Acts 10:5

Acts 10:5. Send men to Joppa. The exact mention of the place is very emphatic: and it recurs again both in the account given by Cornelius to Peter (Acts 10:32), and in the apologetic statement made by Peter before the apostles and elders (Acts 11:13). We should notice, too, with what definite force Joppa is incidentally named in Acts 10:8; Acts 10:23, and Acts 11:5. This is all part of the explicit assertion of the facts of the story as literally true. For the connection with the preceding part of the history, see note on Acts 10:1.

Simon, who is surnamed Peter. It is very observable that this exact phrase in its completeness is found four times in this narrative (see Acts 10:18; Acts 10:32, and Acts 11:13). The messengers use it when they came from Cæsarea to Joppa and speak to Peter himself: Cornelius adduces it in his account of the reasons which led him to send to Joppa; and Peter brings it forward again, when he justifies his own conduct before the apostles and elders at Jerusalem. We are, of course, reminded of the Lord's own emphatic naming of Simon by a new name (John 1:42; Matthew 16:18). This reiteration in the Acts of the Apostles is an expressive link between that book and the history contained in the Gospels; and it points our thoughts to the fulfilment or part of the fulfilment of our Lord's prophecy regarding Peter. But we can see another reason for this reiteration and precision. The exact designation of the man who was to bring the Gospel to Cornelius is an essential part of the transaction. The Divine direction is perceptible in every act and every word recorded. Reuss states this matter very well, when he says: ‘Cen'est pas seulement un avis qui l'adresse à l'apôtre, mais surtout une instruction donnée à l'apôtre lui-même, pour que celui-ci comprenne et accepte la mission spéciale qu'il reçoit.' As to the supernatural character of the communication he adds: ‘Il n'en fallait pas moins pour engager Pierre dans cette voie nouvelle.....Une révélation subsidiaire était indispensable pour le convaincre qu'un païen pouvait recevoir le baptême, chose qu'il ignorait encore et que ses collègues ont de la peine à croire' (Acts 11:1, etc.) (Histoire Apostolique, p. 122).

The exact designation of Peter should be carefully noted, also, from another point of view. Cornelius was to be brought to the knowledge of Christ by the instrumentality of a man, not directly by the angel who appeared to him. This is in harmony with God's usual method of working in spiritual things. Moreover, he is to be brought to this knowledge by an apostle. This was not a commonplace instance of conversion. Philip the Evangelist was very probably then at Cæsarea (Acts 8:40, see Acts 21:8); but this would not suffice. Reuss remarks that the baptism of Cornelius by an apostle would be likely to make a stir and noise throughout Palestine. The apostle, too, was to be Peter, one of the most Judaic Dean Alford has a good note here on the imminent risk of party, which was thus averted. See also Dean Vaughan's Church of the First Days. All parts of the Divine scheme are seen to hang closely together at this crisis. De Pressensé points out how important it was that the most active and influential apostle should be gained. The occurrences in Samaria (Acts 8:14-17) had by no means yet removed all his prejudices.