agreeing with the "sheet" ( οθονην, feminine), not with "vessel" ( σκευος, neuter) as in 10:11.

Even unto me ( αχρ εμου ). Vivid detail added here by Peter.

When I had fastened my eyes ( ατενισας ). This personal touch Peter adds from his own experience. See on Lu 4:20; Ac 3:4, 12 for this striking verb ατενιζω, to stretch the eyes towards, first aorist active participle here.

I considered ( κατανοεω ). Imperfect active of κατανεοω to put the mind down on, to ponder, I was pondering.

And saw ( κα ειδον ). Second aorist active indicative, saw in a flash.

A voice saying ( φωνης λεγουσης ). Genitive case after ηκουσα (cf. 9:7 and accusative 9:4 which see for discussion). Participle λεγουσης (present active of λεγω ) agreeing with φωνης, a kind of indirect discourse use of the participle.

Came into my mouth ( εισηλθεν εις το στομα μου ). Instead of εφαγον (I ate) in 10:14. Different phrase for the same idea.

Was drawn up ( ανεσπασθη ). Instead of ανελημπθη (was taken up) in 10:16. First aorist passive indicative of ανασπαω, old verb, but in N.T. only in Lu 14:5 and here.

Making no distinction ( μηδεν διακριναντα ). So Westcott and Hort (first aorist active participle) instead of μηδεν διακρινομενον "nothing doubting" (present middle participle) like 10:20. The difference in voice shows the distinction in meaning.

We entered into the man's house ( εισηλθομεν εις τον οικον του ανδρος ). Peter confesses it, but shows that the other six went in also. He avoids mention of Cornelius's name and office.

Standing and saying ( σταθεντα κα ειποντα ). More precisely, "stand and say" (punctiliar act, first aorist passive and second aorist active participles).

Fetch Simon ( μεταπεμψα Σιμωνα ). First aorist middle imperative. Third time mentioned (10:5, 22; 11:13). Perhaps Peter is anxious to make it plain that he did not go of his own initiative into the house of Cornelius. He went under God's direct orders.

Whereby thou shalt be saved, thou and all thy house ( εν οις σωθηση συ κα πας ο οικος σου ). Future passive indicative of σωζω, to save. Clearly Cornelius was unsaved in spite of his interest in Jewish worship. Clearly also the household of Cornelius would likewise be won to Christ by the words of Simon Peter. This is household conversion before the household baptism (10:48; 11:17).

As I began to speak ( εν τω αρξασθα με λαλειν ). Εν with the locative of the articular aorist infinitive αρξασθα (punctiliar action simply) and the accusative of general reference. The second infinitive λαλειν (to speak) is dependent on αρξασθα, "In the beginning to speak as to me."

Even as on us at the beginning ( ωσπερ κα εφ' ημας εν αρχη ). Peter recalls vividly the events at Pentecost, the speaking with tongues and all. It is noteworthy that Peter does not here repeat his sermon. "He rests his defence, not on what he said, but on what God did" (Furneaux).

I remembered ( εμνησθην ). First aorist passive indicative of the common verb μιμνησκω, to remind. Peter recalls the very words of Jesus as reported in Ac 1:5. Peter now understands this saying of Jesus as he had not done before. That is a common experience with us all as new experiences of grace open richer veins in God's truth (Joh 12:16). Peter clearly sees that the water baptism is merely the symbol or picture of the spiritual baptism in the heart.

The like gift ( την ισην δωρεαν ). The equal gift, equal in quality, rank, or measure. Common word.

When we believed ( πιστευσασιν ). First aorist active participle of πιστευω in the dative case. It agrees both with ημιν (unto us) and with αυτοις (unto them), "having believed on the Lord Jesus Christ." Both classes (Gentiles and Jews) trusted in Christ, and both received the Holy Spirit.

Who was I ( εγω τις ημην ). Note order, "I, who was I." " That I could withstand God" ( δυνατος κωλυσα τον θεον ). Literally, "able to withstand or hinder God." It is a rhetorical question, really two questions. Who was I ? Was I able to hinder God? Peter's statement of the facts made an unanswerable defence. And yet Peter (Ga 2:11) will later in Antioch play the coward before emissaries from Jerusalem on this very point of eating with Gentile Christians.

Held their peace ( ησυχασαν ). Ingressive aorist active indicative of ησυχαζω, old verb to be quiet, to keep quiet. The wrangling (verse 2) ceased. The critics even "glorified God" ( εδοξασαν, ingressive aorist again).

Then to the Gentiles also ( Αρα κα τοις εθνεσιν ). Εργο as in Lu 11:20, 48 and like αρα ουν in Ro 5:18. In ancient Greek inferential αρα cannot come at the beginning of a clause as here. It was reluctant acquiescence in the undoubted fact that God had "granted repentance unto life" to these Gentiles in Caesarea, but the circumcision party undoubtedly looked on it as an exceptional case and not to be regarded as a precedent to follow with other Gentiles. Peter will see in this incident (Ac 15:8) the same principle for which Paul contends at the Jerusalem Conference. Furneaux suggests that this conduct of Peter in Caesarea, though grudgingly acquiesced in after his skilful defence, decreased his influence in Jerusalem where he had been leader and helped open the way for the leadership of James the Lord's brother.