Verses 1-3
Criticism of Peter’s conduct 11:1-3
News of what had happened in Cornelius’ house spread quickly throughout Judea. "The brethren" (Acts 11:1) and "those who were circumcised" (Acts 11:2) refer to Jewish Christians, not unsaved Jews. Peter’s response to their criticism of him makes this clear (e.g., Acts 11:15). They objected to his having had contact with uncircumcised Gentiles, particularly eating with them (Acts 11:3). Apparently Peter ate with his host while he was with him for several days (Acts 10:48), though Luke did not record this. The same taboo that had bothered Peter was bothering his Jewish brethren (cf. Acts 10:28). They undoubtedly would have felt concern over the non-Christian Jews’ reaction to themselves. Peter’s actions in Caesarea could only bring more persecution on the Jewish Christians from the unsaved Jews (cf. Acts 7:54 to Acts 8:3).
"It is possible to hear a subtile echo of Jesus’ critics in Acts 11:3. Jesus was also accused of eating with or lodging with the wrong kind of people. . . . Now Peter must face the kind of criticism that Jesus faced, arising this time from the circle of Jesus’ disciples." [Note: Tannehill, 2:137.]
"It is plain that Peter was not regarded as any kind of pope or overlord." [Note: Robertson, 3:152.]
Be the first to react on this!