And the apostles and the brethren who were in Judaea heard that the nations also had received the word of God;
News of what happened in a Roman officer's house at Caesarea travelled faster than Peter did. Before he reached Jerusalem, believers across Judea already knew that people outside Israel had received the word of God. Would they take that as good news or as a scandal? The rest of the chapter gives the answer.
This one sentence marks the moment the gospel broke past the borders of one nation. It had been coming for a long time:
The moment had come for the seeds which the Lord Jesus Himself had sown to germinate and bear fruit visibly... The saints had been scattered out from Jerusalem. Samaria had already received the word of God, not by the church agreeing to it, nor even by the action of the apostles. And now God had left nothing ambiguous as to His will about the Gentiles. The gospel from now on must go out to all alike. The holiness of Israel had come to nothing in the cross of Christ. By virtue of the blood of the cross God could and would wash even the Gentiles clean. Ritual had come to its end.
The event looked small: one house, one Roman officer. Scripture gives it space twice over:
This chapter opens with the stir that these events in Caesarea created in Jerusalem... It is remarkable that the Spirit of God thought it well to put Peter's own account on record, as well as the account Luke gives us as a historian in the previous chapter. This emphasizes the importance of what happened so obscurely in the house of the Roman officer. It was in truth an epoch-making event.
For Jewish believers the news was costly. Accepting it meant letting go of what had set them apart:
The difficulty for the Jews in receiving the Gentiles was a great one. To do so was to give up all their privileges, all that remained of the ancient glory of Israel. Peter therefore, on his return to Jerusalem, is reproved; he had eaten with the Gentiles.
Two things reached Jerusalem: Gentiles had received the word, and Peter had eaten with them. The second one gripped them:
The news of the "eating" apparently impressed them more than the news of the grace of God. What hearts are ours! The whole assembly in Jerusalem should have rejoiced. A large company of Gentiles had heard the word of the gospel from Peter, and believed it to their eternal blessing. They might well have called a praise meeting to thank God for His wonderful grace to men so long regarded as outside of every good thing.
The opposition did not come from outsiders. Believers raised it, and they aimed it at an apostle:
Scripture is beautiful in dealing with difficulties. Objectors may startle us today, but such objectors were nothing new in Jerusalem. More than that, they were found inside the church in Jerusalem. More than that, they objected even against an apostle such as Peter. So the apostles had to bear the objections of ignorant and unreasonable men, and that among Christians themselves.
Peter's report did more than answer his critics. Telling the news was worth doing for its own sake:
Why did Peter report at Jerusalem the wonderful news that "the Gentiles also had received the word of God"? To share with the assembly the victories of the gospel. Would that there were more of that kind of thing today, but sadly we are often too taken up with ourselves to be interested in another's work... God was working, and no matter who it was by, all the rest were interested.
Peter simply told them what had happened. That was enough:
Peter gives an account of everything, therefore, from the beginning; and all resistance is silenced by the simple narration. The question with which he ends it is quite unanswerable. They must glorify God that He has granted to the Gentiles repentance to life. Not even a breath is heard about the need of circumcising them to keep the law of Moses; the act of God is too obvious; He is completely in it from end to end. And so the all-important transformation is brought about without a dissenting voice.
- Heard. News of Caesarea reached Judea before Peter did. A quiet event in one house became the report that turned the gospel outward.
- Costly. Welcoming Gentiles cost the Jewish believers dearly. They gave up privileges they had held as their whole inheritance.
- Selective. They fixed on Peter's eating instead of the grace shown. The moment called for praise, and got a complaint.
- Answered. Objections came from inside the church, and even against an apostle. Peter answered them with a plain retelling of what God had done.
- Silenced. God's hand was clear from start to finish. Resistance ended in worship, with no voice left dissenting.
and when Peter went up to Jerusalem, they of the circumcision contended with him,
Peter has just watched God pour out the Holy Spirit on a Roman officer's household. He comes back to Jerusalem with the biggest news the young church had yet heard. What meets him is not celebration but a complaint. It is not about his preaching. It is about his dinner table.
The objectors were fellow believers in Jerusalem who still kept the old separation. Their complaint had a real basis. Until then, every Jewish believer kept a strict social distance from other nations. Peter had just broken it in public.
The vision on the housetop at Joppa had taught Peter to call no man common or unclean just because of his nationality. So for the first time in his life he stayed with people who had been Gentiles, and he stayed several days. For him the dividing wall had come down. But for several years to come, some people in the Christian community at Jerusalem still did not know the liberty Christianity had brought in. Six disciples from Joppa had gone with him to Caesarea, and they returned with him to Jerusalem. There Peter faced a challenge: was his conduct at Caesarea right?… He had not kept up that social separation which all of them had until then, and rightly, maintained. But they raised the question in no hostile spirit.
Two reports arrived together: Gentiles had believed, and Peter had eaten with them. The second one gripped them.
The report of the "eating" apparently impressed them more than the report of the grace of God. What hearts are ours! The whole assembly in Jerusalem should have rejoiced. A large company of Gentiles had heard the word of the gospel from Peter's lips, and had believed it to their eternal blessing. They might well have called a praise meeting to acknowledge God's wonderful grace to men so long regarded as outside every good thing. But instead they called the honoured instrument to account for his conduct in detail in "eating" with men of another nation.
This was not simple pettiness. Agreeing with Peter meant surrendering the standing their nation had held for centuries.
The difficulty for the Jews in receiving the Gentiles was a great one. To do so was to give up all their privileges, all that remained of the ancient glory of Israel. So Peter, on his return to Jerusalem, is rebuked; he had eaten with the Gentiles.
Ordinary believers question Peter. He neither pulls rank nor takes offence.
People may call Peter "the prince of the apostles," and in the superstition of their minds set him on a very high pedestal. But in his own time no one regarded him that way. So when he came back to Jerusalem from Caesarea, his brothers called him to account for his conduct there. Peter did not question their right to challenge him like this. It never occurred to him that his words and deeds were above all criticism.
Scripture does not hide such moments. The objectors came from inside the church itself.
Scripture is beautiful in dealing with difficulties. Objectors may startle us now, but such objectors were not unknown in Jerusalem. Not only that — they were found even in the church in Jerusalem. Not only that — they even spoke against an apostle like Peter. So the apostles had to bear the objections of ignorant and unreasonable men, and that among Christians themselves.
Commentators differ on the tone of this complaint. One reads the question as honest and not hostile; others see a deeper danger behind it. Read alongside the later dispute in Acts 15, the same prejudice shows an enemy at work.
Turn back to Acts 11 and connect it with Acts 15. There we find the spirit of evil working in the hearts of believers through the prejudices of a system. It wanted to destroy the work of God, if it could, and to bring the assembly into bondage to Judaism… They fixed their eyes on earthly things instead of heavenly ones, because they did not understand their true position. Their hearts were still captivated by the honour, glory, and profit attached to the earthly system.
The chapter opens with contention. It closes with worship.
The proof piled up and crowned the argument: God had granted repentance to life to the Gentiles too. Even the strongest defenders of Jewish exclusiveness were overwhelmed by it. It was now an undeniable and blessed fact. They were more than silenced, they "were still." Grace had triumphed over law, as it ought to. And it triumphed in Jerusalem, among none but Jews who believed… It was grace that made them glorify God, reversing their earlier judgment.
- Contention. The complaint was not about Peter's preaching. He stayed and ate with Gentiles, and that broke a separation every believer there had kept.
- Cost. Their resistance was serious, not silly. Accepting what Peter did meant giving up all that was left of their nation's privileged standing.
- Accountability. Peter never claimed his actions were above review. He let ordinary believers question him, and he answered them.
- Danger. Unchecked, the same prejudice became a tool of the spirit of evil, used to bring the church into bondage to Judaism.
- Grace. The argument ended in praise, not in a truce. The objectors reversed their own verdict and glorified God.
saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised and hast eaten with them.
Peter has just come back from Caesarea, where he entered a Gentile home, preached, and ate with the people there. In Jerusalem he meets no congratulations, only a complaint — and not about his preaching, but about his meals.
News reached Jerusalem ahead of Peter. What gripped the hearers was the detail of the table.
The news of the "eating" apparently impressed them more than the news of the grace of God. What hearts are ours! The whole assembly in Jerusalem should have rejoiced. A large company of Gentiles had heard the word of the gospel from Peter, and had believed it to their eternal blessing. Instead, they called the man God had honoured to account, in detail, for his conduct in "eating" with men of another nation.
The word "uncircumcised" pointed to a real dividing line, not mere prejudice. God Himself had drawn it, and Peter had told Cornelius the rule.
Notice that God has "broken down" the wall which He Himself put up long ago (it would have been sin for anyone else to have done so). The LORD said to His people, "You shall be holy to me, for I the LORD am holy and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be mine" (Leviticus 20:26). The godly gloried in this, and could say, "He declares his word to Jacob, his statutes and rules to Israel. He has not dealt thus with any other nation; they do not know his rules" (Psalm 147:19-20). So Peter was right to tell Cornelius that it was unlawful for a Jew to associate with, or visit, anyone of another nation. But such distinctions belong to the past.
Only God's own authority could justify such a step. That is the ground Peter takes.
It was undeniable on the face of things that Peter had openly crossed the distinction so long set up by God between Jew and Gentile. He had to justify this by God's authority, and he does so by simply retelling the vision from the previous chapter, to convince the brothers in Jerusalem… The holiness of Israel had come to nothing in the cross of Christ. By virtue of the blood of the cross God could and would wash even the Gentiles clean. Ritual had come to its end. From now on there must be reality by faith.
The people arguing with Peter were not outsiders. They were believers, and the man on the receiving end was an apostle.
Scripture is beautiful in dealing with difficulties. Objectors today may startle us, but such objectors were not unknown in Jerusalem — not only that, but even in the church in Jerusalem — not only that, but even against an apostle such as Peter was. So the apostles had to bear the objections of ignorant and unreasonable men, and that among Christians themselves.
Peter's reaction says as much as the objection. He answers instead of pulling rank.
Men may call Peter "the prince of the apostles." In the superstition of their minds they put him on a very high pedestal. But he was not regarded that way in his own time. Peter did not question their right to challenge him. It never occurred to him that his words and deeds were above all criticism.
The wording sounds like an accusation. But what kind of men stood behind it?
Even so, for several years to come, there were people in the Christian community at Jerusalem who did not know the liberty that Christianity brought in… Peter had not kept up that social separation. All of them had rightly kept it until then. But they raised the question in no hostile spirit, so it was not hard to convince them that his course was right. Retelling the matter in order, he directed their attention to four points — proofs that it was all God's doing and not man's.
The complaint ends in worship, and one demand never comes up.
The simple account silences all resistance. The question he ends with is unanswerable. They cannot help but glorify God for granting the Gentiles repentance to life. No one even mentions circumcising them to keep the law of Moses. God's act is too plain, and He is completely in it from beginning to end. And so this all-important change happened without a single voice against it.
- Wall. The separation Peter broke was not human snobbery — God Himself had put it up, so only God could take it down.
- Table. The charge fastened on eating, not on the gospel; a question about meals drowned out the news that Gentiles had believed.
- Authority. Peter defends himself by retelling what God did, not by claiming an apostle's word is above question.
- Freedom. Ritual comes to its end at the cross; from here on the reality is faith.
- Worship. God's hand is so plain that the objectors end up praising Him — and nobody demands circumcision.
But Peter began and set forth [the matter] to them in order, saying,
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
I was in the city of Joppa praying, and in an ecstasy I saw a vision, a certain vessel descending like a great sheet, let down by four corners out of heaven, and it came even to me
Peter has just come back from a Gentile officer's house. Believers in Jerusalem are challenging him over it. His answer is not an argument. He starts with where he was, what he was doing, and what he saw coming down from heaven.
Peter does not defend himself. He tells the events in order, and Scripture keeps his account.
Peter went over the matter from the beginning and set it out in order, so that all could see this was clearly of God. It is remarkable that the Spirit of God chose to record Peter's own account too. Luke, as a historian, had already given us the story in the previous chapter. This shows the importance of what happened so quietly in the house of the Roman officer. It was in truth an epoch-making event.
How he answered matters too.
Peter dealt openly with his critics. You cannot find a trace of irritation in his defence. His heart was full of the wonderful grace of God to the Gentiles.
The earlier account says Peter went up to the roof to pray. Here he tells us he prayed.
Peter went up on the housetop to pray, and he did pray. He says in the next chapter, "I was in the city of Joppa praying." It was the sixth hour, noon, not the hour when people usually go up to pray. Once Peter was told to watch and pray, and he did not, and so he fell. Now we find him praying, and the Lord speaks to him in a vision.
The word behind "trance" turns up in other places too.
The word is ekstasis, "ecstasy," in which, as it were, the mind is carried beyond the body. It is translated "astonishment" in Mark 5:42, and "amazement" in Acts 3:10. It is rendered "trance" when Peter had the vision of the sheet let down from heaven. The same word is used when Paul, in the temple, saw the Lord and heard Him speak to him.
Peter is careful to say where the sheet came from. Those two words carry his defence.
He was careful to stress that this vision was "from heaven". Otherwise the others might think he had taken this step of himself... His words to Cornelius show us this: only a light and a command from heaven would ever have brought him into such a situation. The apostles would not have been satisfied without this explanation. But who would contradict a command of God given in such a striking way?
To a Jewish man the contents of that sheet were unthinkable. That is the point.
The cross had changed everything, and put no difference between believers, Jew or Gentile. A Jew until then could no more eat an unclean animal than he could eat with a Gentile sinner. But the sheet came down from heaven and went back up there. In time it taught Peter the immense change that hinges on the cross and answers to the glory of Christ on high.
The shape of the sheet carries meaning too. Older translations, which the writers quote, call it a "vessel".
It was a "great sheet knit at the four corners", which gives us the thought of what is universal. The "certain vessel" would draw Peter's attention to this: the gospel was to go out to the whole world.
Peter adds four words the earlier account does not have — the sheet reached him where he was.
Here Peter "saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending to him." Then, telling the story to the Church at Jerusalem in the eleventh chapter, he says, "And it came even to me." It was a lesson to him. And a lesson comes from heaven to you too: Jesus is willing to save you where you are... "And it came even to me" — what was the lesson? That there was no limit to the grace of God.
Commentators differ here. Some read the vessel as a picture of the church:
The vessel is the type of the church. The four corners represent the four corners of the earth. The clean animals it contained, the Jews; the unclean, the Gentiles. But all in that vessel are cleansed.
Others read it differently. One writer says this truth was not Peter's to bring: "Some have imagined this to be the Church, but I do not believe that is the thought here. Peter was not the vessel through whom God was going to bring out the truth of the Church — that was given to Paul" (W. T. P. Wolston).
- Praying. Peter's own retelling adds what chapter 10 left open: on that rooftop at noon he really did pray. The vision came to a praying man.
- From heaven. He stresses the source. He did not decide this; the sheet came down, so no one could accuse him of acting on his own idea.
- To me. The vessel did not stop halfway. It came all the way to where Peter was — a picture, one writer says, of grace that has no limit.
- Cleansed. The sheet taught what Peter's training could not: the cross ends the divide between clean and unclean.
- In order. Challenged, he answered with the facts, calmly and in order — and God had the whole story written down twice.
on which having fixed mine eyes, I considered, and saw the quadrupeds of the earth, and the wild beasts, and the creeping things, and the fowls of the heaven.
Critics in Jerusalem object that Peter entered a Gentile home and ate there. He does not argue. He retells what happened. Verse 6 is the moment he stares into the sheet and names what he sees — and every creature on that list was, to a Jew, out of bounds.
Luke has already described the vision in chapter 10. So why hear it again from Peter?
Those with strong Jewish prejudices argued with Peter over what he had done. So Peter went over the matter from the beginning and set it out in order, so that all might see the thing was clearly from God. It is remarkable that the Spirit of God has thought it well to record Peter's own account, as well as the one Luke gives us as a historian in the previous chapter. This shows how important that quiet event in the Roman officer's house really was. It was in truth an epoch-making event.
Peter's list is not a random one. Every group he names — animals, beasts of prey, reptiles, birds — was food the law forbade. And the vision came to a man who was not yet ready to go where God was sending him.
As they travel, God prepares Peter's heart for a mission which, until then, he was in no way ready to carry out. But God wanted to have the Gentiles. Peter was praying on the roof of the house where he was staying... He fell into a trance and saw what looked like a great sheet let down from heaven to earth. It was full of all kinds of four-footed animals of the earth, wild beasts, creeping things and birds of the air — which it was not lawful for the Jews to eat.
Peter could have obeyed the command and stayed within the law by picking out a permitted animal. He refused. The way the creatures lay together explains why.
The great sheet Peter saw came down out of an opened heaven. It held within its folds all kinds of creatures, both clean and unclean. It was received up into heaven. Peter was told to satisfy his hunger by eating, and he could have done this by choosing a clean animal for his food. Yet they were all jumbled up together, so he refused. He was told, however, that God could cleanse the unclean; that in fact He had done so, and what He had cleansed Peter was not to call common. This happened three times, so that its meaning might sink into Peter's mind. We can see in the vision a fitting picture of the gospel. It comes from an opened heaven. It gathers into its folds a crowd in which many Gentiles are found, who were ceremonially unclean — but all of them cleansed by grace, and taken up into heaven at last.
Peter had taken the clean and unclean lists as rules about food. The vision showed him what the creatures really stood for.
Now, under God's direct teaching, he finds that these animals, birds and creeping things stand for people who are completely unclean in themselves. Yet by God's grace they can be cleansed by the precious blood of Jesus.
Commentators differ on what the sheet itself stands for. For one writer, the answer lies in who the clean and the unclean animals represent.
And what is the meaning of the vision? The vessel is a picture of the church. The four corners represent the four corners of the earth. The clean animals it contained, the Jews; the unclean, the Gentiles. But all in that vessel are cleansed... Jew and Gentile believing, redeemed by blood, saved by grace, washed and sanctified, are to be put into one body.
Another writer disagrees. He points to which apostle God used to bring out the truth about the church.
Some have imagined this to be the Church, but I do not believe that is the thought here. Peter was not the vessel through whom God was going to bring out the truth of the Church — that was given to Paul. I believe the vision was given to teach Peter this lesson: the Cross had done away with all the barriers that once stood between Jew and Gentile.
The old rules judged an animal by its hooves. Something replaced that test — and it was not a lowering of the standard.
The hand of sovereign grace has thrown open the door of the kingdom; but not to admit anything that is unclean. This could not be. Nothing unclean can enter heaven. But a cloven hoof was no longer to be the test; rather, "what God has cleansed." When God cleanses a man, he must be clean... He had to learn something else too. The standard for true cleanness was no longer physical, ceremonial and earthly. It was now spiritual, moral and heavenly.
- Looked. Peter fixed his eyes on the sheet and named what he saw: every category there was food the law forbade a Jew to touch.
- Learned. The creatures pictured people — unclean in themselves, yet able to be cleansed by the blood of Jesus.
- Loosed. The old test of clean, a cloven hoof, gave way to a new one: what God has cleansed.
- Widened. Commentators differ over the sheet. Some see the church, gathered from the four corners of the earth. Others see the barrier between Jew and Gentile, taken away at the cross.
- Retold. Peter answers his critics by telling the whole story in order, not by argument. The Spirit records it twice, marking a quiet event in a Roman officer's house as epoch-making.
And I heard also a voice saying to me, Rise up, Peter, slay and eat.
Back in Jerusalem, other believers accuse Peter of entering the home of uncircumcised men and eating with them. His whole defence rests on one voice he heard on a rooftop in the town of Joppa.
Peter does not argue from his own judgment. Only God could answer the charge against him.
It was undeniable on the face of things that Peter had openly crossed the line God had long set up between Jew and Gentile. He had to justify this by God's authority. So he simply retells the vision we saw in the previous chapter, repeating it to convince the brothers in Jerusalem. The moment had come for the seeds the Lord Jesus Himself had sown to sprout and bear visible fruit.
Acts tells the same events twice, and the repeat itself carries weight.
Peter then told them the whole experience, and the Spirit of God has seen fit to record this repeat of the matter from beginning to end. This certainly shows how important this method was. By it the Lord broke down the barrier between Jewish and Gentile believers.
The law of clean and unclean animals called for careful inspection before eating. The voice Peter heard set all that aside.
How strange it must have seemed to a man taught from his earliest days in the rules of the law of Moses! He saw a vessel coming down from heaven, holding all kinds of four-footed animals, wild beasts, creeping things and birds of the air. And he did not only see the vessel so filled; he heard a voice saying, "Rise, Peter; kill and eat." How wonderful. No examination of hoofs or habits! There was no need of this. The vessel and its contents had come from heaven. That was enough.
Peter had read the food laws of Leviticus 11 literally all his life. The vision taught him to read them as pictures of people.
Up to that time he seems to have taken this eleventh chapter of Leviticus, and scriptures like it, in a merely literal sense. When he saw the vision and heard the voice, "Rise, Peter; kill and eat," he answered that he had never eaten anything common or unclean. But now, under God's direct teaching, he finds that these beasts, birds and creeping things stand for people who are completely unclean in themselves. Yet by divine grace the precious blood of Jesus can cleanse them.
So why could the old line between clean and unclean fall at all?
The cross had changed everything, and put no difference between believers, whether Jew or Gentile... From the open heaven, light shone on the cleansing power of the blood of Jesus. Grace declared that the uncleanness was gone — the uncleanness the law given at Sinai had condemned so strictly for a time. The Saviour speaks from heaven, where a distinction like Jew or Gentile has no place. A Jew until then could no more eat an unclean animal than he could eat with a Gentile sinner. But the sheet came down from heaven and returned to heaven. In due time it taught Peter the immense change that hinges on the cross.
Writers do not agree on what the sheet itself pictures. One denies that it stands for the church:
Some have imagined this to be the Church, but I do not believe that is the thought here. Peter was not the man through whom God was going to bring out the truth of the Church — that was given to Paul.
Another sees the church pictured there:
The vessel is a picture of the church. The four corners represent the four corners of the earth. The clean animals in it stand for the Jews, the unclean ones for the Gentiles. But all in that vessel are cleansed.
The voice was only one strand of the evidence. Peter lays the strands side by side.
Nothing could break such a threefold cord. Each part was independent of the others, and all of them came from God. For Cornelius in Caesarea had a vision no less than Peter in Joppa. Peter had more than that. While he was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit told him to go with the messengers of Cornelius. He did not yet know that the three men were asking at the gate.
- Heaven speaks. Peter does not argue. He retells. He crossed a boundary God had set, so only God's own voice could justify it.
- Heaven commands. The order to kill and eat needed no inspection of hoofs or habits. The vessel came down from heaven, and that settled it.
- Heaven cleanses. The creatures pictured people unclean in themselves. The blood of Jesus makes them clean, because the cross had changed everything.
- Heaven confirms. A vision to Cornelius, a vision to Peter, and the Spirit's direction formed a threefold cord no critic could pull apart.
- Heaven repeats. The Spirit records the whole account twice. That repeat shows how much God cared about removing the barrier between Jew and Gentile.
And I said, In no wise, Lord, for common or unclean has never entered into my mouth.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
And a voice answered the second time out of heaven, What God has cleansed, do not *thou* make common.
Peter stands before believers in Jerusalem. They object that he went into the house of uncircumcised men and ate with them. His whole defence rests on a voice from heaven that he did not invent. It spoke a second time, and it overturned a lifetime of food laws — and with them, a lifetime of distance from other nations.
Peter is not sharing an experience; he is producing his warrant. He had visibly crossed a line God Himself had drawn, so nothing but God's own authority could clear him.
No one could deny it: Peter had openly crossed the line God had long set between Jew and Gentile. This he had to justify by God's authority; and so he does by simply retelling the vision... The gospel from now on must go out to all alike. The holiness of Israel had come to nothing in the cross of Christ. Ritual had come to its end. From now on there must be reality by faith.
The sheet held creatures Peter had refused since childhood. At first he read the food laws literally. He came to see they pointed to people.
Until then he seems to have taken only a literal meaning from Leviticus 11 and scriptures like it... But now, under God's direct teaching, he finds that these beasts, birds and creeping things stand for people. They are completely unclean in themselves, yet through divine grace the precious blood of Jesus can cleanse them.
Peter's objection uses two words, and the second is stronger than the first. Calling food common meant it was ordinary, not set apart for his use. Unclean went further still.
Impossible, the apostle thought, to do that. With the same freedom of spirit we noticed in Ananias, he objected to the One who spoke to him: "By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything that is common and unclean." That is: the food was not set apart for his use, and it was unclean as well. Again the voice was heard, "What God has made clean, do not call common."
Under the law a man could inspect an animal and decide. The vision removed the test from Peter's hands and put it in God's.
The One who wrote the book of Leviticus was about to lift His servant's thoughts above the barriers that book had raised, into all the greatness of heaven's grace... The hand of sovereign grace has thrown open the door of the kingdom, but not to admit anything unclean. That could not be. Nothing unclean can enter heaven. But a divided hoof was no longer to be the test; rather, "what God has made clean." When God cleanses a man, he must be clean.
Peter notes the direction the answer came from. That detail carries the argument. The answer came from a place where the old distinction has no standing.
The cross had changed everything, and put no difference between believers, Jew or Gentile. Israel had lost by it the old advantage of natural descent. Both were now open alike to far better blessings in Christ by faith. It was no longer a question of the law, or of becoming a proselyte, or even of taking hold of the skirt of a Jew. Light streamed from the open heaven onto the cleansing power of the blood of Jesus. Grace declared that the uncleanness was gone — the uncleanness Sinai had condemned so strictly for a time. The Saviour speaks from heaven, where a distinction like Jew or Gentile has no place.
The words came "a second time," then a third. God did not scold Peter's slowness; He repeated Himself until the lesson landed.
To make it all the more emphatic, this happened three times, and "the vessel was taken up again into heaven." So the Lord in His grace waited on His servant's scruples. He taught him about the new work of grace now in hand. Distinctions of the flesh were to hold no longer. God would bring uncircumcised Gentiles in and bless them on the same ground as the believing Israelite.
The test of the vision was not what Peter said in Jerusalem but where he sat down to eat afterwards.
He remembered the Lord's words at Joppa: "What God has made clean, do not call common." With thanks he recognised these uncircumcised ones as brothers in Christ. He not only had open fellowship with them in the assembly; in daily life too "he was eating with the Gentiles."
- Cleansed by God. The verdict is not Peter's to give. Where God has cleansed, no one may re-label the person unclean.
- Cleansed by blood. The creatures in the sheet stand for people unclean in themselves. The blood of Jesus makes them clean. The cross ended the old ceremonies.
- Cleansed from heaven. The voice came down from an open heaven, where the old wall between Jew and Gentile has no standing.
- Cleansed and repeated. God said it a second time and a third. He waited in grace on His servant's scruples and taught him.
- Cleansed, so welcomed. Peter's proof was practical: he went in, he ate with them, and he called them brothers.
And this took place thrice, and again all was drawn up into heaven;
Peter stands before his critics in Jerusalem, retelling the vision he saw on a rooftop in Joppa. He dwells on two details — the sheet came three times, and then it went back up to heaven — because they prove the move to a Gentile house was God's doing, not his.
Luke has already described the sheet in the previous chapter. Peter now tells it again, and the repeat itself carries weight.
This chapter opens with the stir in Jerusalem over what had happened in Caesarea. Those with strong Jewish prejudices argued with Peter over his actions. So Peter retold the matter from the beginning and set it out in order. Then all could see the thing was clearly of God. It is remarkable that the Spirit of God has thought it well to put Peter's own account on record. Luke, as a historian, had already given us his in the previous chapter. This shows the importance of what happened, quietly and unnoticed, in the house of the Roman officer. It was in truth an epoch-making event.
Peter had no defence of his own to offer.
It was undeniable on the face of things that Peter had openly crossed the line God had set up so long ago between Jew and Gentile. He had to justify this by God's authority, and so he does. He simply retells the vision already before us in the previous chapter, repeating it to convince the brothers in Jerusalem.
The number is the point. God did not say it once and move on.
To make it all the more emphatic, this happened three times, and "all was drawn up again into heaven." So the Lord graciously waited on His servant's hesitation, and taught him about the new work of grace now in hand. Distinctions of the flesh were to hold no longer. Uncircumcised Gentiles were to come in and be blessed on common ground with the believing Israelite.
Writers connect the threefold repeating with the sheer size of what was being overturned. After describing the sheet, the voice, and the refusal, one comment closes the scene in four words:
And this took place three times, and the vessel was taken up into heaven. The fullest witness was given.
The sheet did not stay on earth. Where it went is part of the picture.
The great sheet Peter saw came down out of an opened heaven. It held within its folds all kinds of creatures, both clean and unclean. It was received up into heaven… This happened three times so that its meaning might sink into Peter's mind. We can see in the vision a fitting picture of the gospel. It comes from an opened heaven. It gathers into its folds a crowd, and among them are many Gentiles who were unclean under the old ritual law. Yet all of them are cleansed by grace, and at last taken up into heaven.
The lesson went further than food. It reached the question of what makes any person clean.
All this was good and healthy for the soul of our apostle. It was good to have his heart enlarged to take in the precious thoughts of God. He saw the old barriers swept away before the magnificent tide of grace flowing from the heart of God over a lost world. He learned that the question of "clean" or "unclean" no longer turned on examining hoofs and habits (Lev. 11). The same precious blood of Christ which could cleanse a Jew could cleanse a Gentile also; and further, the Jew needed it just as much as the Gentile.
Peter's defence counts the proofs off one by one. Here is the second:
Second: when that vision ended, and all had at last been drawn up into heaven, the Spirit told him to go with the messengers who were asking for him. He was to go with no doubting, for He had sent them.
Peter arranged none of it.
Such a threefold cord could not be broken; each part was independent of the other, and all of them from God. For Cornelius in Caesarea had a vision no less than Peter in Joppa. Peter had more besides. While he was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit directed him to go with the messengers of Cornelius — before he knew the three men were asking at the gate.
- Repeated — the vision came three times, so its meaning would sink into Peter's mind. The Lord waited on His servant's hesitation instead of overruling it.
- Retold — Peter needed no argument in Jerusalem. He told again what God had done, and let God's authority settle it.
- Cleansed — clean and unclean were no longer settled by examining hoofs and habits. The blood that cleanses a Jew cleanses a Gentile, and the Jew needs it just as much.
- Lifted — the sheet came from an opened heaven and went back there. It pictures a gospel that gathers a mixed crowd, cleanses them by grace, and takes them up to heaven.
- Sent — the vision ended, and at once the Spirit sent Peter off with the waiting messengers. Three separate proofs, all of them from God.
and lo, immediately three men were at the house in which I was, sent to me from Caesarea.
In Jerusalem, Peter is defending himself. He retells the story of Cornelius from the start, and here he reaches the hinge: while he was still puzzling over his vision, three men from Caesarea stood at the door.
Luke already told this story in the previous chapter. Now it comes again from Peter's own mouth.
This led Peter to go over the matter from the beginning and set it out in order, so that everyone might see that the thing was clearly of God. It is remarkable that the Spirit of God has seen fit to put Peter's own account on record. Luke, as a historian, had already given us his account in the previous chapter. This shows how important that quiet, hidden event in the house of the Roman officer really was. It was in truth an event that marked a new era.
Peter points to the timing. This is not the first time in the book that God brings two people together to the minute.
In Acts 8, we saw how accurately God timed Philip's meeting with the Ethiopian's chariot. Now we see the servants of Cornelius arriving at the precise moment to settle the divine instructions in Peter's mind. The thing was of God, and it carried Peter forward with a force he could not resist.
Peter's case does not rest on one witness. There was a vision in Joppa, a vision in Caesarea, and the Spirit's own word.
Peter also told them how the three men from Cornelius, a Gentile, stood in person before the house in Joppa at that very moment. He told them how the Spirit said to go with them without a question. Such a threefold cord could not be broken; each part was independent of the other, and all of them were from God. For Cornelius in Caesarea had a vision no less than Peter in Joppa. But Peter had more. While he was thinking about the vision, the Spirit directed him to go with the messengers of Cornelius. This came before he knew that the three men were asking for him at the gate.
The three men came from Cornelius. Notice who tells Peter about them, and who claims to have sent them.
He does not learn this lesson at once. He "was inwardly perplexed as to what the vision that he had seen might mean" (Acts 10:17). But "while Peter was pondering the vision, the Spirit said to him, 'Behold, three men are looking for you.'" Notice, "the Spirit said" — it is not an angel who speaks. When it is a question of dealing with the soul, and carrying the truth to the soul, the Spirit speaks. The Holy Spirit whispers to Peter, and what does He say? "Rise and go down and accompany them without hesitation, for I have sent them" (Acts 10:19-20). Peter goes down at once. There are the men at the door. They have found the place where Simon lives. They are looking for the evangelist. Meanwhile God has prepared the evangelist to carry His message to an anxious soul.
Three men from a Gentile city at a Jewish apostle's door looks like a small event. It marks a turn in the whole direction of the gospel.
It was plain to everyone that Peter had openly crossed the distinction God had set up for so long between Jew and Gentile... The moment had come for the seeds the Lord Jesus Himself had sown to germinate and bear fruit visibly... With Jerusalem they had begun. But now the tide was turning. From Jerusalem the saints had been scattered abroad. Samaria had already received the word of God... And now God had left nothing unclear about His will concerning the Gentiles. The gospel from now on must go out without distinction. The holiness of Israel had come to nothing in the cross of Christ. By the blood of the cross God could and would wash even the Gentiles clean. Ritual had come to its end. From now on there must be reality by faith.
- Sent — the men came from Cornelius, but the Spirit said, "I have sent them." A household errand was God's own sending.
- Timed — they arrived at the precise moment. Their knock settled the meaning of the vision while Peter was still puzzling over it.
- Threefold — a vision in Joppa, a vision in Caesarea, and the Spirit's own word. Each stood on its own, all came from God, and together they made a cord no one could break.
- Recorded — the Spirit kept Peter's retelling next to Luke's account. That shows how much hung on one hidden hour in a Roman officer's house.
- Turned — at this doorway the tide turns. Peter crosses the old line between Jew and Gentile, and from here the gospel goes out to all alike.
And the Spirit said to me to go with them, nothing doubting. And there went with me these six brethren also, and we entered into the house of the man,
Peter has just come back from the house of a Roman officer in Caesarea, a man who was not a Jew. In Jerusalem, critics are challenging him for going in. His answer here rests on two things: a command he did not invent, and six men who saw it all.
Peter's defence does not begin with his own reasoning. It begins with an order given to him at Joppa, and he is careful to say who gave it.
We have already seen in Peter's case that the Spirit told him three men were looking for him, and that he should get up and go (Acts 10:19). He had His eye on the Gentile whose heart was awake, and He commanded His chosen instrument to go and do as He said. Peter is careful to report this. He knew exactly whose voice had directed him: "the Spirit told me to go" (Acts 11:12).
Notice what Peter does not lean on: an angel. One commentator sees a pattern here, and brings it forward to our own day.
He takes particular care to show that the Spirit told him to go. It was not simply an angelic intervention. We have the two things. We find here the same distinction found elsewhere. Where the matter is providential, it is angelic. Where it touches truth for the soul, it is the Spirit. Both are true. The form may differ. We may see no angel and hear no audible word from the Spirit of God. Yet it is as real now as then. Angels are not less real because we do not see them, and the Spirit of God as surely gives His guidance as if we heard Him.
The ESV reads "making no distinction." Older translations have "nothing doubting." Peter had no reason to hesitate. Three separate things pointed the same way.
Peter told them also how the three men from Cornelius, a Gentile, appeared in person at that very moment before the house in Joppa. He told them how the Spirit told him to go with them without a question. Such a threefold cord could not be broken. Each part was independent of the other, and all of them came from God. For Cornelius in Caesarea had a vision no less than Peter in Joppa. Peter had more besides. While he was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit directed him to go with the messengers of Cornelius. This was before he knew that the three men were asking for him at the gate.
Peter did not travel alone. He was building a record before he needed one.
He had been careful for his character, and so took six brothers down with him. They were to note what would happen and join him in testifying about it. That is what they do before those who oppose him at Jerusalem in Acts 11. God had said that every word must be established by the mouth of two or three witnesses, and so it was in this case.
There is a second gain beyond evidence. Taking companions kept the whole business open.
This wise act did two things. It made sure there was ample witness of what really happened. It also did away with any suspicion that he acted behind the backs of his brothers. Nothing was underhand. He did not try to settle a thorny question apart from fellowship with his brothers.
Peter answers his critics, and his retelling has no edge to it.
Peter dealt frankly with his critics. His defence shows not a trace of irritation. His heart was full of the wonderful grace of God to the Gentiles... The Spirit, moreover, told him to go with the men, nothing doubting.
Peter's story is not new to the reader of Acts. So why tell it twice?
It is remarkable that the Spirit of God has thought it well to put on record Peter's own account, as well as the one Luke the historian gave us in the previous chapter. This shows how important the quiet happenings in the house of the Roman officer really were. It truly was an event that opened a new era.
- Command. Peter's first defence is not argument but obedience — he knew whose voice sent him, and he says so.
- Confirmation. The Spirit's word, Peter's vision and Cornelius's vision each came on its own. Together they formed a threefold cord that could not be broken.
- Companions. Six men went with Peter. Their witness, not one man's word, settled what God had done.
- Candour. Peter hid nothing from his brothers. He did not settle a thorny question behind their backs.
- Consequence. The Spirit had the whole story recorded twice. That repetition marks an event that opened a new era.
and he related to us how he had seen the angel in his house, standing and saying [to him], Send [men] to Joppa and fetch Simon, who is surnamed Peter,
In Jerusalem, Peter answers those who object that he went into a Gentile home. He replies by retelling the facts. At the heart of his account stands the angel's errand to Cornelius.
Three separate things happened at once, and no human hand arranged them.
Peter also told them how the three men from the Gentile Cornelius appeared in person at that very moment before the house in Joppa. The Spirit told him to go with them without a question. Such a threefold cord could not be broken. Each part was independent of the others, and all of them were from God. For Cornelius in Caesarea had a vision no less than Peter in Joppa. But Peter had something more. While he was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit directed him to go with the messengers of Cornelius. He did not yet know that the three men were asking for him at the gate.
The angel could have said anything. All he gave was a town and a name.
Here is another point worth noticing. Angels are not mentioned as preaching the gospel. The angel sent to Cornelius came to guide him in his search for truth. Yet he did not preach the gospel to him. He told him to send for a man. Cornelius heard of the Saviour not from the mouth of the mighty angel, but from the lips of a sinner saved by grace. Again, the angel of the Lord directed Philip to intercept the Ethiopian official. Philip, not the angel, was the one who preached Jesus to him so effectively. So we see that in service, a man in grace enjoys a privilege denied to angels.
Cornelius was already a godly man. So what was he still missing?
The Spirit of God is careful to make known the godly life of Cornelius. He was already a converted man, though a Gentile. But he did not know salvation as proclaimed in the gospel. That is why Peter had to be sent for, as Peter himself afterwards explained (Acts 11:13-14). Otherwise he could only have hoped for his soul in the mercy of God. But now the gospel is to teach sinful man, without distinction... This devout officer could only know his sins forgiven through God's message of grace in the blood of Jesus.
Notice what the angel does not command. He gives Cornelius nothing to do — only a man to hear. The lines below quote an older translation of verse 14.
"Send men to Joppa and call for Simon, who is called Peter, and he will tell you words by which you and all your house will be saved" (Acts 11:13-14). That was the command Cornelius received. The obedience of faith soon heard the words of life. I sometimes say that the little letter K is responsible for a good deal of mischief. WORDS and WORKS differ by only one letter... Words were what Cornelius was to hear. He was not told to do any works. Have you thought you had to do some works to get salvation? Not so, my friend. What you need is to hear words.
The angel's message did not stop at the man who received it. Peter and Paul, from different starting points, say the same thing about a believer's family.
Peter was "a witness of the sufferings of Christ." Paul received his apostleship from the Lord in glory. The two of them unite in proclaiming that there is a connection in the grace of God between the believer and his household... proclaiming the sacredness of the family relationship, and indeed the unity of the household in His sight.
Commentators also mark a limit to that promise.
Cornelius was assured that he was to be saved by hearing the words Peter spoke. How groundless and evil it is to infer from this that "all his house" would be saved regardless of faith! The terms of salvation are alike for Jew or Gentile — by grace, but through faith.
- Errand. The angel came with directions, not a sermon: send to Joppa, fetch Peter.
- Privilege. Angels give directions; a sinner saved by grace tells the good news — a privilege angels do not have.
- Need. Cornelius was already converted and godly. He still did not know salvation as the gospel proclaims it. So the angel sent him to a man.
- Method. The angel gave him no work to do, only words to hear. Words save; works never did.
- Reach. The promise stretched over his whole house — yet on the same terms for each person in it: grace, through faith.
who shall speak words to thee whereby *thou* shalt be saved, thou and all thy house.
Peter is answering believers in Jerusalem who ask why he entered a Gentile home. His defence rests on what the angel told Cornelius: a man would come and speak, and those words would save a whole household. Two questions follow. Why send a message instead of an angel? And how could a devout, God-fearing man still need saving?
Peter adds a detail that the earlier account in Acts 10 leaves out. Everything hangs on one word: "words." One writer sets that word against what religion asks of a person:
In Peter's account we have his side of the story, not that of Cornelius. Yet he gives us one detail about the angel's message to Cornelius that the previous chapter does not mention. Peter was to tell him "words," by which he and all his house would be "saved." The law demands works from men: the Gospel brings words to men, and those words lead them to salvation, if believed. Note also that they were not "saved" until they had heard the Gospel and believed it. Yet there had no doubt been a work of God in the hearts of these people, which led them to seek after God.
The angel had Cornelius' full attention and could have told him everything on the spot. Instead he sent him to fetch Peter. Commentators find the reason in who has the right to preach:
Why this method? Why did the angel not tell him at once about the dead and risen Saviour? The answer is very simple. The privilege of preaching Christ belongs only to those who have themselves tasted redeeming grace. In the same way an angel directed Philip towards the Ethiopian official in Acts 8:26.
Cornelius prayed, gave to the poor, and feared God. Yet the angel still promised him words by which he would be saved. One writer denies that he was only going through religious motions, and draws a careful line:
But it is a mistake to think that Cornelius was only a self-righteous man of outward religion before Peter went to his house in Caesarea. He feared God, and his prayer and his alms came up for a memorial before Him... Cornelius, like the rest, had eternal life. If not, there could be godliness and acceptable prayer without spiritual life. Yet he needed to hear words from the apostle, by which he and all his house would be saved. Salvation is more than being made alive. It is the conscious possession of that deliverance through the work of Christ, which the gospel now announces. Cornelius may have been safe before; he was saved after he received the message of grace and the gift of the Spirit.
The same writer says elsewhere how far this salvation reaches:
This goes beyond light, or even life, to salvation made sure, and it rests on Christ's death and resurrection.
If the promise hangs on words, it matters what they were. Peter's sermon supplies them, and the response came before he had finished:
But as the angel directed, he had sent for Peter to tell him words by which he and his house would be saved. So we turn to Peter's address to find what those words were. He tells us he had barely begun. He had brought forward the testimony of all the prophets to Christ, "that through His Name whoever believes in Him shall receive forgiveness of sins" — and the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard.
The promise names a house, not only a man. The same wording appears far back in Scripture:
We shall meet almost these same words when we look at another "house." That seems to suggest these very words, which include the house, are the Holy Spirit's own special message to those who really want to be saved. We need not ask now who made up Cornelius' household. But we must note that the word is the same as of old: "you and your household." (Gen. 7:1).
- Words — the angel promised a message, not a task; law asks works from people, the gospel brings words to them.
- Messenger — the angel did not preach the Saviour. That privilege belongs to those who have themselves tasted redeeming grace.
- Content — the saving words were these: whoever believes in Christ's name receives forgiveness of sins. All the prophets said so.
- Reach — the promise named a household, in the same words as of old: "you and your household." It is God's message to all who really want to be saved.
- Result — Cornelius was godly before Peter came; he was saved after he heard. Salvation here means knowing you are delivered, on the ground of Christ's death and resurrection.
And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them even as upon us also at the beginning.
Peter has come back to Jerusalem, and believers there challenge him for entering a Gentile home. His defence rests on one moment he did not arrange: God cut his sermon short and acted for him.
Peter does not argue his own case. He simply lists what happened, in order. Three things lined up, and he arranged none of them.
Peter also told them how the three men sent by Cornelius, a Gentile, appeared in person at that very moment before the house in Joppa. He told them how the Spirit told him to go with them without a question. Nothing could break such a threefold cord. Each part stood on its own, and all of them came from God. For Cornelius in Caesarea had a vision no less than Peter in Joppa. But Peter had something more. While he was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit directed him to go with the messengers of Cornelius. This was before he knew that the three men were asking for him at the gate.
Peter's own words tell us he had only just started. What stopped him was a sign, and it swept aside the steps men might have demanded first.
This was as far as the apostle had got. He tells us himself that it was only the beginning of what he intended to say (Acts 11:15). Then a sign of precious significance stopped him. There was no baptism first, as there had been with the audience at Pentecost. There was no laying on of the apostles' hands, as at Samaria. The Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word! God again was the Mover. He answered in advance every question anyone might raise. He set aside all thought of a human line of succession, or of a gift passed on through a ritual. The Gentiles received the Spirit by "hearing with faith" alone (Gal. 3:2), and in this way God gathered them into the church.
Acts records other people receiving the Spirit. Set against them, these Gentiles had the least claim on God and the fewest steps to pass through.
The greater the distance from God, the more freely His grace comes out. The Gentiles were the furthest away, and they had no claim on God at all. The scene sparkles with the brightness of the grace of God. The rebellious Jew must repent and be baptised in public. The Samaritan, religious only on the surface, hears the gospel, believes it, and is baptised in the name of Jesus. But he must wait until the apostles come down, pray for him and lay their hands on him, before the Holy Spirit comes. The Gentile was far off. As a nation he had no link with God — and that is where you and I come in. He hears the truth, believes the gospel, and gets the Holy Spirit on the spot, without any of these steps first.
Peter's comparison is his whole argument. "The beginning" here is Pentecost in Jerusalem. These Gentiles received exactly what the Jewish believers received then.
In verses 15 and 16 we see what Peter recognised. The gift of the Spirit to Cornelius was a baptism of the Spirit, added to what the believers in Jerusalem had known at the beginning. It was God doing for believing Gentiles what He had previously done for believing Jews. God put both on the same footing, and who was Peter, or anyone else, to withstand God?
Peter links two moments here. Commentators trace the one Body back to them both.
This baptism of the Holy Spirit took place with Jewish believers at Pentecost (see Acts 1:5; Acts 2:1-4). It took place with Gentile believers at the call of Cornelius and his friends (Acts 10:44; Acts 11:15-17). The baptism of the Spirit involves the setting aside of all that is after the flesh. Natural distinctions, such as Jew or Gentile, and social positions, such as slave or free, have no place in the one Body.
Some people still look for this baptism to happen to them. One writer answers that hope directly.
We have an example of this in Acts 2, but He baptised only one hundred and twenty then. It then had to reach Gentiles who believed as well (see Acts 11:15). Still, there is no repeat of this baptism now, though some look for one.
- Interrupted — Peter had only begun to speak when God acted; the timing made clear whose work it was.
- Free — no baptism first, no apostles' hands, no ritual. The Spirit came by hearing with faith.
- Furthest, freest — those with no claim on God at all got the gift with the fewest steps first.
- Identical — "as on us at the beginning": the Gentiles got what Pentecost gave the Jews. God put both on one footing.
- One body, once — the shared gift sets aside every natural distinction. No one needs to seek it again as an experience.
And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, John baptised with water, but *ye* shall be baptised with [the] Holy Spirit.
Peter had just come back from a Gentile household, and he was telling the believers in Jerusalem what had happened. He explained himself not by his own judgment, but by a sentence of the Lord's that came back to him at the moment he needed it.
Peter had watched the Spirit fall on Cornelius and his friends. At once he called for water baptism. His own account explains why he moved so fast.
When Peter told the believers in Jerusalem what had happened (Acts 11:16), we learn from him what was in his heart at the time. We also see why he was so quick to command that the Gentiles be baptized. He said that when he saw the Spirit fall on them, "I remembered the word of the Lord, how He said, 'John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.'" It was just the right word for the occasion. Coming to him at that moment, it gave him the guidance and authority he needed to receive the Gentiles publicly into the company of believers.
That has an obvious lesson for anyone facing a decision with no time to look things up.
At some point in your life you may come to a difficulty, and you will say, I really do not know what to do. If you had the Scriptures filling your mind, you would know what to do. "And I remembered the word of the Lord" (Acts 11:16) saved Peter from error.
The verse sets two baptisms side by side, and commentators are careful to keep them apart.
Baptism with the Holy Spirit is distinct from baptism with water. John's baptism is contrasted with it, Acts 11:16; Matthew 3:11. Christian baptism, though distinct, was in view of the reception of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38), but does not give it. Acts 19:5-6. Baptism of the Holy Spirit took place at Pentecost. The Lord said to His disciples, "You will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now" (Acts 1:5). So at Pentecost the saints were all baptized by the one Spirit into one body (1 Corinthians 12:13).
Peter quotes a promise about something only the Lord Jesus does. Scripture records just two times it happened.
Baptism with water was nothing new; John had administered such a rite. The disciples too were empowered to baptize with water. The Lord Jesus alone has baptized with the Holy Spirit. But only twice do we have any hint that such a baptism took place. On the day of Pentecost in the upper room in Jerusalem it was first administered. In the house of Cornelius (must we not say?) it again took place. (Acts 11:16.) … But Christians have no hint to ask for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit again, and no hint to ask for the baptism of the Spirit again. There is no ground to look for it.
Peter's memory picked out the Holy Spirit only. He says nothing about a baptism of fire.
He does not give a hint that the baptism of fire had taken place. He speaks of that of the Holy Spirit. He is completely silent about the other, and rightly so. That still awaits its fulfilment. But were there not tongues like fire seen in the upper room? Certainly. Was that the baptism of fire? We firmly believe it was not. The Lord in the Acts did not mention it; and Peter never referred to it.
Peter's point was simple. God had done for Gentiles what He had already done for Jews.
In verses 15 and 16 we see that Peter recognized the gift of the Spirit to Cornelius as a baptism of the Spirit. It came in addition to what the believers in Jerusalem had known at the beginning. It was God doing for believing Gentiles what He had previously done for believing Jews. God put both on the same footing, and who was Peter or anyone else to withstand God?
Peter's words draw one more distinction. God gave the Spirit to people who already believed.
Notice again that the gift of the Holy Spirit belongs to those who believe. It is not His work in enabling souls to believe, but a precious gift given to those who believed. … The Spirit of God alone gives life through faith in Christ. Without the action of the Holy Spirit faith is impossible. But this enabling power and the gift of the Holy Spirit are two very different things. The gift follows the enabling power.
- Remembered. A sentence of the Lord's, stored in memory, arrived exactly when Peter needed it and kept him from going wrong.
- Contrasted. Baptism with water and baptism with the Spirit are not the same. Christian baptism points to the Spirit but does not give Him.
- Given. Only the Lord Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit. He gives the Spirit to those who have believed; the gift is not the power that first made them believe.
- Extended. What happened in Jerusalem at the beginning happened again in a Gentile house. God put Jew and Gentile on the same footing.
- Unanswerable. God Himself had acted, so no one could stand against Him — not Peter, and not those who questioned him.
If then God has given them the same gift as also to us when we had believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who indeed was *I* to be able to forbid God?
Back in Jerusalem, Peter faces a challenge — not for preaching to Gentiles, but for entering their house and eating with them. His answer ends with a question, not an argument. God had already acted. What right had Peter to block Him?
Peter's defence rests on one fact he did not create and could not undo. In the house of Cornelius, the Spirit fell while Peter was still speaking.
Peter then quickly reaches the high point of the evidence of God's working. He tells them that as he began to speak, the Spirit of God fell on those who heard the word, just as He had on the Jewish disciples at Pentecost. He also quotes the Lord's words about the baptism of the Spirit. There is no mistaking the clear power and grace of God controlling this entire matter. This being the case, how could he dare to withstand God by refusing to accept the Gentiles whom God had accepted?
The weight of Peter's case sits on one word: same.
Peter's companions were astonished, "because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles." Why should they have been? Why so slow to rise to the thoughts of God? Peter afterwards said, "God gave the same gift to them as He gave to us" (Acts 11:17). Standing based on natural birth counts for nothing now. Distinctions have no place in Christianity, and salvation is open to all, whether Jew or Gentile. "There is no difference."
Yet Peter's own grasp of this had limits.
This goes no further than admitting that blessing is for Gentiles just as truly as for Jews. No one had yet declared the truth of the one body. Paul was the one entrusted with it. God gave him the work of unfolding the heavenly union of all saints with the risen and exalted Head by the Holy Spirit. Peter went no farther than to admit the Gentiles to an equal place with the Jews: "God gave the same gift to them as He gave to us."
Peter attaches the gift to faith, and the order matters.
What led to the gift of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2? They believed in the Lord Jesus Christ. What brought in this fullness of blessing in Acts 10? They believed in the Lord Jesus Christ. They heard of Jesus, of His death and resurrection, the power of His name, and forgiveness through His name, and, like simple souls, they believed the word, and God gave them the Holy Spirit on the spot. They did not get the Holy Spirit to help them to believe, but they got the Holy Spirit as the seal of their simple faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
Cornelius was already a believer before Peter arrived. So what did Peter's visit add?
Again, let us note how clearly this discourse of Peter distinguishes new birth from salvation. Cornelius was certainly born of God before Peter visited him at Caesarea. Even so, Peter had to speak to him words by which he would be saved. It is a serious mistake to suppose that the salvation which he now found is not far beyond new birth. Present salvation is the first foundation privilege of the gospel. To be born again was always true from Abel onwards. But those who are only born again do not enter Christian ground until they receive at least the first and most needed blessing. Christ's finished work entitles every believer to it.
Peter did not ask the Gentiles to sign a statement or pass a test of understanding. He pointed to what God had given them.
The true ground of reception is not the acceptance of certain articles of faith, spoken or understood. Still less is it a measure of understanding about the one body and one Spirit. It is unlikely that a single soul in Jerusalem then grasped that clearly. It is a far weightier fact, the possession of "the same gift". ... To be born again never did suffice. One must have, through faith in Christ as the gospel proclaims Him and His work, the Spirit given to one as a believer.
This was more than a change of policy for Peter. It reached his heart.
What a scene to melt the last bit of legal ice out of the soul of Peter, as he realises how impossible it is for him to withstand God! Truly it is impossible! The floodgates are giving way, and all the fullness of divine love, long held back by the requirements of divine righteousness, is hurrying to show itself.
- Cause: They believed in the Lord Jesus Christ. God did not give the Spirit to help them believe. He gave Him to seal faith already there.
- Gift: The same gift — nothing lesser for the outsider. Distinctions of background have no place in Christianity.
- Reach: Peter granted Gentiles an equal place. Paul later unfolded the fuller truth: all believers joined to the risen Christ as one body.
- Result: New birth was true from Abel onwards. Salvation and the sealing Spirit are more. Cornelius was born of God, and still needed Peter's words.
- Rule: Receive whom God has received. The ground is not shared opinions or maturity. It is the same gift. To refuse it is to withstand God.
And when they heard these things they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then indeed God has to the nations also granted repentance to life.
Peter has just explained how God gave the Holy Spirit to a house full of Gentiles, exactly as He had given it to believing Jews. His critics drop their charge. What replaces it is silence, praise, and an admission that cost them everything they had counted on.
The complaint against Peter was not a small one. Accepting his report meant giving up their standing as a nation.
The difficulty for the Jews in receiving the Gentiles was a great one. To do so was to give up all their privileges, all that remained of the ancient glory of Israel... The Jews could no longer resist the clear evidence of the will of God. Grace overcoming in their hearts, they exclaim, "Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life."
The objectors said it themselves, and let their own case go.
If God was indeed dealing with Gentiles on exactly the same terms as with Jews, then Israel's unique place was gone... Those who challenged Peter here were men in whose hearts the grace of God worked. So, at all cost to their national feelings and prejudices, they acknowledged His grace to the "other sheep," who were not of their fold (John 10:16).
Notice the order: they stop talking before they start praising.
The proof kept mounting until it was crowned: God gave to the Gentiles also repentance to life. It overwhelmed even the strongest defenders of Jewish exclusiveness. It was now an undeniable and blessed fact. They were more than silenced, they "were still". Grace had triumphed, as it ought to do, over law, in Jerusalem, and among none but Jews who believed... It was grace that made them glorify God in reversing their previous judgment.
Peter's argument rested on one fact: God gave the Gentiles the same gift He gave believing Jews.
If God had given them the Holy Spirit — and the visible results made that clear — then plainly they must have had repentance to life, by God's grace. The Spirit given to the believer was a privilege over and above faith, and therefore assumed they already had repentance to life.
The word "granted" is the heart of the verse. It makes repentance a gift from God, not something the sinner produces.
Peter's plain and straightforward account silenced all opposition. Grace worked so deeply in the hearts of those who had objected that they did more than recognise that God had granted the Gentiles "repentance to life." They glorified God for doing it. They credited repentance to the gift of God, just as Ephesians 2:8 credits faith to His gift.
That settles a practical question for anyone who feels unable to repent as they should.
He who was crucified is exalted to give repentance and forgiveness of sins (Acts 5:31). The coming and unerring Judge is the One who gives repentance to those who need it and will receive it. He gives it. Efforts, toil, self-punishment are all in vain. He gives it, as we learn; for it is worked in the soul by the word of God acting on the conscience by the power of the Spirit.
Repentance is not the same thing as faith.
Without doubt, there is a changed and new mind about God, which is rather the effect of faith; but this in itself is never repentance. For repentance is, by grace, the soul's eye turned on itself and seeing only and continually its guilt, its evil. Faith that produces repentance is in no way repentance. Faith looks away from self to Christ, for the forgiveness of the sins that repentance condemns...
The words "that leads to life" matter. Sorrow over sin can end somewhere else.
There is a despairing kind of mourning. Judas mourned like that: he saw his sin, he was sorry, he justified Christ, he made restitution... his was not "repentance to life" (Acts 11:18), but rather to death.
What they admitted set the course for the years that followed.
This marked a distinct epoch in the Church's history. From now on the message would go to Gentiles along with the race of Israel. On the day of His resurrection, the Lord had told the gathered company in the upper room that repentance and forgiveness of sins were to be preached among all the nations, beginning at Jerusalem (Luke 24:47).
- Granted — Repentance is God's gift, just as faith is. Effort and self-punishment produce nothing.
- Given by Christ — The crucified and exalted Lord gives it. The word of God works it in the conscience by the Spirit.
- That leads to life — Real repentance ends in life. Judas felt sorrow, confessed, and made restitution, yet ended in death.
- To the Gentiles also — Admitting this cost the objectors Israel's exclusive place. They admitted it anyway.
- Glorified God — Grace silenced the critics, then turned them into worshippers who reversed their own verdict.