Preparations for a gentile mission-the calling of a new apostle

Act . God no Respecter of Persons.

I. Expose some false constructions of the text.—

1. It is not true that God does not love one man more than another. He loves with a special affection all who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. Cain and Abel.

2. It is not true that God does not bestow on one man what He withholds from another. Natural gifts, social advantages, religious privileges, spiritual blessings.

3. It is not true that God does not admit one man to heaven while He excludes another. Some are cast out.

II. Explain the real meaning of our text.—

1. God does not respect persons on the grounds on which men are treated with partiality by their fellowmen—wealth, birth, genius. His preferences are determined by other considerations, although these cannot always be ascertained.

2. God does not respect persons as He Himself did under the former dispensation. The Jew has no monopoly of the blessings of the gospel. As Christ died for a men without distinction, so salvation through Him is to be offered to all, and shall be bestowed on all who believe in Him.

(1) Rejoice in the impartiality of God.

(2) Avail yourselves of the impartiality of God by embracing the common salvation.

(3) Imitate the impartiality of God.—G. Brooks.

Act . God no Respecter of Persons.

I. What the proposition does not mean.—

1. That God is indifferent to diversities in human character.

2. That all religions are equally acceptable in God's sight.

3. That belief in Christ is not required for salvation.

4. That all men will eventually be saved.

II. What the proposition does mean.—

1. That the essence of religion consists in fearing God and working righteousness.

2. That God is indifferent to external distinctions between man and man.

3. That all who possess the inward characteristics of religion are equally well pleasing in God's sight.

4. That all men who are thus religious belong to His Church, irrespective of nationality or other accidental circumstance.

On the Reception of New Truth.—Here is Peter, with the traditional spirit of an Oriental, violating the apparently natural order, and passing at once under a new set of ideas. What is the explanation?

I. It seems to be in the Nature of religious changes that they shall take place suddenly.—There may be, there must be, long seasons of preparation for any moral change, but the transition is instantaneous. It is the law of revelation.

II. His change was due to the fact that he had got sight of larger and more spiritual truths than he had been holding.—Peter had been used to believing that God was a respecter of persons, but when he caught sight of the fact that God has no partialities, but accepts all men who work righteousness, his truth-loving nature rushed at once toward the greater truth.—Theodore Munger.

Act . The Lordship of Jesus Christ.

I. Its basis.—His redeeming work.

II. Its extent.—All things and persons.

III. Its purpose.—Salvation or peace.

IV. Its perpetuity.—Till the time of the end.

V. Its authority.—Derived from the Father.

Preaching Peace; or, Publishing Good Tidings of Peace.

I. The Messenger of peace.—Jesus Christ.

II. The basis of peace.—His atoning work.

III. The terms of peace.—Faith.

IV. The blessing of peace.—Remission of sin.

V. The fruit of peace.—Holiness.

Peace to the Far Off and the Near.

I. What it is.—It means sometimes friendship or reconciliation; and sometimes the state of soul resulting from these. O man of earth, is this peace yours?

II. What it is not.—It is not mere indifference. The frozen lake is calm; but that is not the calm we desire. It is not the security of self righteousness. That a hollow security. It is not the peace of prosperity, or pleasure, or earthly ease. There is the world's peace.

III. Where it comes from.—It does not come from self, or sin, or the flesh or the world. Nor does it come from the law, or our own goodness, or our prayers or religiousness. It comes directly and solely from Jesus Christ; from Himself, and from His cross; from Him as Jesus, from Him as the Christ.

IV. How we get it.—Our text says it is "preached" to us; or more exactly, "the good news of it are brought to us." The pacifying, consciencepurging work is done; and God has sent us His account of it.

V. What it does for us.—

1. It purifies. No peace, no purity.

2. It liberates. The possession of this peace is the liberty of the soul. Without peace we are in bondage and darkness.

3. It satisfies; it fills the soul; it takes away weariness and emptiness.

4. It animates. Till peace takes possession of us we are sluggish in the cause of God. Peace makes us zealous, brave, self-denied; willing to spend and be spent, to do and suffer.—H. Bonar, D.D.

Act . "Who went about doing good."

I. A significant testimony.—Spoken by an eyewitness, authenticating the gospel records of the life of Christ.

II. A deserved eulogy.—History has preserved the names of individual princes, to whom she gives the title of benefactors: thus are held in memory a Ptolemæus Euërgetes, a Titus, "the joy and delight of all mankind"; but of what "benefactors" (Luk ), must not the name and reputation dim and pale before that of the Sovereign of God's kingdom?

III. A loud call.—To unswerving faith in Christ as the promised Saviour, the crown and ornament of humanity, God's highest revelation.

IV. A constant spur.—To a love which yields itself without condition to such a loving Saviour, and henceforth knows no greater joy than, though at a distance infinite, to follow in his footsteps.—Oosterzee.

"God was with Him."

I. Providentially.—As with all.

II. Spiritually.—As with those who fear Him.

III. Efficiently.—As with prophets and apostles working through Him.

IV. Essentially.—As with none else, being one with Him in substance and in power, holiness, goodness, and truth.

The History of Jesus of Nazareth.

I. His Divine mission.—Sent by God.

II. His personal qualification.—

1. Anointed with the Holy Ghost.

2. Clothed with supernatural power.

3. Attended by the Divine presence.

III. His philanthropic career.—

1. Its benevolent character. Doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil.

2. Its extensive circuit. He went about; not restricting Himself to one town or province.

3. Its unwearied continuance. He went about manifestly without cessation,

IV. His tragic end.—"Whom they slew and hanged on a tree." A violent, undeserved, substitutionary death.

V. His triumphant resurrection.—"Him God raised up." The proofs of His resurrection: eating and drinking with the apostles.

VI. His sublime exaltation.—"Ordained to be Judge of quick and dead."

VII. His culminating glory.—"Through His name whosever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sins."

Act . The Death of Christ.—A study in apologetics.

I. Its early occurrence.—After a brief ministry of three (or two) and a half years. Out of a life so short, followed by a death so soon, what great results could be expected to flow? Yet no life or death has moved the world like that of Christ.

II. Its shameful form.—Slain and hanged upon a tree, like the vilest of malefactors. Out of an end so ignominious, what hope of posthumous fame could spring? Yet Christ's death has attracted more attention and been more widely and permanently remembered than any other that has occurred.

III. Its undeserved character.—For no crime or sin of His own, proved or unproved, but for a life spent in holy fellowship with God, and in benevolent ministries among men. In this respect standing apart from that of any son of man who has ever died either before or since. Impossible that in such a death no greater significance could be than in that of ordinary mortals.

IV. Its age-long remembrance.—When Peter spoke of it to Cornelius it was little more than ten years old. The world had scarcely had time to forget it. But nineteen centuries have rolled away since then, and its memory is still green. In all countries men are thinking and speaking of the decease which was accomplished at Jerusalem. The question therefore rises, what was there about this death of Jesus of Nazareth that makes the world unable or unwilling to forget it?

V. Its extraordinary influence.—Christ Himself predicted that if He were lifted up from the earth He would draw all men unto Him (Joh ), and let it be accounted for as one will, the fact is true that the death of Christ has ever since it occurred been one of the most potent—conjoined with the resurrection, the most potent—factor in the onward development of human history.

VI. Its amazing significance.—In this alone lies the explanation that a death so early, so shameful, so undeserved, so long remembered, so profoundly influential, could have taken place, that it was the death:

1. Of an Incarnate God.

2. In the room of sinful men.

3. As an atonement for their sin.

4. As a means of effecting their sanctification; and

5. In order to secure for them eternal life. It is these considerations which give to Christ's death its unique position and power.

Act . Eating and Drinking with the Risen Christ.

I. A proof of Christ's resurrection.

II. An evidence of believers' salvation.

III. A foretaste of the saints' glory.

Act ; Act 10:43. The Threefold Office of Christ.

I. Prophetical.—Preaching peace.

II. Priestly.—Remitting sin.

III. Kingly.—Ruling all.

Act . His (i.e., Christ's) Name.

I. Divinely attested.—"To Him give all the prophets witness."

II. Widely published.—"He commanded us to preach unto the people and to testify."

III. Highly exalted.—Raised up and established above every name.

IV. Certainly saving.—Procuring forgiveness for all who believe.

V. Constantly enduring.—Since the gospel was designed not for one age but for all the ages.

Act . The Great Blessing of the Gospel.

I. Its nature.—Remission of sins.

II. Its channel.—Through Jesus Christ.

III. Its recipients.—All who believe in Him.

IV. Its condition.—Faith in Him.

V. Its certainty.—Witnessed by the prophets.

Act . The Gift of the Holy Ghost.

I. Its nature.—The inhabitation of the soul by the Spirit of God.

II. Its effect.—In some, divers gifts; in all, holiness and eternal life.

III. Its recipients.—Those who believe and obey the word.

IV. Its sign.—Baptism.

Act . The Conversion of Cornelius.

I. Prepared for by his religious condition.—

1. His character before conversion.

(1) A devout man, who

(2) feared God,

(3) cared for the godly training of his house,

(4) practised philanthropy, and

(5) prayed to God always.

2. His need notwithstanding of conversion. This may seem to be contradicted by Peter's statement in Act . Explain

(1) what Act does not and

(2) what it does mean (see "Hints").

II. Brought about by a threefold instrumentality.—

1. By the providence of God. Who had

(1) brought Cornelius into contact with the Jewish people and their worship;

(2) awakened in his heart dissatisfaction with the gods of Rome and eager longing for a purer religion;

(3) led him to Csarea where he heard the gospel; and

(4) sent Peter to Joppa, where he was easily found by Cornelius.

2. By the ministry of angels. In his own and Peter's visions.

3. By the preaching of the word.

III. Sealed by the gift of the Holy Ghost.—

1. The signs. Tongues.

2. The significance. An earnest of the inheritance.

IV. Attested by baptism.—The ordinance of Christ to be observed by believers.

Act . The Administration of Christian Baptism.

I. Hindrances to its reception.—

1. The absence of faith. The individual who is not prepared to profess faith in Jesus Christ has no claim whatever to be admitted to baptism.

2. The presence of open sin. Though a professed believer, the individual who lives in scandalous sin is in an unfit state for partaking of this holy ordinance.

3. The want of adequate knowledge. The person who has not yet attained to a clear understanding of the nature and significance of baptism is not a proper subject for its reception.

II. Qualifications for its reception.—

1. The qualification in God's sight. Endowment with the Holy Ghost. Baptism ideally considered is not a means of imparting the Holy Ghost, but a sign and seal of the Holy Ghost's presence.

2. The qualification in man's sight. An outward profession of faith, attested by visible saintship or a corresponding walk and conversation, accompanied, as above stated, with adequate knowledge.

1. Peter's Report to the Church at Jerusalem; or, the Admission of the Gentiles vindicated (Act ).

2. The Origin of the Church at Antioch; or, the Preparation of a Centre for the Gentile Mission (Act ).

Verses 1-18

Act . The apostles.—Peter and John (Act 8:14), with James (Act 12:2), and possibly the rest of the Twelve. The brethren.—The body of disciples.

Act . They that were of the circumcision.—In the first instance all the Judæan disciples who were Jews, afterwards a party in the Church who contended for circumcision as a term of Christian communion (Php 3:3; Col 4:11; Tit 1:10).

Act . Didst eat with them.—See on Act 10:28.

Act . Rehearsed the matter from the beginning and expounded it by order.—Better, having begun, expounded the matter unto them in order.

Act .—Peter's account differs from Luke's in only minor details. (See "Homiletical Analysis.")

Act .—Mentions that Cornelius's ambassadors were three in number (Act 10:19), and Act 11:12 that Peter's companions were six (Act 10:33).

Act .—Represents Cornelius as calling his mysterious visitor an angel, whereas Luke's account makes the centurion speak of him as a man (Act 10:30). The word men, an insertion from Act 10:5, should be omitted.

Act .—Adds an item of the angel's message not before mentioned.

Act .—The clausule as I began to speak contradicts not that in Luke's account "while Peter yet spake" (Act 10:44), but draws attention to the shortness of the interval which passed before the Holy Ghost descended. In the beginning = on the day of Pentecost, about ten years before: see on Act 11:26.

Act . Whether the antecedent to who believed πιστεύσασιν is us (A. and R.V., Bengel, Meyer), or them and us (Alford, Hackett), or them only (Plumptre), cannot be decided; but in each case the sense is the same.

Act . Glorified God.—Correct if the reading is ἐδόξασαν (Westcott and Hort, R.V.); if ἐδόξαζον be preferred (A.V., Alford, Hackett), then the rendering should be kept glorifying God, a continuous act.

Peter's Report to the Church at Jerusalem; or, the Admission of the Gentiles vindicated

I. The serious indictment preferred against Peter.—

1. The occasion.

(1) The tidings that had reached the apostles and brethren in Juda that the Gentiles also had received the word of God (Act ). So remarkable a phenomenon was not likely to remain unknown to the Church leaders in Jerusalem. Nor is it readily conceivable that tidings so glorious should have given rise to dissatisfaction in any right-thinking bosom. Yet such actually appears to have been the case.

(2) The return of Peter to the metropolis, which was dictated not by any peremptory summons issued to him by his colleagues to defend before them the action he had taken—an assertion destitute of even the slightest evidence—but by a natural desire to explain what had taken place and his relation thereto (Act ).

2. The movers. "They that were of the circumcision"—i.e., the Jewish Christians as distinguished from the Gentile (see Act )—the party in general and not an inner circle of them more zealous for the rite than their fellows (Lechler). Such a party afterwards arose (Col 4:11; Tit 1:10); here its first indications are observed. At this stage the whole Jerusalem Church, being composed of Jews, felt disposed to emphasise the importance and obligation of circumcision.

3. The gravamen. Not that the apostle had preached the gospel to the Gentiles—which, in face of Christ's command, could hardly have been pronounced a fault (Mat )—or that he had baptised them, and so received them into the Christian Church, but that he had done so without subjecting them to circumcision. As yet the apostles and brethren do not so express their thoughts, but merely charge Peter with having violated (traditional) Mosaism by entering into friendly intercourse, and holding house and table fellowship with the Gentiles (Act 11:3).

II. The triumphant vindication offered by Peter.—

1. The frankness with which it was given. Not standing upon his dignity as chief among the apostles (primus inter pares), or resenting their interference with what was so unmistakably a work of God, but recognising their right to have their difficulties stated and, if possible, removed, doubtless also appreciating their perplexity concerning what conflicted so strangely with their traditional beliefs, Peter began and expounded the matter in order to them. A Christian of the right spirit—whether a public official or a private member in the Church—will not fail to exhibit the like anxiety, by means of a frank explanation, to remove any offence or stumbling block which his personal behaviour may have placed in the way of his weaker brethren (Rom ).

2. The fulness with which it was given. The main particulars of the story were related.

(1) The vision he had himself beheld in Joppa (5-10), his own account differing from Luke's only in minor details, such as the omission of all mention of the time when the vision occurred and of the hunger which preceded it, saying nothing about seeing heaven opened, and adding that the sheet appeared to come even unto him, and that it contained "wild beasts" (Act ) as well as other animals.

(2) The arrival of Cornelius's messengers, though he did not at all mention the centurion's name, or at that stage in his tale allude to the vision which had prompted the centurion to despatch his embassy (Act ).

(3) The inward whispering of the Spirit which had directed him to accompany the strange men from Cæsarea (Act ), which prompting he obeyed, taking with him six brethren who were then present, having apparently come up to Jerusalem along with him, and to whom he may be pictured as having pointed—"these six brethren also accompanied me."

(4) The account Cornelius gave of the angel's appearance in his house with instructions to send men to Joppa for him, Simon, whose surname was Peter, who, the angel said, should tell him words whereby he and all his house should be saved (Act ).

(5) The descent of the Holy Ghost upon Cornelius and his household almost immediately after he had commenced to speak (the interval between his beginning to preach and the Spirit's coming down seemed so short), and in exactly the same fashion as it had done upon Jewish believers at Pentecost—i.e., with the same manifestations in the form of tongues (Act ).

(6) The impression the phenomenon had made upon himself. It caused him to remember the word of the Lord (see Act ) about the difference between John's baptism with water and the Lord's baptism with the Holy Ghost (Act 11:16).

(7) The process of reasoning he then followed—which was that, if God had bestowed on them, the Gentiles, the same gift of the Holy Ghost as He had conferred on Jewish believers, it was manifest God had received them, the Gentiles, into His Church; and that being the case who was he, Peter, that he should withstand God and keep them out by withholding from them the rite of baptism, which was the sign of their being let in (Act )?

3. The success with which it was given.

(1) The apostles and brethren held their peace. They could say nothing against it. It was as clearly the doing of God as the healing of the lame man at the Beautiful Gate of the Temple had been (Act ).

(2) They glorified God, saying, "Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life." What a pity they did not ever after remain in this mind!

Learn.—

2. That all Christian believers are not equally enlightened, or equally free from prejudice, narrow-mindedness and bigotry.

3. That the best way to remove misunderstandings and overcome prejudices among Christians is to come together in friendly conference.

4. That the same story is seldom twice told in the same way and without variation in details.

5. That whom God admits into the Church none have a right to exclude.

Note A.—The historical credibility of Cornelius's conversion has been objected to principally on the following grounds:

1. That it had no practical effect on the settlement of the Gentile question.

2. That Paul did not cite it as an argument in the Jerusalem council.

3. That in spite of the silence and glorification of God which followed Peter's explanation (Act ) the Jerusalem Christians were not long in reasserting their old demand for the circumcision of non-Jewish believers (Act 15:5).

4. That the council felt itself wholly undecided as to the position it ought to maintain on this question of the terms of communion for Gentile members.

5. That Peter's subsequent behaviour at Antioch showed he had never really known of such a conversion as is here reported. (See Baur's Life and Work of Paul, ; Zeller, Die Apostelgeschichte, pp. 183-190; Holtzmann, Hand Commentar zum Neuen Testament, Erster Band, p. 366). But—

1. Cornelius's conversion was distinctly referred to by Peter, if not by Paul, in his speech at the apostolic council (Act ), so that it cannot be truthfully affirmed. Cornelius's conversion was wholly without effect in determining the Gentile question.

2. If Paul did not cite that conversion when addressing the council, he may have deemed it unnecessary to do so after Peter's reference to the same event. Along with this it should be noted that as Paul's address has not been reported, one cannot be certain that he made no allusion to Peter's action in receiving Cornelius.

3. If circumcision for the Gentiles was again mooted in Jerusalem, that was not surprising considering it was the Pharisees who mooted it (Act ).

4. The allegation that the council did not know how to act upon the question is incorrect, since they answered the question to Paul's satisfaction.

5. The wavering of Peter at Antioch (Gal ) only showed that he, like many another good man before and since, was inconsistent—not that he had not baptised Cornelius. Lesser difficulties—such as the number of visions connected with the story, the uselessness of sending Cornelius to Peter to hear about the gospel, when he could have learnt all he wanted to know from Philip, and the obvious inaccuracy of the statement (Act 10:28), since how otherwise could a Gentile be transformed into a Jewish proselyte—scarcely require an answer. The notion that the Cornelius history is a free composition intended to legitimate Paul's Gentile mission by showing that Peter had opened the door to the heathen before him contains this element of truth, that Peter's action in baptising Cornelius without circumcision because the Holy Ghost had, on the same terms, granted the gift of tongues, proved that Paul's procedure in the Gentile Churches was not unauthorised and self-invented, but had the highest possible sanction, that of the Holy Ghost and of Peter. The remainder of the Tübingen theory is an exploded delusion.

Note B.—The Theology of Peter, as set forth in the various addresses given by him in the Acts:—

1. In the Upper Room (Act );

2. On the Day of Pentecost (Act );

3. In Solomon's Porch (Act );

4. Before the Sanhedrim (Act );

5. In the Christian Meeting (Act ; Act 5:8-9);

6. Before the Sanhedrim (Act );

7. In Samaria (Act );

8. At Lydda (Act );

9. At Joppa (Act );

10. At Csarea (Act ).

I. Peter's doctrine of God.—

1. The personality of God is everywhere assumed (Act , Act 2:29, Act 3:13, etc.). His wisdom, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.

2. The sovereignty of God, both in providence (Act ) and in grace (Act 3:26), is fearlessly asserted.

3. The unity of the Godhead is everywhere clearly taught, as, for instance, when the term God is used absolutely (Act , Act 4:10, Act 5:4, Act 10:34, etc.).

4. The trinity of persons in the Godhead, if not distinctly expressed, is fairly implied in such passages as teach the divinity of Christ and of the Holy Ghost.

II. Peter's doctrine of Christ.—

1. His person.

(1) That Jesus of Nazareth was an actual historical personage, a true man, a genuine partaker of flesh and blood humanity, and not a mere semblance thereof, as the later Docetæ taught, Peter presupposes throughout—taking for granted all the details of His earthly history as these have been recorded in the gospel records, if not mentioning His Incarnation implying it when affirming His divinity (see below), alluding to His baptism (Act ), His philanthropic ministry (Act 10:38), His sinless character calling Him God's holy and righteous One (Act 3:14), affirming His crucifixion (Act 2:23, Act 10:39), His resurrection (Act 2:23; Act 2:31; Act 3:15; Act 5:40-41), and His ascension (Act 2:33; Act 3:21; Act 5:31), and predicting His future coming as the Judge of quick and dead (Act 10:42).

(2) That Peter regarded Jesus of Nazareth as a pre-existent Divine being, who had been sent and who had come into the world, may be reasonably inferred from such statements as these—"He is Lord of all" (Act ), "David saith concerning Him, I beheld the Lord always before my face" (Act 2:25), and "The Lord saith unto my Lord" (Act 2:34), since, even if they refer to the exalted Christ, it cannot be supposed that Christ could have been made a Divine being by the process of resurrection and exaltation if He had not been so before.

(3) That Peter considered this exalted Divine human personality as the Messiah of Israel (Act ) and the Saviour of the world (Act 3:25), is expressly stated.

2. His work. That Peter regarded Christ as Jehovah's servant (Act ; Act 3:26, Act 4:27; Act 4:30) who had been commissioned to perform upon the earth a work through which men might receive remission of sins (Act 3:19; Act 10:43), is hardly less apparent than that Peter connected that work with His death upon the cross (Act 2:32; Act 2:38; Act 3:26; Act 4:10-12; Act 9:43).

III. Peter's doctrine of the Spirit.—

1. The personality (Act ), and

2. The divinity (Act ), are unambiguously asserted.

IV. Peter's doctrine of Providence.—Includes the following points:

1. The sovereignty of God in foreordaining whatsoever comes to pass (Act ).

2. The freedom of man in accomplishing his own will while all the time he executes the purpose of God (Act ; Act 4:27).

3. The present and immediate knowledge of all that man thinks and does upon the earth (Act ; Act 4:29).

4. The possibility of interposing, either naturally or supernaturally, in the course of mundane history (Act ).

V. Peter's doctrine of sin.—On this momentous subject the Apostle taught:

1. That sin in its essence was disobedience to God (Act ; Act 5:29).

2. That thoughts of the heart as well as overt actions or words were included in the category of sin (Act ; Act 8:27).

3. That sin until it was forgiven held men's souls in spiritual bondage (Act ).

4. That the sins of men might work out the purposes of God (Act ).

5. That sins of the most heinous character were pardonable through Christ's blood (Act ; Act 3:19; Act 8:22; Act 10:43).

VI. Peter's doctrine of salvation.—Contained these tenets:

1. That all men needed salvation, Jew and Gentile alike (Act ).

2. That this salvation was attainable only through Jesus Christ (Act ).

3. That the only condition of salvation was faith in Christ's name (Act ).

VII. Peter's doctrine of the last things.—This included—

1. A second advent of Jesus Christ to be preceded by times of refreshing, and ushering in the times of the restoration of all things (Act ).

2. A future resurrection for all men (Act ).

3. A solemn assize for quick and dead (Act ).