Acts, Jealousy & Honor (part 1)

Now the high priest rose up, and all those with him (that is, the religious party of the Sadducees), and they were filled with jealousy. – Acts 5:17  (NET)

The Book of Acts tells a wonderful story.  The opening chapters, especially, are fast-paced and action-packed, detailing the movement of the Spirit of the Creator God and the way in which the kingdom of that God (as revealed in Jesus) came to be manifested on earth and began to spread, bringing new and renewed creation in its inspirational wake.  In chapter one, the disciples are given a promise by Jesus, they watch Him ascend, they return to Jerusalem, and appoint another man to take the place of Judas. 

Chapter two begins in the same breath, as Pentecost brings with it the reversal of the language confusion of the tower of Babel, with people from many nations able to exclaim “we hear them speaking in our own languages about the great deeds God has done!” (Acts 2:11b)  With an ironic nod to the story of the ill-fated tower and the astonishment and confusion that no doubt took place when the languages were confounded, Luke writes “All were astounded and greatly confused, saying to one another, ‘What does this mean?’” (2:12)  It is upon this occasion that Peter delivers what is looked to as the first “sermon” of the church (post earthly life of Jesus), explaining the coming of the Spirit and the kingdom, saying “let all the house of Israel know beyond a doubt that God has made this Jesus whom you crucified both Lord and Christ” (2:36). 

What was an immediate effect of the announcement of the advent of the kingdom of the Creator God, as it was ensconced within the proclamation of Jesus’ Resurrection?  The author writes: “Reverential awe came over everyone, and many wonders and miraculous signs came about by the apostles.  All who believed were together and held everything in common, and they began selling their property and possessions and distributing the proceeds to everyone, as anyone had need” (2:43-45).  This was a significant mark of the worshipers of Jesus, and this significances leads to a repetition in the fourth chapter, where one can read “The group of those who believed were one of one heart and mind, and no one said that any of his possessions was his own, but everything was held in common.  With great power the apostles were giving testimony to the Resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was on them all” (4:32-33). 

What was the testimony to the Resurrection and the kingdom it portended?  What was the evidence of the great grace?  The next verse provides the answer: “For there was no one needy among them, because those who were owners of land or houses were selling them and bringing the proceeds from the sales and placing them at the apostles’ feet” (4:34-35a).  What was the purpose and result of this testifying, grace-evidencing and manifesting activity?  “The proceeds were distributed to each, as anyone had need” (4:35).  The apostles didn’t simply sit on the proceeds or allow the proceeds to pile up, going un-used.  They were distributed to each, as anyone had need.  It is key to note that the sharing of goods led to needs of the people being met---the needs of the people being met.    

Speaking In Tongues (part 4)

Not only did the church not have to explain a new phenomenon, but they were simply able to employ a term already in use to describe a relatively widespread and known practice, with the term adequately conveying, for the Christians, the same information it would have conveyed on behalf of non-Christians---speaking in tongues while possessed by a god.  Glossolalia did not describe something new that originated with or in the church, but was merely adopted and adapted by Christians, as an accepted religious practice for many that was already full of meaning and richly symbolic.    

It is undeniable that what can be seen in the church today bears a heavy resemblance (identical?) to the occurrences of ecstatic tongues that took place in these ancient cults well before the day of Pentecost, to which is generally looked as the time of the outpouring of the Spirit that has, since then, enabled the ecstatic speech of Christians, though there are marked differences between both Christian, non-Christian, and pre-Christian speaking in tongues from what is recorded in the second chapter Acts. 

In all cases of speaking in tongues, based upon the facts of history, the one performing the action is said to be doing so under the influence of their god.  It cannot be said enough that speaking in tongues is not a uniquely Christian practice by any means.  A large number of studies have revealed the fact that speaking in tongues is present in non-Christian religions all around the world.  It is practiced quite distinct from the church in China, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Indonesia, Siberia, Arabia, and Burma, just to name a few locations.  Glossolalia can be heard among Eskimos, in Japanese séances on the island of Hokkaido, from the shamans of the Zar cult in Ethiopia, in Haitian Voodoo, and quite extensively in African tribal religions.  In each case it functions differently for the group, though it will generally sound the same.      

With an understanding that speaking in tongues was present in Paul’s world and elsewhere before Pentecost, attention can now be turned to one of the most important societal constructs in the world of Paul’s day, which is the construct of honor and shame.  It was the system of honor and shame that governed relationships in the ancient world.  One that was desirous of pursuing honor, while also being able to function at an honor-pursuit level within society (not a child, woman, slave, leper, etc…), would take great pains to perform public actions that would not be damaging to one’s accrued honor, while carefully avoiding activities or associations that would tend to bring shame.  Honor equaled prestige in the ancient world.  Honor was also considered to be a limited good, in that if one gained honor for themselves, it came at the expense of another person’s honor.  More honor for one equated to more shame (or simply less honor) for another, and one could certainly gain honor for self by shaming another person.  Speaking in tongues was certainly a component of this system.  

This system of social interaction and order can be seen to have been at work in the records of the life and ministry of Jesus.  When Jesus is challenged, in addition to these challenges being akin to rabbinic debates, they are also contests of honor and shame.  If His challengers can defeat Him through their questions, thereby asserting their superiority or demonstrating potential flaws in His reasoning or grasp of the law, then they will have shamed Him while gaining honor for themselves.  This shaming could very well have served to stem the tide of His kingdom movement.  However, Jesus, who attracted crowds and prestige, did not seek honor for Himself.  He as presented as one that accrued honor but did not seem to care for the workings of the system.  In fact, He is presented as being only concerned with His Father’s honor.  

Speaking In Tongues (part 1)

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but I do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. – 1 Corinthians 13:1  (NET)             

Whenever the topic of “speaking in tongues” is considered, a common misconception, together with a failure in basic knowledge of the subject, is advanced.  That common misconception is that “speaking in tongues” or “glossolalia” somehow began with Christians at Pentecost.  Whether one is “for” or “against” the idea of speaking in tongues, which is generally considered to be an ecstatic form of speech that is unintelligible to both the speaker and any hearers as it does not bear resemblance to any known languages, it is impossible to engage in a discussion without first considering the fact that records of the practice of speaking in tongues predates Christianity by several hundred years.  Yes, records of its historical practice in a way that is akin to the way in which it is practiced by millions of Christians around the world today, can be found centuries prior to the advent of the church and in complete isolation from the influence of the Creator God’s covenant people. 

The Apostle Paul, in his first letter to the congregation of Corinth, deals extensively with the issue of spiritual gifts, with that of speaking in tongues receiving what appears to be an inordinate amount of focus and attention.  This particular spiritual gifting appears to be of grave concern to the Apostle, and one can only have any hopes for understanding the reasons for Paul’s dealing with the subject in the context of the body of people that stood in representation of the kingdom of God, if one also understand a bit of the history of the action itself, its place in the culture, what it signified to the performer and to an audience, how it was received, how it functioned in a community, and in what the action of speaking in tongues would result. 

So yes, as one gazes through the pages of recorded history, one finds that there have been many occasions where people have spoken in what has been referred to as ecstatic language.  The records indicate that this is no different, in practice and in appearance, than what is to be seen in the contemporary (and historical) Christian practice of speaking in tongues (ecstatic language).  Shortly, this study shall also make clear that the given reasons for the speech have remained unchanged, and that the practice has merely been adapted to the new situation. 

Most of the accounts of ecstatic speech predate Pentecost (though it will be necessary to provide a helpful delineation between what is recounted in the second chapter of Acts and the activity that is being addressed in Paul’s letter to the Corinthian church) and were of decidedly non-Christian origin.  This fact should give pause to Christians that decry, and perhaps quite rightly, the fusion of pagan holidays into Christianity, rejecting the celebration of Easter and its associated traditions or Christmas and its associated traditions because of their questionable origins, while uncritically embracing pre-Christian (pagan) acts such as speaking in tongues that have also been carried over into the church. 

As the simple facts of the matter will eventually serve to demonstrate, Christians cannot say with any degree of confidence, that every occurrence of glossolalia (again, this is not necessarily what is seen in the second chapter of Acts) must be an expression of the will of the Creator God.  Many, of course, subscribe to this view, though it is historically untenable and does not withstand an even moderate degree of scrutiny. 

Raising Lazarus For Glory (part 3)

Before one can return to the issue of Lazarus’ sickness and death and God’s glory, it is necessary to traverse the territory that is laid out before the reader with the exchanges that take place between Martha and Jesus, and Mary and Jesus.  Jesus goes to Bethany, where He encounters the grieving sisters of Lazarus, whom He loved (along with his sisters).  Upon His arrival, Martha greets Him, saying, “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died.  But even now I know that whatever You ask from God, God will grant You” (John 11:21-22). 

There is, it needs to be said, a faith-rooted belief to be found in those statements.  Martha, apparently believing Jesus to be the Messiah, and combining that belief with some type of knowledge that part of the work of Messiah will be to restore all things, along with the general belief in the resurrection of the dead, appeals to her awareness of His powerful, healing and restoring works, in hopes that a restoration to life will be granted to her deceased brother.  Jesus responds to Martha’s faith and messianic understanding by saying, “Your brother will come back to life again” (11:23). 

Martha, who is merely reflecting the general hope of Israel in that day, which was the resurrection of the righteous dead (the Creator God’s covenant people) into their God’s good and restored creation, replies by saying, “I know that he will come back to life again in the resurrection at the last day” (11:24).  Jesus’ response to this is to flatly inform Martha that “I am the resurrection and the life.  The one who believes in Me will live even if he dies, and the one who lives and believes in Me will never die” (11:25-26a).  An interesting statement to be sure. 

Jesus punctuates this statement of response with an inquiry, saying, “Do you believe this?” (11:26b)  With this, Jesus confirms both Martha’s belief in Him as Messiah, as well as the Jewish hope in the resurrection of the Creator God’s covenant people into a renewed created order in which the God of Israel has put down death and corruption (as they were most definitely not looking towards a spiritual, dis-embodied, heavenly existence for all eternity), defeating the evil that had been launched into the world at Adam’s fall, all of which was connected with the coming of messiah at the last day.  Martha’s enthusiastic reply is “Yes, Lord, I believe that You are the Christ (the Messiah), the Son of God (King of Israel) Who comes into the world” (11:27-parentheses supplied).   

This worldview that Martha presents is that upon which the Apostle Peter will seize in what is generally referred to as his Pentecost “sermon” in the second chapter of Acts.  As a member of the nation of Israel, Peter himself had been looking towards their God’s action in history, which would eventually culminate in the resurrection of the righteous dead into the renewed creation.  The righteous dead were the saints---those who were the Creator God’s covenant people, Israel.  In that tremendous piece of oratory, Peter said, with an ultimate reference to what had been wrought in the world via the Resurrection of Jesus, that “this is what was spoken about through the prophet Joel” (Acts 2:16).  Following that, Peter recounts Joel’s prophecy, which, prior to the Christ-event, was generally understood as a presentation of that which would accompany the resurrection of the righteous dead, Israel, in the last days. 

After quoting Joel, Peter would go on to speak of Jesus, saying “God raised Him up, having released Him from the pains of death, because it was not possible for Him to be held in its power” (2:24).  This was what the people of Israel, Peter’s fellow Jews, were expecting to be said of all of their God’s covenant people in the last days.  Peter makes it clear that the expectation of Israel has been fulfilled in Jesus, and that He had gone down into death and had been raised up, experiencing these things as Israel’s representative.  

Do Not Fear (part 1 of 2)

Do not fear, My land!  Rejoice and be glad, because the Lord has accomplished great things! – Joel 2:21  (NET)

A few verses after this, what is perhaps the most famous and well-known statement from the book of Joel can be found.  That statement is “After all of this I will pour out My Spirit on all kinds of people.  Your sons and daughters will prophesy.  Your elderly will have revelatory dreams; your young men will see prophetic visions.  Even on male and female servants I will pour out My Spirit in those days” (2:28-29). 

This is quoted by Peter, as reported in the second chapter of Acts, doing so in his address to the people of Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost.  For Peter, it seems that this vision of Joel that has now been realized, is couched in the necessity of the Resurrection of Jesus.  Based upon what would have been Peter’s worldview concerning the resurrection of the righteous and the end of the covenant people, this pouring out of the Spirit can only have taken and be taking place because the Christ had been resurrected from the grave.  Accompanying that, an entirely new age had begun. 

Along with this, one must remember, as a basic rule of exegesis, that when New Testament writers or speakers make reference to isolated passages from the Hebrew Scriptures, doing so is not an indication that they are merely looking for proof-texts for their opinions.  Rather, it is that they have entire narratives, entire sections of texts, and entire patterns of thought in mind, all couched within a comprehensive worldview that is shaped by an understanding of their God and His covenant with them. 

In many, if not most cases, when passages from the prophets or wisdom literature are quoted, or when a New Testament character or author alludes to a single verse, it is because the Christ-event, in some way and in accordance with the unified Scriptural narrative, has served to make additional or new sense of that passage.  So even though Peter quotes a selection from Joel (2:28-32), it must be presumed that his hearers would have in mind the entirety of the context from which that selection is lifted.  Again, this is a basic rule of exegesis, and all conclusions that can be derived from isolated verses must be weighed against this consideration.       

So looking back to Joel, which is entirely appropriate when hearing Peter make reference to the work, one must take notice that the twenty-eighth verse begins with “After all of this.”  Such a statement begs the question, “After all of what?”  Because what follows is clearly connected with thoughts about what the Creator God is going to do among and through His covenant people, what precedes must speak to the world in which these things will be done. 

For the prophet Joel, the indication it will be as if a new age has dawned.  It is an age in which he grips the promise of God that “I will make up for the years that the arbeh-locust consumed your crops---the yeleq-locust, the hasil-locust, and the gazam-locust---My great army that I sent against you” (2:25).  Here, much like Peter is calling the whole of Joel to mind, Joel calls to mind the Deuteronomic and Levitical curses that would accompany Israel’s failure to live up to the terms of their covenant with their God, which naturally calls to mind the exodus (the seminal and defining event in the history of Israel), which is set against the background of the call of Abraham, which ultimately had to take place because of the fall of Adam (thereby calling to mind the Adam story). 

Yes, because the Bible essentially presents one continuous narrative of creation, fall, cursing, God’s-single-plan-of-salvation-for-the-world, redemption, and restoration (never lose sight of this idea), one is more than justified in thinking about the curse that came upon the ground (the world/creation) because of the fall of Adam (as well as the Torah curses of Deuteronomy and Leviticus) when stories about locusts consuming crops are encountered. 

Parallel Stories

The fourteenth chapter of Acts begins as a continuation of the thirteenth chapter of Acts.  Rather than repeating what would come to be a fairly standard occurrence, Luke writes “The same thing happened in Iconium when Paul and Barnabas went into the Jewish synagogue” (14:1a).  That “same thing,” of necessity and due to the rapid movement of the narrative from one story to the next, must include the idea that “the disciples were filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit” (13:52).  The Holy Spirit was being poured out in Iconium, as Paul “spoke in such a way that a large group of both Jews and Greeks believed” (14:1b).  With more and more people being embraced by the arms of covenant due to their believing, “they stayed there for a considerable time, speaking out courageously for the Lord” (14:3a). 

In association with this speaking out on His behalf, Luke insists that the Lord, “testified to the message of His grace” (14:3b), with that message and grace being the Gospel (Jesus is Lord) and the extension of the covenant implied by that message of God becoming King in and through and as His Christ (Messiah/King), and confirmed by the “granting of miraculous signs and wonders to be performed through their hands” (14:3c).  This is an obvious, conscientious adaptation of the words from Joel that had been on the lips of Peter at Pentecost, as recorded in the second chapter, which was “I will pour out My Spirit in those days and they will prophesy.  And I will perform wonders in the sky above and miraculous signs on the earth below” (2:18b-19a).  To this Peter had added talk of “Jesus the Nazarene, a man clearly attested to you by God with powerful deeds, wonders, and miraculous signs that God performed among you through Him” (2:22b). 

Later on in that same chapter, we find another point of allusion, in that “Reverential awe came over everyone, and many wonders and miraculous signs came about by the apostles” (2:43), not the least of which was “All who believed were together and held everything in common, and they began to sell their property and possessions and distributing the proceeds to everyone, as anyone had need” (2:44-45).  By this, they accomplished what Caesar could not (which is the subject of another study), while proclaiming the Gospel in their very actions, gaining “the good will of all the people” (2:47a), with the result that “the Lord was adding to their number every day those who were being saved” (2:47b).  This took place as more and more came to the confession of Jesus as Lord, thereby joining the covenant people of God based on their allegiance to and belief in that claim. 

What were the miraculous signs and wonders performed by Paul and Barnabas in Iconium?  Though there is no specific, immediate mention, and though even in chapter two Luke passes over this statement without making what we would think of as any immediate, substantiating claims, chapter three contains the record of a man that had been lame from birth being healed, at the command of Peter, in the name of Jesus.  This healing in Jesus’ name, as was the point of other healing stories that would have been a component of the oral (pre-written) Jesus tradition in Paul’s day, made the point that Jesus did indeed rule over all things.  We can imagine the same types of things are in mind when Luke will later write about the performance of signs and wonders in connection with speaking out courageously for the Lord Jesus (as did Peter and John).

Though they met with opposition, with this opposition eventually forcing the need to flee from Iconium to other cities, Paul was never dissuaded from his message, as Luke records that he “continued to proclaim the good news” (14:7).  Let us never fail to equate “good news” with “Gospel.”  Concurrently, let us never fail to equate “Gospel” with “announcements about the ruler of the world.”  We shall not fail in this because neither the audiences of Luke or Paul or any of the earliest believers in Jesus would have failed in this.

Not only do we imagine that Luke intends to draw out the similarities between the preaching of the Gospel at Pentecost and Paul’s preaching of the Gospel in other cities, which serves as an indication that Pentecost (the pouring out of the Holy Spirit so as to create belief in Jesus as the means by which God would place people in right standing with Him---make righteous, justify, save, etc…), in a way, was an event that was repeated whenever and wherever the Gospel was being preached, but the report of miraculous signs and wonders in chapter fourteen (though the setting has changed from Iconium to Lystra) is followed by an event that almost precisely parallels the mention of signs and wonders in chapter and two and the event that opens chapter three.  As we hear about “a man… lame from birth” (14:8) that is healed at the command of Paul, we consider the idea that the preaching of the Gospel message (the good news) has the same impact and effect in Gentile cities, and on and for Gentiles, as it did in Jerusalem, and on and for Jews. 

In an almost comical twist, the healing in chapter fourteen results in “the priest of the temple of Zeus” bringing “bulls and garlands to the city gates,” as “he and the crowds wanted to offer sacrifices to them” (14:13).  When a lame man is healed in chapter three, at the Temple in Jerusalem, “the priests and the commander of the Temple guard and the Sadducees came up to them, angry because they were teaching in Jesus the Resurrection of the dead.  So they seized them and put them in jail until the next day” (4:1b-3a).  Divergent responses indeed.  This, of course, followed the people “being filled with astonishment and amazement at what had happened” (3:10b), as the people were “completely astounded” and “ran together to” (3:11) Peter and John.  In the parallel story in Lystra, it just so happened that “when the crowds saw what Paul had done, they should in the Lycaonian language, ‘The gods have come down to us in human form!’” (14:11b)  Following the healing (though before the arrival of the priests from the Temple), Peter and John took the opportunity to preach Jesus, in whom “The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our forefathers” (3:13a), had taken human form.  Paul, after the arrival of the priest from the temple, took the opportunity to proclaim the power of the same Creator God, who was the ultimate subject of the good news that he had been preaching.  Peter and John had to argue for their lives, were threatened, and eventually released.  Paul, preaching the same Jesus and the same God, with the same, subversive subtext, “scarcely persuaded the crowds not to offer sacrifice” (14:18b) to he and Barnabas.       

Cornelius & The Mission Of God (part 4 of 4)

Peter relates Cornelius’ words to him, which were that “he had seen an angel standing in his house and saying, ‘Send to Joppa and summon Simon, who is called Peter, who will speak a message to you by which you and your entire household will be saved.’” (11:13-14)  Peter emphasizes that it would be the message that would bring salvation---a message that would bring these Gentiles into covenant and so begin the process of transformation (the working out of their salvation, if you will), rooted in belief (like Abraham) in the Gospel that generates an unswerving loyalty to the faithful God revealed in Jesus, that will conform these believers into the image of God in Christ and so cause them to more accurately bear the divine image as truly human beings, reflecting the glory of God into the world and articulating the praises of all creation back to God.  Inherently then, it is belief in this message that grafts these Gentiles into the tree of God’s covenant people (to borrow some terminology from Paul, as he reflects on what God has done and is doing in and for the world via His kingdom people).  The belief that Jesus is Lord generates salvation.  The adoption of covenant markers (works of the law) as that which brings salvation, continues the process of salvation, or indicates salvation, here goes un-contemplated. 

Peter will go on to build on the fact that it is the message, with its content and the power of that content, that generates salvation (justification, right-standing, covenant inclusion).  Being reminded of that, we get to hear Peter say “as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as He did on us at the beginning” (11:15).  Though it is not reiterated, we know from the story of chapter ten that these Gentiles were said to have spoken in tongues and praised God, with this following his reminding them of cross and Resurrection of Jesus.  The actions, said to be indicative of the pouring out of the Holy Spirit, are the indication of belief in Jesus as Lord, with all of this occurring independent of the exercise, application, adherence to, or mention of any of the works of the  law.  When Peter tells the story in Jerusalem, he does not make mention of this occurrence, instead forcing the recollection of what happened to them at “the beginning,” at Pentecost, when they too enjoyed this experience.  

God indeed shows no partiality (Acts 10:34).  The Holy Spirit is poured out on all who believe the Gospel, adopting people into Abraham’s family (God’s household) without discrimination.  He continues to make his case and to contemplate what all of this means, adding “I remembered the word of the Lord, as He used to say, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit’” (11:16), as the stories of Israel’s defining water-crossings resonate and come to be shared by these newly adopted sons and daughters through the instrumentality of the Holy Spirit and its work to produce a believing trust in the message of the Gospel (which is the evidence of the activity of the Spirit).  Continuing, Peter says “Therefore if God gave them the same gift as He also gave us after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ,” with that gift being the inclusion in God’s kingdom project that was begun in the Resurrection and is carried on through the announcement and conscientious enactment of the Gospel, “who was I to hinder God?” (11:17)  The question is informative and enlightening, while also being a damning verdict on those that wanted to maintain certain boundaries and covenantal delineations.  With these words on the lips of Peter, we are not left to wonder why Paul would eventually accuse Peter of hypocrisy. 

With Peter having voiced his position and his question, a collective verdict is rendered.  We read that “When they heard this, they ceased their objections and praised God, saying, ‘So then, God has granted the repentance that leads to life even to the Gentiles.’” (11:18)  With this statement, as we realize the covenant and story-of-Israel language that it conveys, this group of early church elders realized that Gentiles, without restriction and without the need to adhere to the traditional covenant markers (as evidenced by the fact of their belief in Jesus, their speaking in tongues, and their praising of God that made them equal to themselves as those that had experienced Pentecost, which also aligned them with the story of Abraham and belief that preceded circumcision or any other requirement), now share in the story and covenant and inheritance of Israel, standing with them in exile and joining with them in the experience of exodus that was the life of the resurrection of the body.     

Cornelius & The Mission Of God (part 3 of 4)

With his own witness to the pouring out of the Spirit, the speaking in tongues, and the praising of God, which would be an explicit reminder of Pentecost, Peter says “No one can withhold the water for these people to be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?” (10:47)  Peter uses the inclusive language of “we.”  We could here note that Paul uses such language on a regular basis.  We are also reminded of chapter two’s informing us that “those who accepted his message were baptized, and that day about three thousand people were added” (2:41). 

Along with that, as we hear the telling of this story and the words of Peter in the context of the story of Israel, it is impossible to disconnect the concept of baptism from the crossing of the Red Sea and the crossing of the Jordan River (both on dry land).  These are pivotal events within Israel’s story, and they are told as tales of God’s faithfulness to His people.  Also, the baptism in chapter two would have been exclusively Jews, in Jerusalem, during a great Sabbath, whereas that of chapter ten was a baptism of Gentiles.  Thus, because both Jews and Gentiles experience baptism, both stand before God in a state of equality. 

Baptism, when connected to Jesus as Messiah of Israel, allows those that undergo the experience to participate in that tale of God’s faithfulness, symbolically crossing from a state of exile to a state of exodus.  Because the baptism that stems from a belief in Jesus is also rooted in the understanding that the Resurrection of Jesus brought an end to the old age and ushered in the new age, baptism becomes the picture of the believer’s deliverance from the exile of the old age/creation, into the new age/creation.  We could comfortably presume, based on his writing, that such thoughts found a home in the mind of Paul as well.    

This series of events caused no little consternation amongst the circumcised believers in Jerusalem (11:2).  Those that took issue with what Peter had done, accused him of going to uncircumcised men and sharing a meal with them (11:3).  These are the same issues at work, against which Paul stridently speaks, in Galatians two, though the setting was Antioch rather than Jerusalem.  This is nothing short of a clear disavowal of the covenant markers of Judaism, as Peter has, by confirming the presence of the Holy Spirit in the uncircumcised and by violating food laws (though Sabbath is not in view), has transgressed and effectively repudiates the marks that had previously been the means by which one was identified as a covenant member in good standing.  Though they can certainly be practiced, they are of no particular use or value, when set against the new covenant marker of belief in Jesus as the crucified and resurrected Messiah of Israel and Lord of all (the Gospel).  Again, all this is stressed, though it seems to not necessarily have any bearing on Romans, because Paul will be more than aware of all of these things, and would most likely heavily rely on Peter’s experience and telling of the experience in formulating his positions about Gentile inclusion under the covenant and their participation in the promises of Israel’s God.         

Peter takes up the challenge that is presented to him, which is also a challenge to the legitimacy of the Gospel message and to the commission given to him and the rest of the disciples by Jesus.  As if to emphasize that this subject is quite crucial to the church of the Christ, Luke has Peter retelling the whole of the story of his encounter with Cornelius (so we get to read the story twice, back to back---by contrast, we read the story of Paul’s “conversion” three times in Acts, all of which are offered separately).  Indeed, “Peter began and explained it to them point by point” (11:4).  He talks about the men that came to him, saying “The Spirit told me to accompany them without hesitation” (11:12a).  He also points out that six of the brothers that were with him, presumably all Jewish believers in Jesus, went with him and also entered the house of the Gentile Cornelius (11:12b).