Acts 10:34-48

Acts 10:34-48 is a significant passage for many reasons. Perhaps the most important aspect of this passage is the extension of the Holy Spirit to the Gentiles who had previously been considered “unclean” (Acts 10:28). It isn’t so much that God considered them unclean, but they were clearly thought of as unclean in the Jewish understanding at the beginning of Acts. The preceding text throughout Acts ten is of the utmost importance in understanding why this passage is so significant. The main characters of this story are Cornelius, a Roman centurion, and the apostle Peter. Some other characters who appear are Cornelius’s servant, angels, and the Gentiles to whom Peter is speaking. An angel came to Cornelius with a message telling him to send for Peter. Cornelius sent his servants. Meanwhile, Peter was given a message from an angel preparing him to go to Cornelius in Caesarea. He is very reluctant to this idea saying, “You yourselves know that it is unlawful for a Jew to associate with or to visit a Gentile.” Once Peter arrives in Caesarea, Cornelius tells him about his encounter with the angel and all the things that took place since then.

It is interesting to note the Holy Spirit’s involvement throughout the narrative that begins with setting up this divine appointment between Peter and Cornelius for the sake of bringing the good news to the Gentiles. The Holy Spirit is not at work for the first time by all means. But the Holy Spirit is preparing to arrive in a new way. It is also very interesting to observe the part of the conversation Peter had with the angel in 10:15 saying, “What God has made clean, you must not call profane.” This motif sets up the interaction between Peter and the gentiles in Caesarea that would take place in 10:34-48. Peter is obviously reluctant to the idea of taking part in anything profane. God had to speak to him three times before he accepted the reality of the way God’s kingdom was being made manifest.

There are many key words and motifs in this passage that carry over from the early portion of Acts 10. Two of the most crucial words in this context are “partiality” (10:34) and  “Holy Spirit.” The word, “partiality” is significant for many reasons. Peter begins his discourse to the gentiles by saying, “I truly understand that God show no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him.” The words “Holy Spirit” are also crucial because there is a focus on this part of the Trinity throughout this chapter. The Holy Spirit is spoken of as the one what “anointed Jesus of Nazareth” in 10:38 and interrupts Peter’s discourse in 10:44; “while Peter was still speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard the word.”

In addition to significant motifs and words, there are also very significant phrases in terms of use in the Old Testament and previously in the New Testament. In 10:39 Peter says, “they put him to death by hanging him on a tree.” This is the second time in the book of Acts that Peter has alluded to Jesus being hung on a “tree.” He would allude to it again in his epistle as well (I Peter 2:24). This would have been especially important to the Jews as the law of Deuteronomy spoke of the one who hung on the tree being cursed. (Deuteronomy 21)

This text definitely exhibits internal structure in its form and development. Its literary form is mostly narrative but there is a lot of dialogue as well. Narrative and dialogue go back and forth throughout. The previous section in Acts 10 could also be categorized in relation to particular dialogues between God and humans by way of angels. The ending could be categorized with Pentecostal literature as the Holy Spirit fell upon the Gentiles. The entire drama of the story has an upward effect rather than a climax that leads to a softer resolution. There is question as to whether Peter would go to the Gentiles and preach, he preaches, and then the most surprising element occurs when the Holy Spirit descends leaving a very triumphant climax at the end of the passage.

The only textual variant in this passage is the inclusion of the word “which” in 10:36; “You know the word which he sent to the sons.” Most translations include it. It seems as if it were a non-intentional inclusion or exclusion based on the way the Greek is written. It would be easy to miss. It doesn’t appear to be a significant enough variant to alter the meaning of the passage as a whole.

There are a few things about this text that speak to the socio-historical setting. This passage takes place in Caesarea, a city that is named after the “Caesar” denoting significant political currents that are present with regard to the Roman powers. It is significant that Peter is called to preach to Romans of all the gentile ethnicities the Holy Spirit could have chosen for this conversation. The other socio-historical notion is that of purity. The question of the profane and unclean is addressed head on. It seems as if Peter’s perspective in the previous passage is quite concrete with regard to impure things, Jewish partiality, food, or other things that could be considered impure by Jewish standards. By the time we reach 10:34 his understanding of these factors has changed significantly due to his encounter with the angel. Peter can’t help but include Jewish lingo throughout his short sermon to the gentiles speaking of thoroughly Jewish entities like Judea, Jerusalem, being hung on a tree, and prophets who testified about Jesus as the Christ.

Peter’s actual discourse is laden with Jewish themes. At one point he discusses the ones with whom God entrusted God’s message after the Holy Spirit came on the day of Pentecost. In 10:37 he begins addressing God’s message as it had been “spread throughout Judea, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John announced.” He then continues by saying “we” are witnesses. One must attempt to identify the “we” of this statement. It seems as if he is referring to the Jews who were present there. He picks up the theme of Jewish priority again in 10:41 saying, “not to all the people but to us who were chosen by God as witnesses, and who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead.” Peter is trying to be inclusive as he speaks to the gentiles but it certainly doesn’t come across that way. 10:44-48 could be understood as a response to Peter’s disservice to the Gentiles who were present. It could be that since Peter claims the Holy Spirit came only to the Jews the first time, the Holy Spirit decides to come a second time to the Gentiles.

The whole of this text seems to be about extending the water of baptism to the entire world. This doesn’t necessarily mean there had not been any Gentile converts in the previous chapters of Acts or any other gospels. It is also about showing the way Peter progressed in his understanding of who was “in” and who was “out.” This is certainly a notion that is prevalent at all junctures of Christian history, especially in modern Christianity. We must be aware of who Peter is, how he has acted as a leader in the Church up to this point, and the fact that he would only appear in one more chapter before the focus was turned to Paul’s missionary journeys. On many occasions Peter is the one boldly standing up, calling out in the crowds, proclaiming God’s word, and battling with the Jewish authorities. By the time we reach this passage he has experienced years with Jesus, the crucifixion and resurrection, and countless supernatural instances since the day of Pentecost. This sermon is predicated on Peter’s understanding of God’s kingdom. There is another account of his resistance when the angel said, “Get up, Peter; kill and eat.” He replied, “by no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is profane or unclean.” It is painful and difficult for him to come to terms with such a powerful change, but his resistance is almost completely gone by 10:34 when he begins to speak to the gentiles. This passage is important for the contemporary Christian understanding of the nature of God. We see how God continued to interact with humans after Jesus had risen. The Spirit of God still on the move. There are rightfully concrete understandings of God’s view of outsiders that are being completely disrupted. In a few moments, Peter learns something about the nature of God that he didn’t gather from spending years with Jesus. It wasn’t just a nuance that needed to be reevaluated but an entire way of thinking. One introspectively determines if there is a certain group they are excluding based on their own, often rightfully concrete, understandings of the way God’s love is continually made manifest in our world.