Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 11:4
But Peter rehearsed [the matter] from the beginning, and expounded [it] by order unto them, saying,
4. But Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order unto them ] Better, “But Peter began and rehearsed the matter in order unto them.”
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
But Peter rehearsed – Greek: Peter beginning, explained it to them in order; that is, he began with the vision which he saw, and gave a narrative of the various events in order, as they actually occurred. A simple and unvarnished statement of facts is usually the best way of disarming prejudice and silencing opposition. Opposition most commonly arises from prejudice, or from false and exaggerated statements, and such opposition can be best removed, not by angry contention, but by an unvarnished relation of facts. In most cases prejudice will thus be disarmed, and opposition will die away, as was the case in regard to the admission of the Gentiles to the church.
And expounded it – Explained it; stated it as it actually occurred.
In order – One event after another, as they happened. He thus showed that his own mind had been as much biased as theirs, and stated in what manner his prejudices had been removed. It often happens that those who become most zealous and devoted in any new measures for the advancement of religion were as much opposed to them at first as others. They are led from one circumstance to another, until their prejudices die away, and the providence and Spirit of God indicate clearly their duty.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 4. But Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order] . This is the very style of St. Luke; see his Gospel, Lu 1:3. To remove their prejudice, and to give them the fullest reasons for his conduct, he thought it best to give them a simple relation of the whole affair; which he does, as we have seen in the preceding chapter, with a few additional circumstances here. See the notes before.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
This great apostle condescends to the least and weakest amongst them, and gives an account of what he had done and the reasons that moved him unto it, if by any means he might gain some, and confirm others.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
But Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning,…. Of the vision at Joppa;
and expounded it by order unto them; or related every particular, in a very methodical and orderly manner: he did not insist upon his authority as an apostle, and much less pretended to a primacy to the rest of the apostles; but submitted to have his case heard, examined, and judged of by the body of the brethren.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Began (). Not pleonastic here, but graphically showing how Peter began at the beginning and gave the full story of God’s dealings with him in Joppa and Caesarea.
Expounded (). Imperfect middle of , to set forth, old verb, but in the N.T. only in Acts (Acts 7:21; Acts 11:4; Acts 18:26; Acts 28:23), a deliberate and detailed narrative “in order” (). Old word for in succession. In the N.T. only in Luke 1:2; Luke 8:1; Acts 3:24; Acts 11:14; Acts 18:23. Luke evidently considered this defence of Peter important and he preserves the marks of authenticity. It came originally from Peter himself (verses Acts 11:5; Acts 11:6; Acts 11:15; Acts 11:16). “The case of Cornelius was a test case of primary importance” (Page), “the first great difficulty of the early Church.” Part of the story Luke gives three times (Acts 10:3-6; Acts 10:30-32; Acts 11:13). See the discussion chapter 10 for details given here.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Began. Graphically indicating the solemn purport of the speech (compare Luk 12:1), perhaps, in connection with expounded, his beginning with the first circumstances and going through the whole list of incidents.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “But Peter rehearsed the matter,” (de Petros eksetitheto) “Then Peter proceeded to explain the matter,” to review or set forth in order what had occurred between him and Cornelius and their encounters with the Lord and each other and near associates of each, as related, Act 10:1-48.
2) “From the beginning,” (arksamenos) “In order from the beginning,” from the time the angel of the Lord appeared to him and from the time the Lord appeared to Cornelius, each in separate visions or trances, with revelations of His will for them, Joh 7:17; Eph 5:17.
3) “And expounded it,” (eksetitheto) “And expounded it or explained,” how it came to be, set forth in an orderly step by step, accurate, and logical manner, with fervor of conviction, Jas 1:22; 1Co 15:58.
4) “By order unto them, saying,” (autois kathekses legon) “Even in a coherent, chronological, orderly step by step manner, saying,” testifying of his experience first in Joppa, while in fasting and prayer, Act 10:9-10. The best way to clear up fault-finding and misunderstanding is by giving accurate, clear, understandable information.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(4) But Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning.Better, perhaps, the word rehearse having grown into a different shade of meaning, began and set forth the matter. The translators seem to have paraphrased the participle having begun somewhat more fully than its actual meaning admits. The almost verbal repetition of the same narrative as that of Acts 10 seems, at first sight, inconsistent with our common standard of skill in composition. The probable explanation of it is that St. Luke obtained the first narrative from the disciples whom he met at Csarea, and the second from those of Jerusalem, and that the close agreement of the two seemed to him, as indeed it was, a confirmation of the truth of each.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
4. Rehearsed Peter at once sweeps them clear by unfolding the wonderful facts, the angel, the trance, the command of the Spirit and the pentecostal outpouring. Luke, aware of the momentous nature of these transactions, again gives them in Peter’s words.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘But Peter began, and expounded the matter to them in order, saying, “I was in the city of Joppa praying, and in a trance I saw a vision, a certain container descending, as it were a great sheet let down from heaven by four corners, and it came even to me, on which when I had fixed my eyes, I considered, and saw the fourfooted beasts of the earth and wild beasts and creeping things and birds of the heaven.” ’
Peter replied by describing what had happened to him ‘in order’, just as it had happened. The detail is repeated because of its importance. Note how each point that he makes emphasises that it was through God’s initiation. He wants them to know that it was not he who had made these choices. Nor was it Cornelius. It was God Who had insisted on each step that was taken.
He points out that God had first spoken to him through a trance. He pictured to them the great sheet coming from heaven with its content of a variety of four-footed beasts, wild beasts, birds and creeping things. Each one present would probably shudder at the thought of such a mass of unclean things together. Here was something definitely needing to be avoided at all costs. Here was indeed an example of the uncleanness that they were concerned about.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The rehearsal of Peter:
v. 4. But Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order unto them, saying,
v. 5. I was in the city of Joppa praying; and in a trance I saw a vision, a certain vessel descend as it had been a great sheet, let down from heaven by four corners; and it came even to me;
v. 6. upon the which when I had fastened mine eyes, I considered, and saw four-footed beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
v. 7. And I heard a voice saying unto me, Arise, Peter, slay and eat.
v. 8. But I said, Not so, Lord; for nothing common or unclean hath at any time entered into my mouth.
v. 9. But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.
v. 10. And this was done three times; and all were drawn up again in to heaven.
v. 11. And, behold, immediately there were three men already come unto the house where I was, sent from Caesarea unto me.
v. 12. And the Spirit bade me go with them, nothing doubting. Moreover, these six brethren accompanied me, and we entered in to the man’s house;
v. 13. and he showed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter,
v. 14. who shall tell thee words whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.
v. 15. And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them as on us at the beginning. Instead of launching forth in cleverly worded arguments to defend his action, Peter believes it best to let the facts speak for themselves, for which reason he gives them in the form of a simple recital, presenting them to the critics in order, just as they occurred, and as they have been narrated in Chapter 10. Peter first told them about the peculiar vision which he had had in Joppa, when he had been in a state of ecstasy, when the container in the form of a large sheet, tied together at the four corners, was lowered out of heaven. He emphasizes that he looked very closely, and that there was no question of an illusion. He had surely seen in the container various quadrupeds and animals and reptiles of the earth and birds of heaven. He had plainly heard the voice telling him to arise, to slaughter, and to eat. He had objected very emphatically on the ground of his always having strictly observed the injunction governing unclean foods. But the voice had sounded the second time, bidding him not to regard as common what God Himself had cleansed. Three times the same thing had happened before the container had been drawn up into heaven again. And, behold, at that very moment three men had stood below, having been sent from Caesarea to fetch him, and the Holy Ghost had told him to accompany them without doubt or hesitation. They had then gone with him, and also brethren from Joppa, whose number Peter here states to have been six; these six, having returned with him to Jerusalem, could substantiate his words. They had entered into the house of the man who had sent the messengers, who had given them an account of his having seen an angel standing in his house and speaking to him. The command of this angel he had followed in sending to Joppa and fetching Simon with the surname Peter, who would speak words to him whereby he would be saved and his house. These last words, not found in the other accounts, anticipate a summary of Peter’s discourse in showing to the assembly the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies and of New Testament preaching in Christ, the Savior of all men. Peter finally tells of the effect which his words had had upon his hearers. Before he had finished his discourse and brought out all that he might have said on that topic, which is inexhaustible, the Holy Ghost had fallen on the Gentiles in the same manner as He had been imparted to themselves in the beginning. The argument of Peter therefore was, that after seeing the vision, hearing the voice, and receiving the order of the Spirit to go with the men, he could not have done otherwise than obey and enter into the house of the Gentile at Caesarea. And the fact that the Holy Ghost had been poured out on these Gentiles was a further proof for the Lord’s acceptance of the Gentiles.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Act 11:4. But Peter rehearsed the matter, &c. But Peter beginning, opened to them the matter in order. As it is probable that they were only some of the Jewish converts who questioned St. Peter about what he had done, he might, no doubt, have overborne them by urging his apostolical authority, and referring them tothe miracles by which it was established: but as he could with no great propriety blame them, because he himself, till of late, had been as bigoted to the Jewish nation as any of them, he treats them in the most gentle and condescending manner, laying before them the reason of his conduct, and appealing to their judgments, whether, in such circumstances,hehad not acted according to the divine direction; herein giving a most amiable example of humility and condescension, which it would be the glory and happiness of Christ’s ministers to follow in circumstances which bear any resemblance to this.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
4 But Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order unto them, saying,
Ver. 4. But Peter rehearsed ] With singular modesty he seeks to satisfy them (if reason will do it), and to quench their wild fire by casting milk upon it. Zuinglius and Oecolampadius endeavoured to do the like by Luther and his disciples, but could never effect it. In the year 1533, he wrote a very bitter epistle to the Senate of Frankfort, Qua Zuinglianos Archi-diabolos appellat, e suggestu repellendos, ditione eieciendos, wherein he calleth the Zuinglians arch-devils; and judgeth that they ought to be kept out of the pulpit, driven out of the country. a In the year 1567, at Antwerp the Lutherans joined themselves to the Papists against the Calvinists. b Still Satan is thus busy, and Christians are thus malicious, that, as if they wanted enemies, they fly in one another’s faces; yea, cut one another’s throats: as the English and Scots do at this day, to the inconceivable grief of all the godly on both sides. Deus meliora.
a
b Bucholcer, Chronol.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
4 .] ‘Having begun, set forth to them:’ i.e. began and set forth : not for . as Kuinoel.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Act 11:4 . . . “But Peter began, and expounded the matter”: . may be pleonastic, Act 1:4 , cf. , or may be used graphically, or because the reproaches of . gave the first incentive to St. Peter’s recital. . only in Luke, Gospel and Acts, see Act 3:24 . , Act 18:26 , Act 28:23 , Jos., Ant. , i., 12, 2, so also in Polyb., x., 9, 3. Perhaps used here by St. Luke from its use by Dioscorides; familiar word to him also as a physician, see Vogel, p. 17. Evidently St. Luke by the two accounts attaches great significance to this first reception, exceptional case as it was, of a Gentile proselyte like Cornelius into the Christian Church, but it was an isolated case, and moreover a case within Palestine, not beyond its borders, so that the great questions of a mission to the Gentiles of the heathen world, and of the conditions for their reception as Christians, were not matter for consideration as afterwards in chap. 15, see Wendt, edition 1899, p. 211; Hort, Ecclesia , pp. 58, 59; and see below on Act 11:12 .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
rehearsed . . . from the beginning, and = having begun.
expounded = set forth. Greek. ektithemi. See note on Act 7:21.
by order = in order. Greek. kathexes. See note on Act 3:24.
unto = to.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
4.] Having begun, set forth to them: i.e. began and set forth: not for . as Kuinoel.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Act 11:4. , beginning) He began to speak in many words.-, expounded) Peter was not offended at his being questioned, nor did he demand, that he, even without any exposition of his reasons, should be held as superior to all (any) objections being made on the part of his colleagues and all believers. It is not the indication of the best mind or the best cause, along with the Pope or his attendants (hangers-on), to be offended at the question, What art thou doing? Peter answers with mildness, as to a subject which he himself before had not very readily comprehended.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Act 14:27, Jos 22:21-31, Pro 15:1, Luk 1:3
Reciprocal: Act 21:19 – he declared
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1
Act 11:4-11. See the notes on chapter 10:9-18.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Act 11:4. Rehearsed the matter from the beginning. This was his most judicious course. A simple and careful statement of the facts from the outset was more likely to be persuasive than anything else. He did not argue. The mere telling of the story was a proof of the Divine teaching in this case, which was far beyond any argument. Another thought, too, forces itself here upon the mind. The course which St. Peter followed was utterly different from that which he would have adopted if the privileges of infallibility and supremacy belonged to him. If ever there was a case which belonged essentially to the sphere of faith and morals, it was the case of Cornelius.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Observe here, 1. How far St. Peter was from pretending a superiority over the rest of the apostles; he did by no means think himself so far above them, as to disdain to render an account of his actions to them, but with great sincerity and humility, rehearsed and related the whole matter of fact, to their entire and joint satisfaction.
Observe, 2. How he acquaints the apostles with the vision he had seen, in which he was commanded to make no distinction of clean or unclean: because there was not natural turpitude in any kind of meat, save only as it was prohibited by God; and that God, who having made the law about difference of meats, had now abrogated it, and made all meats clean, and free to be eaten.
Observe, 3. How he gives them the interpretation of this vision, and acquaints them with the end for which this vision was designed; namely, not so much to reveal to him the lawfulness of eating all sorts of meats, as to acquaint him with his liberty and duty to converse with and preach the gospel to the Gentiles; whom he was no longer to look upon as unclean, though they were not circumcised; but as “heirs and fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God.”
Observe lastly, The conclusion which St. Peter drew from these premises: “Seeing God hath made the Gentiles equal in grace with the believing Jews; seeing the Holy Ghost coame down upon them in the same manner, and with the same effects as he did upon us apostles, I could not reasonably deny them baptism, and by baptism admission into the gospel-church; for having the grace signified by baptism, they ought to have baptism, the seal of that grace; they that have the inward, are not to be denied the outward baptism; and they that were baptized with the Holy Ghost (as Cornelius and his family were) might and ought to be baptized with water, as Cornelius was: for had I denied them church-communion for want of the ceremony of circumcision, it had certainly been a downright resistance of, and disobedience against God.”
Thence learn, that it is a downright opposition to the will of God, to shut them out of the church, and to debar them from the communion of it, who have received the sanctifying graces of God’s Holy Spirit; but differ from us in external rites and ceremonies only.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Act 11:4-15. But Peter rehearsed , laid open; the matter from the beginning Of the vision which he had seen, which was evidently designed to dispose him to such condescension, and gave them a full detail of all the particulars, with the exactest truth and simplicity. So far was he from taking it ill to be questioned, or desiring to be treated as infallible. And he answers the more mildly, because it related to a point which he had not readily believed himself. See these verses explained in the notes on Act 10:11-33; Act 10:44.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
4-17. (4) “But Peter related the matter to them in order from the beginning, saying, (5) I was in the city of Joppa, praying, and saw, in a trance, a vision, a certain vessel like a great sheet descending, let down from heaven by the four corners, and it came to me. (6) Having looked intently into it, I perceived and saw four-footed animals, and wild beasts, and reptiles of the earth, and birds of the air. (7) And I heard a voice, saying to me, Arise, Peter; kill and eat. (8) But I said, Not so, Lord; for nothing common or unclean has at any time entered into my mouth. (9) But the voice from heaven answered me, What God has cleansed, do not you make common. (10) This was done three times, and all was drawn up into heaven again. (11) And behold, three men immediately came to the house in which I was, sent to me from Csarea, (12) and the Spirit told me to go with them, doubting nothing. But these six brethren also went with me, and we entered into the man’s house. (13) Then he told us that he had seen an angel in his house, standing and saying to him, Send to Joppa, and call for Simon who is surnamed Peter, (14) who will speak words to you by which you and all your house will be saved. (15) And while I was beginning to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them as upon us in the beginning. (16) Then I remembered the word of the Lord, that he said, John immersed in water, but you shall be immersed in the Holy Spirit. (17) Since, then, God gave to them the same gift as to us who already believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I, that I should be able to withstand God?” The events here rehearsed by Peter had removed his own prejudice, and now, through the words which he addressed to the brethren, the same vision of unclean animals, with the command to kill and eat; the same command of the Spirit to go with the Gentile messengers; the authority of the angel who had ordered him to be sent for; and, finally, the same immersion of those Gentiles in the Holy Spirit, are all pressing upon their minds and hearts, with precisely the same import that they did upon his.
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Peter’s defense of his conduct 11:4-17
Luke recorded Peter’s retelling of these events to his critics to impress the significance of this incident on his readers further. Peter stressed particularly God’s initiative (vv. Act 11:8-9; Act 11:12; Act 11:15-17 a) and his own inability to withstand God (Act 11:17 b).
Cornelius and his household were not saved from God’s wrath until they heard and believed the gospel of Jesus Christ that Peter proclaimed to them (Act 11:14; cf. Act 10:43).
Peter was speaking of the day of Pentecost when he referred to "the beginning" of the church (Act 11:15; cf. Act 2:4). Clearly the baptism of the Holy Spirit is what he referred to (Act 11:16). Peter justified his actions in Caesarea by appealing to what God had done (Act 11:17 a). Note that Peter identified believing in the Lord Jesus Christ as the only necessary prerequisite to receiving the baptism of the Holy Spirit (Act 11:17 a). Spirit baptism was not an experience subsequent to salvation for Cornelius and his household but something that happened simultaneously with salvation.
"Peter’s defense did not rest on what he himself did, but on what God did. God had made no distinction between Jew and Gentile, so how could Peter?" [Note: Toussaint, "Acts," p. 382.]