Acts (Written)

Inside senate, Utah state capitol.

Tuesday, 27 September 202

and said, ‘Cornelius, your prayer has been heard, and your alms are remembered in the sight of God. Acts 10:31

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 previous verse began Cornelius’ explanation of how it came to be that he had summoned Peter to come and speak to him. He noted the coming of the man in bright clothing. The man stood before Cornelius “and said, ‘Cornelius, your prayer has been heard.’”

In verse 4, at the time of the visitation, it said, “your prayers.” Now, Cornelius says, “your prayer.” No contradiction needs to be assumed here. Rather, Cornelius is most likely focusing his mind on the single most important aspect of his prayers, meaning how to be righteous before God.

Cornelius, as previously noted in earlier commentaries, understood that there was a disconnect between him and God. He understood his sinful nature, he grasped God’s perfection and realized that He could not abide with his sin. He also knew that condemnation was his default position. This can all be deduced from Cornelius’ attitude, habits, and lifestyle. He sought out the truth that could set him free from the burden his soul felt laid upon him.

Because of this heart attitude, and because this was certainly his most consuming thought and his most constant prayer, he notes it in the singular. This prayer was issued again and again, making it one prayer repeated many times. With this surely being the reason for his words, he continues with the words of the messenger, saying, “and your alms.”

It is the same word spoken by the messenger. Cornelius repeats this portion exactly as it was conveyed to him. Together, his prayer and his alms “are remembered in the sight of God.”

In verse 10:4, the messenger said, “have come up for a memorial before God.” Cornelius uses terminology that explains rather than repeats the words of the messenger. His prayers had ascended as a memorial before God. As such, they are remembered in the sight of God. A memorial is something to bring to remembrance. To be “before” someone is to be “in the sight of” that person.

Cornelius has clearly explained the matter to Peter. For those who would say his words are not the words of the angel and are a fabrication, the fact is that those same people would say of an exact repeat of his words, “Luke just copied the words from verse 10:4. This is just a fabrication.” But the words spoken by Cornelius now are reasonable, they fully explain the matter, and they are how any normal person would explain the events they had experienced a few days earlier.

Life application: In Isaiah, there is an excellent connection to the words of Cornelius as spoken to Peter –

“Behold, the Lord’s hand is not shortened,
That it cannot save;
Nor His ear heavy,
That it cannot hear.
² But your iniquities have separated you from your God;
And your sins have hidden His face from you,
So that He will not hear.” Isaiah 59:1, 2

Sin is what keeps our prayers from being heard by God. As all people have sinned, there is a disconnect between us and God that keeps our prayers from being heard. In the case of Cornelius, he had faith that God existed. He also knew that if the infinite gap that stood between us and God was to be bridged, it would have to be from the top down.

This is the prayer that God can hear because it removes us (meaning our attempts at reconciliation) from the equation. This is why Jesus gave this parable to Israel –

“Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. ¹¹ The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other men—extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector. ¹² I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I possess.’ ¹³ And the tax collector, standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me a sinner!’ ¹⁴ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.” Luke 18:10-14

The tax collector removed himself from the equation as far as reconciliation is concerned. He threw himself at the mercy of God and begged His forgiveness. God can deal with such a person. The arrogant Pharisee placed himself before God as if they were equals, expecting God to see his self-righteousness and reward him. God cannot deal with such arrogance.

This explains the worthy or unworthy manner in which one takes the Lord’s Supper as explained in 1 Corinthians 11. The purpose of taking the Lord’s Supper is “to proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes” (vs. 26). It is an acknowledgment that Christ had to die for our sins, and only because we are in Christ are we found acceptable to God. The fact is, that without Jesus, there is nothing in us worthy of salvation or even an explanation from God about anything. But thanks be to God for Jesus Christ who alone makes us worthy. Yes, thanks be to God for our Lord Jesus.

Lord God, praises alone belong to You. Without Your glorious hand of reconciliation and restoration through Jesus, we would be utterly swept away. But because of Him, we have been brought near to You. Thank You. We praise You forever and ever because of Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Utah House of Representatives.

Monday, 26 September 2022

So Cornelius said, “Four days ago I was fasting until this hour; and at the ninth hour I prayed in my house, and behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing, Acts 10:30

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 previous verse noted Peter’s words which questioned Cornelius as to why he had been sent for. With that, it now says, “So Cornelius said, ‘Four days ago I was fasting until this hour.’” Some texts (and thus some translations) say, “Four days ago to this hour, at the ninth hour.” As such, there is nothing noted about him fasting and the explanation of the hours of the day is slightly altered.

Either way, the point is that Cornelius is recounting that it was four days prior to the current day when the events that started the matter began to occur. Regardless of the text used, it literally says, “from the fourth day.” Cornelius is reckoning backward from the day in which he is now speaking.

Whether he fasted or not doesn’t change the overall message. One would think that the note about fasting would more likely be dropped out by accident than inserted without justification, but either way, Cornelius continues, saying, “and at the ninth hour I prayed in my house.”

This would be in accord with his nature which was described in verse 10:2. There it said that he “prayed to God always.” It was during the time while he was in prayer, that he says, “and behold, a man stood before me.”

Verse 4:3 said, “About the ninth hour of the day he saw clearly in a vision an angel of God coming in.” His words to Peter about it being the ninth hour are supported by this. And more, the angel (Greek: messenger) is now described as being a man. This does not mean he is not an angel. The angel Gabriel is described as a man in Daniel 9:21.

As such, it could be an angel, or it could be a man (such as Enoch or Elijah who stand before the Lord to this day). Either way, the text clearly identifies him as a messenger of God. And more, Cornelius says he was “in bright clothing.”

The word here is not the same as that used for Jesus’ garments at the transfiguration. It was used, however, to describe the “gorgeous robe” that was placed upon Jesus in Luke 23:11 during His trial before Herod. The word is lampros. It signifies that which is radiant. It is used by James to describe a person dressed in fine clothes, and it is used five times in Revelation to describe various things (see Revelation 15:6, 18:14, 19:8, 22:1, and 22:16).

Life application: Cornelius’ description of the garments of the messenger from God is the same used of the seven angels who are “clothed in pure bright linen” in Revelation 15:6 and of those who are the bride of the Lamb in Revelation 19:8. There it says that they are arrayed in “fine linen, clean and bright.”

As such, this does not answer if the messenger from God is an angel or a man. Either way, he came to Cornelius with a message that changed his life, and it has been documented to show us how the inclusion of the Gentiles into the church was brought about. It is true that the Ethiopian eunuch has already been included in it, but Peter was not there to validate that. The account now includes Peter to specifically ensure that it is fully agreed upon that Gentiles can be included in the church and that they are not bound by adherence to the law before being accepted by the Spirit.

What is wonderful to consider is that someday the redeemed of the Lord will be clothed in magnificent garments. This signifies the righteousness of Christ that has been imputed to us. When we consider what lies ahead, we must consider that it was all because the Lord first acted to redeem us. May we never forget that we have been brought back to God by God in the giving of His Son for us. Let us remember the great cost that was needed for our reconciliation. May we forever and ever hail the Lamb of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, for what He has done.

Lord God, thank You that You have brought us back to Yourself. May we never assume that it is because of our goodness, but because of Your great love, grace, and mercy that we have been reconciled to You. Thank You. Great things You have done! Hallelujah and amen.

Lots of marble. Capitol of Utah, Salt Lake City.

Sunday, 25 September 2022

“Therefore I came without objection as soon as I was sent for. I ask, then, for what reason have you sent for me?” Acts 10:29

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).

Peter, having gone into the house of Cornelius, said to those inside, “You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation. But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean.” With that, he next says, “Therefore I came without objection.”

Here is a word found only once in Scripture, anantirrétós. It is an adverb meaning without hesitation or promptly, but it carries with it the sense of without opposition or objection. The matter was set forth and Peter immediately agreed to come, based on Cornelius’ request. This was obviously initiated by the trance in which he heard the voice and saw the vision. Based on that, and based on the words of the messengers of verse 10:22, he knew that this was a matter that God had determined to come about. And so, he says, that he came “as soon as I was sent for.”

They left on the next day, obviously meaning that the day was expired enough that a stay at the house of Simon the tanner was necessary before actually departing. On the next day, they left and started the journey to Caesarea. Now that he had arrived, he immediately asks for clarification of the summons with the words, “I ask, then, for what reason have you sent for me?”

Verse 10:22 explained the reason sufficiently for Peter to depart with the messengers. If there was anything else that they knew, it is certain that they talked about it on the way to Caesarea. And so, what Peter is asking for is a more detailed explanation directly from the mouth of Cornelius. This will allow the entire event, from the first moments until the present, to be brought out in front of all of those gathered with him. Whatever God had wanted to occur would be completely expressed in the presence of all, thus providing an entire house filled with witnesses.

Life application: There are times in recorded Christian history, even in recent history, where a multitude of people have gathered together and claimed Spirit-led revelation. In fact, it happens in many churches every Sunday. Visiting one of those churches, it is obvious that what occurs does not match what is prescribed in the Bible. As such, the events cannot be of the Spirit.

One could then say, “Well then, how can you say that what is recorded in the Bible is any different? Where is the proof?” Obviously, there is no proof. However, there is sufficient evidence within Scripture to establish that what is recorded there is reliable. Anyone who truly determines to find out if Scripture is telling the truth will find out that it is. The finest minds of the last two thousand years have studied this book and found it reliable. And more, those who have vehemently tried to oppose it in order to have it proven false have failed to do so.

There will naturally be an element of faith required in accepting the message of the Bible and the reliability of accounts like this particular event recorded in Acts 10, but this is not a blind step of faith into the unknown. Rather, it is a step of faith into God’s revealed light that has been carefully recorded and upheld throughout the millennia.

On the other hand, those gatherings mentioned above that do not match with Scripture cannot be reliably trusted, no matter how many people are involved. Mass psychosis occurs among people all the time. It happens among secular populations, among adherents to various religions and cults around the world, and it happens within uninformed or purposefully manipulated bodies of those gathered under the umbrella of Christianity.

There must be a standard by which those things are based, and that standard must be the basis of the faith. As Jesus is the basis of the faith, and as the word of God is the instrument by which God explains Jesus, then such events must be based upon an accurate analysis of the word of God in order to be true.

A simple example of this is the speaking of tongues. Scripture defines what tongues are, meaning a known language. Scripture says –

“If anyone speaks in a tongue, let there be two or at the most three, each in turn, and let one interpret. ²⁸ But if there is no interpreter, let him keep silent in church, and let him speak to himself and to God.” 1 Corinthians 14:27, 28

If a gathering does not match these parameters where tongues are spoken, then it is not led by the Spirit. That is perfectly simple to determine. Determining whether something is of God or not is to be conducted in this manner.

The modern Pentecostal movement, which was spawned by the Azusa Street revival, was filled with speaking in tongues by the entire audience. As this does not conform to what Paul said as he was led by the Spirit to write Scripture, and as Pentecostal gatherings to this day continue to not match what Scripture says, then it is obvious that this is a false movement based on something other than the Spirit of God.

Be wise, be discerning, and learn your Bible – in context.

Glorious God Almighty, thank You for Your word. By knowing it and applying it to our lives, we can be kept from false teachers and false gatherings of people who claim special powers and gifts. We have a record of how the church was established and of the miracles that took place when it was. What more do we need? We can now live by faith in what You have done. Thank You that Your word is sufficient for our lives, doctrine, and the practice of our faith. Amen.

Senate, Utah Capitol. Salt Lake City Utah.

Saturday, 24 September 2022 

Then he said to them, “You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation. But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean. Acts 10:28

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).

Peter has now fully entered the house of Cornelius and is before all those gathered together. With that context remembered, it next says, “Then he said to them.”

It is Peter who speaks, thus setting the tone for what must be conveyed. A change from the normal way things were within society has taken place that must be explained. This will then set the tone for the rest of what is conveyed. Peter now explains that change, saying, “You know how unlawful it is.”

What he will convey is not actually a point of Mosaic law but rather of Pharisaic law. However, because of their traditions and standards, the thought permeated society to a wide degree. Those who diverged from such implicit laws were considered lowly and contemptible. The unlawful matter that Peter is referring to is “for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation.”

The word translated as “keep company” signifies to join to. Both it and the word translated as “go to” are in the verse where Philip was told to come near and join with the chariot of the Ethiopian eunuch –

“Then the Spirit said to Philip, ‘Go near and overtake this chariot.’” Acts 8:39

Hence, the Spirit had already shown that what Peter is saying is incorrect. It is a misapplication or even a twisting of what God allows. Further, the word translated as “another nation,” allophulos, is found only here in the New Testament. It speaks of one who belongs to another tribe or race, a foreigner. The utterly ridiculous nature of this is seen time and again in Scripture. Innumerable examples can be found where exactly that occurred.

David had men of other nations as his chief men, such as Uriah the Hittite. He also spent time among the Philistines while Saul was king. Solomon entertained the Queen of Sheba, inviting her into his palace and associating with her.

The prohibitions found in the Law of Moses were to separate Israel from the nations of Canaan and their idolatrous and immoral practices. But the very same passages that speak of those things, such as Leviticus 18, actually include the thought of associating with foreign people –

“Do not defile yourselves with any of these things; for by all these the nations are defiled, which I am casting out before you. ²⁵ For the land is defiled; therefore I visit the punishment of its iniquity upon it, and the land vomits out its inhabitants. ²⁶ You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations, either any of your own nation or any stranger who dwells among you ²⁷ (for all these abominations the men of the land have done, who were before you, and thus the land is defiled), ²⁸ lest the land vomit you out also when you defile it, as it vomited out the nations that were before you. ²⁹ For whoever commits any of these abominations, the persons who commit them shall be cut off from among their people.” Leviticus 18:24-29

Further, the pilgrim feasts of Israel clearly invited foreigners to be enjoined to the people of Israel in their times of celebration –

“You shall rejoice before the Lord your God, you and your son and your daughter, your male servant and your female servant, the Levite who is within your gates, the stranger and the fatherless and the widow who are among you, at the place where the Lord your God chooses to make His name abide. ¹² And you shall remember that you were a slave in Egypt, and you shall be careful to observe these statutes.” Deuteronomy 16:11, 12

In those words, the ger, or stranger, means an alien or foreigner. The law Peter is now conveying is one that is not Scriptural but cultural. Despite that, it permeated the thinking of Jewish society. This will be seen in chapter 11 –

“Now the apostles and brethren who were in Judea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God. ² And when Peter came up to Jerusalem, those of the circumcision contended with him, ³ saying, ‘You went in to uncircumcised men and ate with them!’” Acts 11:1-3

One can see that the congregation of believers was astonished at what Peter had done and was clearly upset by his actions. As for Peter and why he has done this, he explains it to those in Cornelius’ house, saying, “But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean.”

The word “me” is emphatic and is given as a complete contrast to the words “You know.” In other words –

You know how unlawful it is … To me, however, God has shown.

This takes the reader back to the trance Peter was in and the words, “What God has cleansed you must not call common.” Peter came to understand that the foods that were deemed acceptable to the nations to eat were not something that defiled those people. God had pronounced to Noah in Genesis 9:3 that every moving thing that lives was acceptable as food.

Israel was given a dietary law that did not void that pronouncement by God to Noah (meaning the people of the world). Rather, the law added restrictions to Israel, but it did not end the freedoms of the people of the world. Hence, the people of the world could not be considered common or unclean by eating those things, even if Israel could. Therefore, it was the law – a law that had been fulfilled and ended by Christ – that made them unclean for Israel.

Therefore, the addition of the laws of the Pharisees twisted what God had said, but it was not something that God ever intended, as is evidenced in His word.

Life application: The Pharisees added to the law of God. This is one of the main things Jesus rebuked them for. And he did it time and again. The same is true with denominations, churches, pastors, preachers, and teachers – and even lay people – to this day. We add our own pet peeves to what we find acceptable or unacceptable when we teach others about supposed Christian morality. This is legalism and it is as harmful as ignoring precepts found in the word.

Churches set their own arbitrary standards of morality. No dancing. No skirts on women above the knees. Men must wear ties in church. No soft drinks. No pork (heaven forbid!). Such teachings are damaging because they stem from man, not from God. We cannot go unscathed when this occurs. Churches will become legalistic and increasingly demanding. Eventually, a standard of conformity exists that demands allegiance to the leader and not to God.

Be careful to evaluate all things. If a church has cultural standards, respect them. In other words, if you go to an Arab church in Nazareth, you want to be sensitive to the cultural mores of the congregation. If you attend a Korean church in Sarasota, Florida, the same is true. Those cultural mores are not the same as church doctrines. If the church sets forth unbiblical doctrines, then head for the door. Be wise in understanding the differences and be respectful to the congregants if their practices are cultural but not unbiblical. Of this thinking, Vincent’s Word Studies says –

“It is interesting, in this connection, to note the ‘Honour all men’ of 1 Peter 2:17. It is obvious that the pride of class, resting on mere differences of culture, and showing itself in acts and words of contempt, is, from one point of view, even less excusable than that which at least imagined that it rested on a religious basis, while from another, it is less inveterate, and therefore more easily curable.”

Lord God, may we never add to Your word that which You have set forth for Your people. If Your word says something is acceptable, then we are not to condemn it. If Your word prohibits something, then we are not to tolerate it. If Your word does not address the issue, then give us the wisdom to determine what is proper based on a right understanding of the rest of Your precious word. To Your glory, we pray. Amen.

Nifty ceiling lamp. Capitol, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Friday, 23 September 2022

And as he talked with him, he went in and found many who had come together. Acts 10:27

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).

Cornelius had just fallen before Peter. That was followed by Peter correcting him for doing that. From there, it now says, “And as he talked with him.”

The contents are left unstated, but it was probably a general greeting accompanied by the normal personal things people say when they first meet. Being a present participle (literally: And talking with him), they engaged in conversation as they proceeded, such as, “We had a really nice trip. On the way, we stopped for the best falafel I’ve ever had. And now we are here to discover what the Lord intends for us to know.” Whatever was said, it continued as “he went in.”

This shows that Cornelius first met Peter outside of the house. Once Peter had raised him up, the conversation began, and they continued to talk even as they were entering. As they did, it notes that Peter “found many who had come together.”

One can think of the verse that says, “But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him” (Hebrews 11:6).

Cornelius diligently sought after God (contrary to the Calvinistic idea about man being unable to seek after Him). When he received his vision, he then wanted to share it with as many of his family and friends as he could. In other words, one can imagine his words to them, “I have told you for years about our need to consider God in all our ways. Now, I have been told that He has a message to share with me from a man in Joppa. That man will arrive today, and I want you to be there to hear his message as well. Please, please come and hear what he has to say!”

This is the situation that now exists as Peter and Cornelius enter the house. Remembering that Peter is a Jew and that this would otherwise be considered culturally inappropriate, he will next inform this gathered audience of the reason he has nevertheless entered.

Life application: Peter has walked into the house of supposedly “unclean” Gentiles. A doctor will enter a room with sick people that others would not dare to enter. A fellow soldier will throw himself on top of a grenade that will surely kill him in order to save his brothers in arms. What exceptional thing are you willing to do to bring life to others? The examples of the doctor and the soldier may involve actions by those who are unbelievers, and yet they will risk their lives for others. This is their calling, and it is their honor to act.

We have a calling placed upon us that is intended to save, but it is not physical life we are considering. Rather, the message we possess – meaning that of the gospel – is the only message that can bring a person who stands already condemned before God (see John 3:18) to one who stands approved before God. And yet, are we too shy to share it? Are we embarrassed to share it? Are we too busy to share it?

What excuses do we need to drop in order to be obedient to the call that we have been given? Let us consider them, let us refine our thoughts, and then let us act by spreading this wonderful message. Cornelius called “many” to hear the message. Peter was willing to go into “many” despite the cultural barrier that would have otherwise prevented him from doing so. Consider this and redirect! Speak out the word of salvation!

Lord God, thank You for those who have been willing to accept danger in order to help save those who needed them in their time of distress. May they be a reminder to us that we can also help by bringing the saving message of Jesus to those who live out their lives in a permanent state of distress. We are all one heartbeat away from where eternity will place us. May we be willing to make a difference in where that eternity will be spent by them. Amen.