Apostelgeschichte 11:2 Kommentar

In this chapter we have, I. Peter's necessary vindication of what he did in receiving Cornelius and his friends into the church, from the censure he lay under for it among the brethren, and their acquiescence in it (v. 1-18). II. The good success of the gospel at Antioch, and the parts adjacent (Act 11:19-21). III. The carrying on of the good work that was begun at Antioch, by the ministry of Barnabas first, and afterwards of Paul in conjunction with him, and the lasting name of Christian first given to the disciples there (Act 11:22-26). IV. A prediction of an approaching famine, and the contribution that was made among the Gentile converts for the relief of the poor saints in Judea, upon that occasion (Act 11:27-30).

And the apostles and brethren that were in Judea,.... The rest of the twelve apostles, and the private members of the churches that were in Judea, for there were in it now more churches than that at Jerusalem, Act 9:31 heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God; as well as Samaria, Act 8:14 the news by some means or other were quickly brought to them, and no doubt but they also heard that they had received the Holy Ghost, his extraordinary gifts, as well as his special grace, though no mention is made of them.

And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem,.... From Caesarea, after he had stayed some certain days in Cornelius's house; so a journey from Caesarea to Jerusalem is called an ascending from the one to the other, Act 25:1 because Jerusalem stood on higher ground, as well as was the metropolis of the country; and this was a journey of six hundred furlongs, or seventy five miles, for so far, according to Josephus (t), was Caesarea distant from Jerusalem: they that were of the circumcision, which phrase designs not only the circumcised Jews that believed in Christ, for such were all they of the church at Jerusalem, or at least proselytes that had been circumcised, for as yet there were no uncircumcised Gentiles among them; but those of them, who were most strenuous for circumcision, and made it not only a bar of church communion, but even of civil conversation: these contended with him; litigated the point, disputed the matter with him, complained against him, and quarrelled with him. Epiphanius says (u), that Cerinthus, that arch-heretic, was at the head of this contention. (t) De Bello Jud. l. 1. c. 3. sect. 5. (u) Contr. Haeres. l. 1. Haeres. 28.

"And the Apostles and brethren that were in Judea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God. And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him, saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them." After such great things, "they of the circumcision contended:" not the Apostles; God forbid. It means, they took no small offence. And see what they allege. They do not say, Why didst thou preach? but, Why didst thou eat with them? But Peter, not stopping to notice this frigid objection - for frigid indeed it is - takes his stand on that great argument, If they had the Spirit Itself given them, how could one refuse to give them the baptism?

Do you remark how they were not kindly disposed towards him? Saying, "Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them." Do you note what zeal they had for the Law? Not Peter's authority abashed them, not the signs which had taken place, not the success achieved, what a thing it was, the Gentiles having "received the word:" but they contended about those petty things. For if none of those signs had taken place, was not the success itself enough?

"And when he was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him." When Peter was come up to Jerusalem, faithful Jews contended with him as to why he had gone in to men uncircumcised and had eaten with them. But he related truthfully by what vision he had been warned and what injunction he had received from the Divinity. Having heard that, all the people gave thanks to God because the Lord Christ had granted life-giving repentance and the gifts of the Holy Ghost to the Gentiles too.

Peter showed in his defense that he had by no means been the cause, but God everywhere. For he said, he himself set me in the excess of mind, he himself pointed out the sheet, and I indeed even contradicted; again the same he himself said, and I did not hear therefore. The Spirit commanded that I should join them, and having joined I did not even run on therefore. They said that God had sent, and I did not so baptize, but again God accomplished the whole matter. God baptized, not I. For while I was yet speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon those men, and they spoke in tongues. They glorified God loudly, as do we. [CHRYSOSTOM]

You see what zeal they had concerning the law. They were not ashamed before Peter's dignity, nor the miracles that had taken place, nor that wonderful preparation that had been made for the reception of the word, but began to dispute about such trifles. Those of the circumcision disputed, not the apostles. And they do not say "why did you preach?" but "why did you eat?"

Peter returns to Jerusalem, and is accused of having associated with the Gentiles, Rom 8:1-3. He defends himself by relating at large the whole business concerning Cornelius, Rom 8:4-17. His defense is accepted, and the whole Church glorifies God for having granted unto the Gentiles repentance unto life, Rom 8:18. An account of the proceedings of those who were scattered abroad by the persecution that was raised about Stephen; and how they had spread the Gospel among the circumcision, in Phoenice, Cyprus, and Antioch, Rom 8:19-21. The Church at Jerusalem, hearing of this, sends Barnabas to confirm them in the faith, Rom 8:22, Rom 8:23. His character, Rom 8:24. He goes to Tarsus to seek Saul, whom he brings to Antioch, where the disciples are first called Christians, Rom 8:25, Rom 8:26. Certain prophets foretell the dearth which afterwards took place in the reign of the Emperor Claudias, Rom 8:27, Rom 8:28. The disciples send relief to their poor brethren to Judea, by the hands of Barnabas and Saul, Rom 8:29, Rom 8:30.

Contended with him - A manifest proof this that the primitive Church at Jerusalem (and no Church can ever deserve this name but the Jerusalem Church) had no conception of St. Peter's supremacy, or of his being prince of the apostles. He is now called to account for his conduct, which they judged to be reprehensible; and which they would not have attempted to do had they believed him to be Christ's vicar upon earth, and the infallible Head of the Church. But this absurd dream is every where refuted in the New Testament.

PETER VINDICATES HIMSELF BEFORE THE CHURCH IN JERUSALEM FOR HIS PROCEDURE TOWARDS THE GENTILES. (Acts 11:1-18) the apostles and brethren . . . in Judea--rather, "throughout Judea."

they . . . of the circumcision--not the Jewish Christians generally, for here there were no other, but such as, from their jealousy for "the middle wall of partition" which circumcision raised between Jew and Gentile, were afterwards known as "they of the circumcision." They doubtless embraced apostles as well as others.