Author: Charlie Garrett

Utah, the Beehive State

Saturday, 22 October 202

“I was in the city of Joppa praying; and in a trance I saw a vision, an object descending like a great sheet, let down from heaven by four corners; and it came to me. Acts 11:5

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

In the previous verse, it noted that Peter began his response to the circumcision, putting everything in order as it occurred. That order now starts with, “I was in the city of Joppa praying.”

Peter begins with his location. As it was in a different city than where Cornelius was, it is important that he conveyed this to his audience. In this, they would be able to see that what occurred was based on events that actually took place more than a day apart in order for the immediate events surrounding Peter to occur simultaneously. While in Joppa, he next notes his state, saying, “and in a trance I saw a vision.”

The words are explanatory. Luke recorded what Peter saw as a trance without using the term “vision.” That is seen in Acts 10 –

The next day, as they went on their journey and drew near the city, Peter went up on the housetop to pray, about the sixth hour. ¹⁰ Then he became very hungry and wanted to eat; but while they made ready, he fell into a trance ¹¹ and saw heaven opened and an object like a great sheet bound at the four corners, descending to him and let down to the earth. ¹² In it were all kinds of four-footed animals of the earth, wild beasts, creeping things, and birds of the air. ¹³ And a voice came to him, “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.”
¹⁴ But Peter said, “Not so, Lord! For I have never eaten anything common or unclean.”
¹⁵ And a voice spoke to him again the second time, “What God has cleansed you must not call common.” ¹⁶ This was done three times. And the object was taken up into heaven again. Acts 10: 9-16

It is while in a trance and seeing the vision that Peter next explains the contents of the vision, saying, “an object descending like a great sheet.”

One can refer to the comments on Acts 10:11 to understand the meaning of this and to see that what Peter saw was probably a “great sail.” Translating the Greek word as “sail” is acceptable, and it is the most likely meaning of Peter’s words. Next, Peter says this great object was “let down from heaven by four corners.”

The Greek has two slight differences. First, the verb is a present participle, “being let down.” Secondly, it says, “from the heaven.” With that noted, the words of this clause are again explained in the Acts 10:11 commentary. There is rich symbolism and Peter would have grasped its intent after pondering what he saw. The verse next ends with, “and it came to me.”

It does not specifically say this in Acts 10, but it is implied. Peter is on the earth, the great object descended from the heaven, it was intended for him to see, and the voice that spoke was directed to him. Hence to say “and it came to me” is correct from his perspective.

Life application: The personal witness of an individual to the changing power of events in one’s life can lead others to follow the same path as well. In the case of accepting Jesus because of the gospel, there is no need to embellish the events that took place at all.

The focus is to be on the power of God, not on the individual. Unfortunately, humans find it satisfying to make events about us. This is not a healthy way of presenting why we have received Jesus. First, it is not the point of salvation. The ultimate point of salvation is for God to receive the glory.

Secondly, we are fallen beings and we are bound to fail. When we do, those who were impressed with the change in us might become disheartened in their seeking out the reason for our conversion. But if we keep the focus of our conversion on Jesus at all times, then our failings will not diminish the power of God in our lives, they will actually highlight it.

If we needed a Savior, and if we continue to need a Savior, it means that we are dependent on the Lord at all times. If we act as if our salvation has brought us to a state where we are no longer in need of Jesus’ guiding hand in our lives, we will not be bringing the glory to Him as we should.

Let us keep our personal testimony about Jesus focusing on Him at all times. As Paul says, “Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall” 1 Corinthians 10:12. We are always dependent on Jesus. Let our speech and attitude reflect this.

Lord God, how good You are to us. You saved us and You keep on saving us. When we fail You, there is always the assurance that we are Yours and that You are there to forgive us and lead us back to Yourself. And so, Lord, help us to consider this and draw near to You at all times. Thank You for Your tender care of us. Amen.

Another view from capitol building, Salt Lake City, Utah

Friday, 21 October 2022

But Peter explained it to them in order from the beginning, saying: Acts 11:4

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

Those of the circumcision were in a snit towards Peter about what had occurred in Caesarea. They said to him, “You went into uncircumcised men and ate with them.” With that, it now says, “But Peter explained it to them in order from the beginning, saying.”

This translation by the NKJV is hardly reflective of the Greek. Rather, the Greek reads, “Now Peter having begun, set forth to them in order, saying” (BLB). Peter opened his mouth and began his response to them. Once he did, he set forth the events as they occurred. The verb is imperfect, reflecting the ongoing nature of his speaking out the chronology of events. He started explaining and he continued by sequentially relaying how things happened.

By doing this, he would be able to convince them of the appropriateness of his actions more precisely. This is because they will be able to see it in the same manner as God ordered the things to occur. Peter had his own doubts, but they were dispelled by how things transpired. By the time he arrived at Cornelius’ house, he felt reassured that his entry into it was exactly the right thing to do.

By speaking out the matter just as it had been presented to him, they could logically follow along as if they were there, right next to him, watching how God orchestrated everything. As such, even a hardened Jew, if he accepted Peter’s story as true, would be fully convinced that Peter’s actions were wholly acceptable.

Life application: By looking at this verse in parallel with other translations, one can see how carefully some translations follow the original Greek, some paraphrase it, and some practically plagiarize what others have already put forth without ever checking with the original.

For this commentary, forty-six versions were looked at. Of them, thirty-one follow the Greek order exactly or pretty closely. Eleven follow the same pattern as the NKJV (noted above), and the rest are essentially paraphrases that do not reflect the Greek very well at all. One can almost see where the original error in thought came in and who went with it. In this case, the oldest Bible referred to, and which started the divergence in translation, was the Bishop’s Bible of 1568.

First, remember the correct sequence of the Greek from the BLB –

“Now Peter having begun, set forth to them in order, saying”

The translation that less properly follows the Greek (the Bishop’s Bible of 1568) reads –

“But Peter rehearsed the matter from the begynnyng, and expounded it by order vnto them, saying:”

From there, whoever was assigned this portion of Acts on the KJV translation team simply copied that and updated it to more modern English –

“But Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order unto them, saying,”

From there, the NKJV did this again –

“But Peter explained it to them in order from the beginning, saying:”

This is just a simple exercise in finding out why translations are the way they are, and it can be extremely helpful in better learning the original intent, if desired. Seeing error in something can help in directing the mind to what is correct. If such things don’t matter to you, then enjoy whatever translation you are reading, but be sure to not assume it is the only correct version. Just because you enjoy the style of the translation you are reading, it doesn’t make it right.

Consider this carefully because even though Acts 11:4 doesn’t carry any heavy theological weight, other verses do. A single mistranslated verse, or a single verse taken out of its proper context, can lead people down entirely incorrect paths of doctrine. Never stop studying this precious word. It is a lifetime of joy for those who seek out what God has set forth for us!

Lord God, what a delight it is to read Your word and to contemplate it. Thank You for those who have diligently and faithfully translated it for us over the millennia. We are the recipients of their efforts, and for that, we are grateful. How wonderful it is to have modern, reliable versions to help us understand what You have set for us. Amen.

View from capitol building, Salt Lake City, Utah

Thursday, 20 October 2022

saying, “You went in to uncircumcised men and ate with them!” Acts 11:3

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

In the previous verse, it noted that when Peter came up to Jerusalem, those of the circumcision contended with him. It now explains that with the words, “You went in to uncircumcised men.” Rather, the Greek reads, “men having foreskin.” Vincent’s Word Studies says of this, “An indignant expression.”

The word, akrobustia, is first seen here. It signifies the foreskin. It is used at times by Jews when referring to Gentiles. Figuratively, it signifies a person being outside of God’s covenant. This is because of the mandates given to Abraham all the way back in Genesis 17. This was later brought into the Mosaic law, as well as is seen in Leviticus 12:3, saying, “And on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.”

After this, the word will be used nineteen more times, all by Paul in his epistles. His uses of it will mostly contrast those who are circumcised and those who are not. One of the most poignant times is when he uses the word six times in Romans 4:9-12 –

“Does this blessedness then come upon the circumcised only, or upon the uncircumcised also? For we say that faith was accounted to Abraham for righteousness. ¹⁰ How then was it accounted? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised. ¹¹ And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while still uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all those who believe, though they are uncircumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also, ¹² and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also walk in the steps of the faith which our father Abraham had while still uncircumcised.”

What happened with Cornelius and those with him is just what Paul is referring to in Romans 4. The blessing of God in Christ came upon the uncircumcised just as the declaration of righteousness bestowed upon Abraham came upon him while he was still uncircumcised. Not considering this, those of the circumcision were highly upset at Peter, noting that he had gone in to be with these men “and ate with them!”

They knew that uncircumcised men would also be eating food that was not considered clean according to the laws and customs of the Jews. He might as well have brought a pound of bacon home with him and started eating it right in front of them. They were aghast at his complete shunning of what it meant to be a Jew.

Life application: Those who promote the Hebrew Roots movement, along with other cults and sects of supposed Christians, will deny the obvious meaning of what occurred when Peter stayed with these Gentiles and ate with them. If asked about such verses, long explanations of how Peter would have brought his own food, or that he would have had special food prepared for him, or some other ridiculous notion that is clearly not indicated by Luke’s words, will be proposed.

But the text and its meaning are clear. Peter did not adhere to the customs or dietary restrictions of the Jews. He had been in the trance, he had heard the voice from heaven, it had been presented three times, and then he had seen the Holy Spirit come down upon the Gentiles. He realized what Jesus meant concerning the words He spoke when He walked among them –

“Are you thus without understanding also? Do you not perceive that whatever enters a man from outside cannot defile him, ¹⁹ because it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and is eliminated, thus purifying all foods?” Mark 7:18, 19

Rather than an elaborate explanation of how Peter remained undefiled in his diet, which is obviously not the case, it is more probable that he sat down, had a meal, and while eating asked, “Wow, this is really good! What is it?” The answer may have come back, “Pork chops, do you want more?”

Think about the entire context of what happened from Acts 10:1 until this point. We are free from the constraints that were levied upon the Jews. Why on earth would anyone want to be put back under that yoke, except to prove how holy he was? What an affront to the finished work of Jesus Christ! We find our true righteousness, sanctification, and holiness in Him alone.

Lord God, thank You for what Jesus has done. In Him, there is full and forever purification that could never come through the Law of Moses or from any other supposed demonstration of piety. Religion cannot bring us closer to You. Only Jesus can do that. Thank You for Jesus who has made us acceptable before Your glorious throne. Amen.

Revolutionary War Tribute, Utah Capitol

Wednesday, 19 October 2022

And when Peter came up to Jerusalem, those of the circumcision contended with him, Acts 11:2

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

Previously, it was noted that the apostles and brethren in Judea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God. Exciting news indeed. With that noted, it now says, “And when Peter came up to Jerusalem.” It had previously said that Cornelius had asked Peter to stay a few days (Acts 10:48). It is after this unstated amount of time that Peter now went up to Jerusalem. This is where the apostles stayed and tended to the affairs of the believers.

Upon arriving in Jerusalem, it next says “those of the circumcision contended with him.” The words seem out of place. As the only non-circumcised believers so far mentioned were either in Ethiopia or Caesarea, every other believer is, by default, a circumcised Jew. Therefore, there must be a reason why they are singled out as “the circumcision.”

The reason for the contention is not stated until the next verse, and so it is getting ahead in the analysis to debate exactly what that means, but it is necessary now. There are several possibilities for Luke recording it this way:

• They are those mentioned in Acts 10:45 who went with Peter and saw the conversion of the Gentiles. There, they are called “those of the circumcision.” Peter stayed while they left, returning with the news throughout Judea even to Jerusalem.
• It is referring to any Jew (born as a Jew or converted to Judaism) who had converted to faith in Jesus as the Messiah, and they are simply being noted in a different category than the other Jews.
• They are those Jews who had converted to faith in Jesus but who were adamant about the necessity for continued observance of the law and of the rites of conversion, such as circumcision.
• Luke is now using the term in a new manner, setting a distinction between any circumcised person and any non-circumcised person. This distinction is set to define who is a Jew and who is a Gentile, regardless of how they conduct their life, even if the matter of circumcision in a non-believing Jew needs to be more fully explained later.

In short, and which will be evaluated again in the next verse, they believe Peter defiled himself by going in with those who were uncircumcised. Understanding this, the first option is wrong. Those who went with Peter were privy to the details of his trance, and they were certainly aware of what had transpired afterward. It is not sound to think they would argue against Peter concerning a matter they were also intimately involved in.

The second option is incorrect because it would make an improper distinction between those Jews who believed and those who did not. The issue is physical circumcision, not the spiritual circumcision of the heart referred to elsewhere in Scripture.

The third option is a distinction that seems to be referred to elsewhere, such as in Galatians 2 –

“Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; ¹² for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. ¹³ And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.” Galatians 2:11-13

This is seen in Acts 11:2 as well. Thus, it appears that a distinction is being made by separating Peter and those with him from a group that is adamant about adherence to the law by calling them “the circumcision.” But that is a point of theology based on their status as circumcised Jews, not a separate category altogether. This is certain because Peter is specifically noted as an apostle to those who are circumcised in Galatians 2 –

“But from those who seemed to be something—whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man—for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me. ⁷ But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter ⁸ (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), ⁹ and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. ¹⁰ They desired only that we should remember the poor, the very thing which I also was eager to do.” Galatians 2:6-10

Understanding this, and also understanding that the term can later be applied to the third category, but at this early date before the matter is settled, the answer to who “the circumcision” is that Luke is referring to in Acts 11:2, the fourth option is correct. It is a term that is now being used in order to distinguish between any person who is circumcised according to the cultural standards of Israel, expressly setting them apart from the Gentile world. This is certain because Paul says this in Colossians 4 –

“Aristarchus my fellow prisoner greets you, with Mark the cousin of Barnabas (about whom you received instructions: if he comes to you, welcome him), ¹¹ and Jesus who is called Justus. These are my only fellow workers for the kingdom of God who are of the circumcision; they have proved to be a comfort to me.” Colossians 4:10, 11

Paul makes a distinction between who is circumcised as a Jew and who is not, meaning they are Gentiles, in his epistle. A separate category of who is a “true Jew” is defined by Paul in the book of Romans, but that is a theological argument which is still based on the physical mark of circumcision in relation to the spiritual “circumcision of the heart” that is also required to be in a right standing with God.

Life application: The physical circumcision of the Jewish people sets them apart from the Gentile world. Just because most Jews do not believe in Messiah, and thus they are not currently in a right standing with God, it does not mean that they are not Jews. They are just not completed Jews. They remain separate from God in one manner (failure to enter into the New Covenant), but they remain united to God in another (bound to Him through the Mosaic Covenant).

The lack of faithfulness of the Jewish nation (meaning Israel) to come to Jesus Christ does not negate God’s having covenanted with them through Moses. His words to them will be performed. They will be brought into the New Covenant.

However, until they do come to Him through Jesus, they will continue to suffer the consequences of their agreement to the Mosaic Code. They are bound to it, even if they do not adhere to it. God bound Himself to it as well. Israel’s unfaithfulness in no way negates God’s faithfulness. This is the main error in thinking for most of the church. Both Israel and the church will eventually learn that God’s promises and His election will stand.

Heavenly Father, how faithful You are. When we fail You, it is a mark against us. But You will never fail us. Your faithfulness reaches to the skies and Your love and tender mercies to the objects of Your affection are never-ending. Thank You for Your tender care of Your unfaithful creatures. Amen.

Gettysburg Address, Utah capitol

Tuesday, 18 October 2022

Now the apostles and brethren who were in Judea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God. Acts 11:1

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

The last verse of Chapter 10 ended with the baptism of the new believers and then a note saying, “Then they asked him to stay a few days.” This was referring to Peter. With that, Chapter 11 starts with, “Now the apostles and brethren.”

More appropriately, it reads, “Now the apostles and the brethren.” They are two distinct categories. Of these two groups, it next reads, “who were in Judea.”

The sense of the Greek is “throughout Judea.” Also, the verb is a present participle. Thus, it reads, “Now the apostles and the brothers being in Judea.” In other words, the word spread throughout all of the believers, and Luke is writing it as if it is happening. What must be the case is that the Jews who were with Peter left immediately to tell of what had occurred. As they traveled from Caesarea, they stopped at the houses of believers and shared with them news of what happened. As it next says, they “heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God.”

The clear and obvious meaning is that these were uncircumcised, non-proselyte Gentiles. They had never observed a day of the Mosaic Law in their lives, their stomachs were filled with the morning’s bacon, they had not received any ceremonial purifications, and so on. They were, to the Jews, essentially unclean dogs. The thought of what occurred may have been repugnant to them and yet it occurred. Therefore, it was not – nor could it be considered – repugnant to God. While this message is being conveyed, it is to be remembered that Peter remained in Caesarea, living for a span among these Gentiles.

Also, note how Luke phrased his words. These Gentiles “had also received the word of God.” What does this mean? The books of Moses? No, of course not. Does it mean that they were instructed in the law, the history of Israel, and the prophets? Nothing specific is said of that in Luke’s analysis of what Peter said.

Go back and read Acts 10:34-43. Other than the last sentence which merely confirms that Jesus is the fulfillment of the prophets, the words are about Jesus and His ministry. The implication of the vision given to Cornelius, as well as the trance in which Peter was in, is that Jesus’ ministry is the fulfillment of those prophets, and what He has done is now also offered to the Gentiles. It is a new direction, a New Covenant, and it is based on the word of God which is the testimony of Jesus. As Paul says in Romans 10:17, “So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.”

Life application: What is it that you find out of place in your church? Do you get queasy when someone comes to church after having worked all night at a dirty job and is still wearing his dirty uniform? What about someone who is from a different culture and whose mannerisms are different than everyone else? Maybe someone shows up at church with biker’s clothes on. Maybe he doesn’t (perish the thought!) wear shoes. Maybe he wears sandals and kicks them off while in church. Well, maybe he grew up on the beach and never really left it.

The point is that people are different. As long as the people that come into a church building are respectful of the way the church is normally run, why should you worry about appearances? If someone comes in and is noisy or belligerent in his behavior, that is a different issue. However, if he is a believer, he is in the same state as the Jews before Cornelius’ conversion, and the same as Cornelius and those with him after their conversion. In other words, God has accepted him. As this is so, how can you not do so as well?

Once unbiblical legalism creeps into a church, the church will become arrogant and self-serving. As stated in an earlier commentary, this is not necessarily the same as a cultural standard. If you go to a church filled with people from the Philippines, they will have a way of worshiping that may be different. There is nothing wrong with that. As long as you respect their cultural distinctions and enjoy their fellowship, stick it out and enjoy the Baluts. If not, then go find another church. They have a right to worship the Lord in a manner that satisfies their cultural standards.

Be accepting of those who are different when they come into your midst. At the same time, be respectful of the ways of others when you go into their midst. Seek harmony, not division, within the body of believers.

Lord God, how wonderful it is! The grace You have bestowed on us means that we can rest in what You have done. Works for salvation are excluded. We have the door to heaven opened to us by a simple act of faith. Thank You, O God, for the wonderful thing You have done. Thank You for Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.