BRUCE C WEARNE takes a deeper look at what Peter says about his meeting with Cornelius in Acts 11…
Now (of course) the apostles with all the brothers and sisters in Judea heard that the Gentiles also had lent a willing ear to God’s message. So, when Peter returned to Jerusalem there were issues to deal with, those raised by the circumcision: “You entered the house of the uncircumcised and have eaten with them.” Peter’s response was a full explanation: “There I was in the city of Joppa praying; a trance came over me and in a vision I saw something descending, like a great sheet, let down from the heavens by its four corners, coming right up to me. By examining it I could see animals, beasts of prey, reptiles and birds of the air. I heard a voice saying to me, ‘Get up, Peter; kill and eat.’ But I said, ‘Not I, Lord; for nothing wild or unclean has ever entered my mouth.’ But the voice from heaven came a second time, ‘What God has cleansed you must not call wild.’ This was repeated three times, and then it was all drawn up again into heaven. At that moment three men arrived at the house where we were staying, having been sent to me from Caesarea. And the Spirit instructed me to go with them, making no excuses. With six brothers we then travelled together and entered the man’s house. And he told us how he had seen the messenger standing there in his house telling him, ‘Send to Joppa and bring Simon called Peter; who will declare to you a message that will bring salvation to you and to all your household.’ Hardly had I begun to speak and the Holy Spirit came upon them just as it had to us at the beginning. I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, ‘John baptised with water, but you shall be baptised with the Holy Spirit.’ So, if God gave the same gift to them as he gave us when we [finally] believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to withstand God?” When they heard this they were silenced, extolling God in these words, “This then is how it is going to be. Gentiles have also been granted God’s gift of life-giving repentance”. (Acts 11:1-18/transliteration by Bruce C Wearne)
|
|
A statue depicting St Peter at the Vatican. PICTURE: Alfonso Romero/www.freeimages.com IN A NUTSHELL
|
Any new version of the New Testament will stimulate debate about the meaning of various passages. There has been ongoing discussion of this text. These days the NIV says “the circumcised believers criticised him.” The RSV refers to the “circumcision party”. Another version has “those of the circumcision contended” while the Jerusalem Bible simply says “the Jews”.
If we are not careful, these can give a wrong view. Why isn’t it feasible that Peter initiated an open examination of his conduct with the believers in Jerusalem? We should not too quickly assume that this was a matter of one group against another. Later, Paul in his letter to the Galatians, was willing to run the risk of embarrassing himself by recounting his challenge to Peter, when Peter came to Antioch: “Stop play acting! If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel Gentiles to live like Jews?” Luke has told us of Peter’s repeated disagreement with the Voice from heaven in his three dreams. He recounts Peter’s openness with Cornelius about the fact that they were both breaking with tradition. Peter had to explain his actions to himself, as well as other Jewish believers. This is an important part of the issue here.
Luke’s account is full of subtlety. It carefully shows how Peter conducted himself before and after the coming of the Holy Spirit upon the gathering at Cornelius’s house. There was apparently an immediate aftermath to this vision. The Holy Spirit told Peter that He had sent the two servants. Yes, a ‘devout’ Roman soldier had accompanied them, but Peter told the Jerusalem gathering that he went along with them without delay.
So there are significant differences between Luke’s account of Peter’s vision. The second one, out of Peter’s mouth, clarified the process by which Peter’s change of heart occurred. The account to the brothers in Jerusalem described four elements in the lowered sheet; the previous account has three. Peter’s refusal to eat, his hesitation, seems to have arisen from his confrontation with a mixed menu in which he was uncertain which animals had been rendered unclean and thus unfit for eating. Since they had been presented all together in one lowered hamper, he felt he had no choice but to refuse the lot.
But the Spirit’s word to him after the vision lifted reassured him that he was not to hesitate. That seems to have been his initial response. And so off he went without hesitation.
This vision enjoined him to partake freely of what God provided. This meant that scrupulous adherence to former food rules as well as rules for social engagement were no longer the rule.
And so, when Peter explained his coming to Cornelius he said that he had come in direct response to what Jesus had recently been teaching him. When Jesus rose from the dead, the Great High Priest ate with those He chose to be witnesses of His resurrection. We have even read that Jesus ate with His disciples even while they disbelieved His resurrection (Luke 24:36-43). His action was the precedent for what Peter did and means no believer should ever be viewed as “wild” or “unclean”. The way was now open to Gentiles and this had implications for all disciples. Before it became a fierce dispute, Peter, with his six Jewish witnesses, convinced the brothers and sisters that “God’s gift of life-giving repentance had been poured out on Gentiles”.
Got a verse or a short passage you’d like us to look at? Just send an email to [email protected].
