Bible Study series: Acts 10:44-48. This scene continues on the fourth one. Everyone needs their own Pentecost.
Friendly greetings and a warm welcome to this Bible study! I write to learn. Let’s learn together and apply these truths to our lives.
I also translate to learn. The translations are mine, unless otherwise noted. If you would like to see many others, please click on this link:
At the link to the original post, next, I write more commentary and dig a little deeper into the Greek. I also offer a section titled Observations for Discipleship at the end. Check it out!
In this post, links are provided in the commentary section for further study.
Let’s begin.
Scripture: Acts 10:44-48
4 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell on everyone listening to the message. 45 And the circumcised believers who went with Peter were amazed because even upon the Gentiles the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out. 46 For they heard them speaking in Spirit-inspired languages and magnifying God. Then Peter answered, 47 “Surely no one can refuse water to baptize these who have received the Holy Spirit, as we also have!” 48 He ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay for some days. (Acts 10:44-48)
Comments:
This is the Gentile Pentecost in Acts 10:44-48; the Jerusalem / Judean Pentecost was in Acts 2:1-4; the Samaritan Pentecost happened in Acts 8:14-17. Paul’s Personal Pentecost was in Acts 9:17; and Pentecost for John the Baptist’s followers will happen in Acts 19:1-7. The Pentecost that launched the others was in Jerusalem / Judea.
44:
This is a humorous touch by Luke—accurate in the sequence, but humorous nonetheless. Sometimes the Spirit will interrupt the message. But he falls on those who listen. It seems, fortunately, that all of them were listening from the heart and received the Spirit.
So did Spirit-conversion (born again) and Spirit-baptism happen exactly at the same time, or one after another? I used to think the listeners were Spirit converted and Spirit baptized at the same time. Now I think they were sequential—in quick succession, one after another within seconds.
In his speech Peter spoke enough of the basic truths of the life of Jesus that the faith of the listeners awoke (Rom. 10:17), with the help of the Spirit bearing witness. Then the Spirit flooded their spirits and souls, and people spoke in prayer languages. They were converted and then filled with the Spirit with the evidence of prayer languages, Spirit-baptism immediately following Spirit-conversion. But I won’t quarrel about the timing and sequence.
45:
Now we see why it was important to have the six Messianic, believing Jews (“circumcised believers”) to accompany Peter (v. 23b). They will help him testify to the miracle of the outpouring of the Spirit that is taking place to the powerful committee of Messianic Jews headquartered in Jerusalem (Acts 11:1-18). These latter Jews were much more scrupulous and restrictive than the Jews who accompanied Peter. But as we shall see, they too accept the will of God to allow Gentiles to come into the community.
“amazed”: the Greek verb can be translated literally as “they were standing beside themselves” Or “they were beside themselves.” Most translations go with “stunned” or “astonished” or “amazed.”
The Spirit is a gift from God. Never forget it, and never condescend towards it, especially when it is accompanied with Spirit-inspired languages.
46:
“Spirit-inspired languages”: It is the one Greek word glōssa, which means both the physical “tongue” and “language” in Greek and older English, around the time when the King James Version was published in 1611. It is best to translate it as “language,” not “tongue,” which is archaic. And since the Spirit is inspiring the languages (not gibberish), I translate it fully: “Spirit-inspired languages.” I also use “prayer languages” or “spiritual languages” (etc.).
6. Gifts of the Spirit: Prophecy
Questions and Answers about Spirit-Inspired Languages
Are ‘Tongues’ the Sign of Baptism with Spirit in Acts?
These languages do not seem to be ones that other nations would understand at that time, as it happened in Acts 2. Instead, these were supernatural languages as we see in 1 Cor. 14. No one understands them unless someone gives a supernatural interpretation.
What 1 Corinthians 14 Really Teaches
In Acts 11:15 and 15:7-11, Peter will recount the gift of the Spirit, but omit the detail of their receiving heavenly languages. Why the omission? He will focus our attention on Gentile salvation. But Luke’s narrative is “full” of omissions (if it’s possible to be full of gaps!). So how does this relate to the overall very charismatic book of Acts? We should always read verses about the fullness and infilling and power of the Spirit in light of manifested gifts of God, like prayer languages, even when they are not openly stated.
Are ‘Tongues’ the Sign of Baptism with Spirit in Acts?
These five cases are paradigmatic and exemplary because they illustrate that converts to the Jesus Movement or the Way had also to be filled with power and fire and this speaking gift.
However, Paul’s experience proves that Luke does not have to explicitly link the fullness of the Spirit and prayer languages every single time. Paul received the fulness of the Spirit, but his prayer language is not mentioned at that time (Acts 9:17-18). But we know that he used this gift very often (1 Cor. 14:18).
Luke expects us to fill his omissions with the power of the Spirit because the entire sweep or context of his book is charismatic. It is similar to his omitting water baptism in key places. Often he does say that new converts got baptized: Acts 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 35-38; 9:18; 10:48; 16:14-15, 31-33; 18:8; 19:5), Yet in other cases water baptism is not brought up for new converts: Acts 9:42; 11:21; 13:12, 48; 14:1; 17:12, 34. It may be hard to believe, but during Paul’s and Barnabas’s first missionary journey, Luke does not record even one water baptism, even though numerous conversions are recorded. But it is a sure thing that every new convert was water baptized. Luke expects us to fill in these omissions. This is why I have nicknamed him Luke “the Omitter.” Or he could be called Luke “the Condenser.”
47:
“as we have”: So the circumcised disciples accompanying Peter from Joppa had already received the Holy Spirit, and probably so did Simon the tanner and his household—with the evidence of prayer languages. Luke does not have to record these details at every turn. He assumed it because his entire book is super-charged with the Spirit and power and miracles. We need to see these disciples praying in the Spirit (prayer languages) throughout their ministry times, if only quietly and under their breath.
Paul said he thanked God he spoke in prayer languages more than the Corinthians did (1 Cor. 14:18). Surely apostles like Peter and the other eleven apostles and the seven servants and many “regular” disciples also spoke often in their Spirit-inspired languages.
“baptized”: Cornelius and his household had heard the message. Faith and trust were sparked in their hearts. The Spirit baptized them. And then they were water baptized. Conversion first. Water baptism second. Water does not save, but Jesus does. Salvation goes beyond initial justification or initially being declared righteous. It involves one’s whole life. And being water-baptized for the washing away of sins means that water symbolically washes away one’s sins.
48:
People can be baptized in the name of Jesus, but let’s not get involved in doctrinal disputes about “Jesus Only,” as if he is only the latest manifestation of God. No, he is more than a manifestation; he is the second person of the Trinity or Triunity. Baptism should be done in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19). So why didn’t Peter insist on the Trinitarian formula? He was proclaiming the gospel to a mixed audience of Jews and Gentiles. It was important to exalt the name of Jesus. We should do the same when we find ourselves mingling with people who believe deeply in different religions. When Jesus spoke those words in Matt. 28:19, he was in front of his disciples. It was important to reveal the nature of God more fully. And so should we follow his example at the right time and in the right place.
“him”: notice how Luke does not mention “them,” or Peter’s fellow-Jews who accompanied him, but we can be sure that they too were hosted by Cornelius. Once again, Luke’s narrative is elliptical or omits details. We treasure the details that are mentioned.
“name”: see v. 43 for more comments about this noun.
Let’s now look at being baptized in Jesus’s name (only).
Some Pentecostal pastors claim this verse to believe in Jesus alone, and the Father and Spirit are some sort of manifestation of him. So they should be baptized only in Jesus’s name. Error.
Rather, Peter ordered God-fearing Gentile Cornelius and his household to be baptized “in the name of the Lord Jesus.” Peter says nothing about Elohim or YHWH. Cornelius already knew about his God. Instead, Peter had to drive home the point that Jesus was the only and new way of salvation. God introduced his Son as the Messiah a few years earlier, and his Son revealed his Father more fully. Now a relationship with God the Father goes through only his Son.
In comparison, in Acts 2:38, let’s not make too much of Peter’s primitive or first time of preaching. He is simply highlighting Jesus’s vindication in the face of his Jewish persecutors. It’s irony. You put him to death in your ignorance, when you thought you were doing God a favor? Well, God raised him from the dead. Now be baptized in his name!
In Israel at time, baths dotted the landscape, where people washed. No doubt the new converts were baptized there, immediately. They were baptizing extra-devout Jews, many of whom were pilgrims. They already knew about Elohim and YHWH (whom they reverently called the Name). Would Peter have said, “Be baptized in the name of Elohim!”? Or baptized in the Name!”? They already knew that. Instead, Peter preached boldly the name of Jesus, the “new sheriff” in town, the new path of salvation. Other baptisms in the name of the God of Israel, as they understood the term, were inadequate.
Let’s look at other situation of people being baptized in the name of Jesus.
Acts 8:12-16 says that the Samaritans believed Philip’s preaching the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus, and they were baptized simply (or only) “in the name of the Lord Jesus.” The reason for their being baptized in this name only? They too were in the confines of Israel, and they already knew about Elohim or YHWH (or the Name). Philip was emboldened to proclaim the name of Jesus, the new Savior, the new and fuller revelation about God and the way of salvation. They were to be baptized in his name, and not merely the name of Elohim or the Name. Then they were immersed or baptized in the Spirit.
Acts 19:1-5 teaches us that Ephesian disciples had been baptized by John presumably in the name of Elohim or the Name or the God of Judaism. Paul saw this as incomplete. There was a new Savior, the Messiah, and his name is Jesus. These disciples had to be baptized “in name of the Lord Jesus.”
Here are passages in which people were baptized, but not mentioning any name, but they probably were baptized in the name of Jesus.
Ethiopian Eunuch (Acts 8:38)
Saul (Acts 9:18)
Lydia and her household and friends (Acts 16:15)
Philippian jailer and his household (Acts 16:33)
Crispus the synagogue leader, his household, and many Corinthians (Acts 18:8)
So what is the point? We must not make a massive doctrine out of being baptized in the name of Jesus only. These people were not going to be baptized in the name of Elohim or the Name (YHWH). Jesus was the newest, only and fuller Savior. Salvation was through him alone. Those who believe that water baptism must be done in “Jesus only” are shortsighted because they fail to understand the cultural and religious contexts.
I like how Bock concludes this chapter about Cornelius:
The case of Cornelius raises an interesting question, given that he was respectful of God but had not yet responded to Jesus. Luke is aware that there are people who show respect for God, and Luke’s account of them is respectful. This does not mean, however, that Luke ignores that their spiritual state still leaves them in need of salvation. Their pursuit of God by itself does not exempt them or inoculate them from needing the forgiveness Jesus has obtained …. There is a difference between seeking and entering into fellowship with God. God directs Peter to complete Cornelius’s journey back to God. Cornelius’s heart has been well prepared for the gospel. His conversion in many ways stands in contrast to Paul’s. Where Paul went from enemy to believer by a dramatic experience, Cornelius went from an open seeker to a believer through the preached gospel. The contrast reveals the variety of ways in which God can work. (p. 402)
Yes, everyone needs salvation, and God leads them towards it in a variety of ways, but he will judge people who do good works without salvation more leniently and those who do evil severely.
Are There Degrees of Punishment, Rewards after Final Judgment?
GrowApp for Acts 10:44-48
1. God interrupted Peter’s excellent sermon and filled Cornelius and his household with the Spirit. They were born again and Spirit filled at the same time. What is your story about being born again by the Spirit of God?
RELATED
The Historical Reliability of the Book of Acts
Book of Acts and Paul’s Epistles: Match Made in Heaven?
SOURCES
For the bibliography, please click on this link and scroll down to the very bottom:
Dr. Jim's Essential Bible Teaching 