Sermon Tone Analysis

*A CONTEXTUAL LOOK AT PETER AND CORNELIUS*

* *

*ACTS 9:36-10:48*

* *

*9:36-38.*

While *Peter was *at *Lydda, *a well-beloved Christian woman (a disciple) in *Joppa *by the name of *Dorcas . . .

died.

*Her name means “gazelle” in Greek as does its counterpart *Tabitha *in Aramaic.

She was known for her help to *the poor.

*Because the cities of *Lydda *and *Joppa *are only about 12 miles apart *two men *were *sent *from Joppa to call Peter.

(For a brief statement on Joppa’s history see Beers, /The Victor Handbook of Bible Knowledge, /p.

559.)

No one had been raised from the dead in the early church so far as the records of Acts declare, but the faith of the believers was so great they expected the Lord to use Peter to resurrect Dorcas.

*9:39-41.*

When *Peter *arrived, he *sent *the weeping *widows *and other believers out of the *upstairs . . .

room, *prayed *on his knees *for Dorcas, and commanded her to arise (cf.

Mark 5:41).

To avoid ceremonial defilement (cf.

Lev.

21:1; Num.

5:2; 9:6-10; 19:11), *Peter *did not touch her until after God restored her to life.

*9:42-43.*

*This *miracle, like previous ones, led *many *to believe *in the Lord* (2:43, 47; 4:4; 5:12, 14; 8:6; 9:33-35).

After this miracle *Peter *remained *in Joppa for some time *(lit., “sufficient days”) *with a tanner named Simon.

*His house was “by the sea” (10:6).

This passage (9:32-43) shows the excellent preparation given Peter for his ensuing experience with Cornelius.

(1) Two outstanding miracles confirmed his ministry; God was with him in a special way.

(2) He was ministering in an area that was partially Gentile.

(3) His living in the home of Simon the tanner was significant.

Tanners were considered to be ceremonially unclean because they were constantly in contact with the skins of dead animals (Lev.

11:40).

/c./     /Peter and Cornelius (chap.

10)./

The importance of this event is seen in the fact that Luke recounts it three times—here in Acts 10, again in chapter 11, and finally in 15:6-9.

The geographic extension of the gospel in Acts is an initial fulfillment of Jesus’ words in Matthew 8:11: “Many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places . . . in the kingdom of heaven.”

(1) The vision of Cornelius (10:1-8).

10:1.

By separate visions both Peter and *Cornelius *were prepared for this momentous happening.

Cornelius and his vision are described first.

Cornelius was *a centurion, *a Roman officer in charge of 100 soldiers, in *the Italian Regiment, *consisting of 600 soldiers.

In the New Testament centurions are consistently viewed in a favorable light (cf.

Matt.

8:5-10; 27:54; Mark 15:44-45; Acts 22:25-26; 23:17-18; 27:6, 43).

Centurion Cornelius became one of the first Gentiles after Pentecost to hear the good news of Jesus Christ’s forgiveness.

*10:2.*

From the description of Cornelius as *devout *(eusebēs, used only here and in v. 7; 2 Peter 2:9) *and God-fearing *(“righteous and God-fearing,” Acts 10:22), it can be inferred he was not a full-fledged proselyte to Judaism (he had not been circumcised, 11:3), but he did worship Yahweh.

Evidently he attended the synagogue and to the best of his knowledge and ability followed the Old Testament Scriptures.

Nevertheless, he had not entered into New Testament salvation (cf.

11:14).

*10:3-6.*

The time reference, *3 in the afternoon, *may refer to a Jewish time of prayer (cf.

3:1).

If so, the Lord approached Cornelius by means of *an angel *while he was at prayer (cf.

10:9).

Later Cornelius called this angel “a man in shining clothes” (v.

30).

*Cornelius *responded to *the angel *by asking, *What is it, Lord? *Perhaps “Lord” (/kyrie/) here means “Sir” (cf.

comments on 9:5).

This soldier’s piety was evidenced by his *prayers *and his generous giving *to the poor *(cf.

10:2).

The angel instructed him to send for *Simon . . .

Peter *at the home of *Simon the tanner *(cf.

9:43).

*10:7.*

*When the angel who spoke to him had gone, *the centurion *called *three of his men—two *servants *and a military aide, also *a devout man *(eusebē; cf.

v. 2).

Undoubtedly these three had been influenced by Cornelius’ devotion.

*10:8.*

*He told them everything that had happened.

*Related to the Greek participle used here (exēgēsamenos) is the English noun “exegesis.”

The verb means he “explained” everything.

The three went off *to Joppa, *some 33 miles south of Caesarea (v.

24), to bring Peter back to Cornelius.

(2) The vision of Peter (10:9-16).

10:9.

That *Peter *prayed morning and evening may be assumed, for those were normal times of prayer.

In addition he prayed at *noon.

*Prayer three times a day was not commanded in the Scriptures, but Peter followed the example of pious men before him (cf.

Ps. 55:17; Dan.

6:10).

Peter *went up *to *the *(flat) *roof to pray; *this would have given him privacy.

*10:10-12.*

While *hungry, *Peter *fell into a trance *in which God gave him a vision of a *sheet *coming *down to earth *with *all kinds of . . .

animals . . .

reptiles . . .

and birds.*

*10:13-14.*

When God commanded *Peter *to *eat *of these animals, his response was, *Surely not, Lord! *Significantly his refusal (“surely not”) was mēdamōs, a more polite and subjective term than oudamōs (“by no means,” used only in Matt.

2:6).

This was the third time in Peter’s career that he directly refused God’s will (cf.

Matt.

16:23; John 13:8).

*Peter *knew from the Law that he should not eat *unclean *animals (Lev.

11).

But could he not have killed and *eaten *the clean animals and left the unclean?

Probably Peter understood the command to include them all.

Or possibly the large sheet contained only unclean animals.

*10:15.*

*Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.

*This rebuttal gives Mark 7:14-23 more meaning (cf. 1 Tim.

4:4).

It is generally recognized that Mark wrote down Peter’s words.

In retrospect Peter must have recognized that Jesus as the Messiah cleansed all goods from ceremonial defilement.

*10:16.*

Why did Peter refuse *three times *to eat the unclean foods?

For one thing, this indicated emphasis.

But more than that it revealed certainty and truth.

Here was one place where Peter was being scrupulous beyond the will of God.

His intentions were good, but he was being disobedient.

Also, was there some link here with Peter’s threefold denial (John 18:17, 25-27) and with his three affirmations of his love for the Lord?

(John 21:15-17)

(3) The visit of the messengers (10:17-23a).

10:17-22.

In marvelous timing and by the coordination of the sovereign God the three messengers and *Peter *met.

*The *Holy *Spirit, *who told Peter about the arrival of the *three men, *may have been the One whose unidentified voice Peter heard earlier (vv.

13, 15).

*The men . . .

from Cornelius *spoke highly of him (cf.

vv. 2, 4) and conveyed to *Peter *their purpose in coming.

*10:23a.*

*Then Peter invited the men into the house to be his guests.

*Since Peter had been waiting for his noon meal (cf.

v. 10), he undoubtedly now shared it with his visitors.

Perhaps he was already beginning to discern the lesson of his vision!

(4) The visitation of Gentiles (10:23b-43).

10:23*b.

*By the time *Peter *and his guests finished lunch it must have been too late to start back to Caesarea that day.

*The next day *they began the almost-two-day trip.

(Cornelius’ emissaries had left Caesarea after 3 p.m. one day [vv.

3, 8] and arrived at noon two days later [vv.