Chapter 11
Word gets back to the Jews in Judea that the Gentiles have received the gospel. No doubt they heard about Cornelius, his household, the ministry of Philip in Caesarea to the Gentiles and the many Samaritans that were converting. When Peter gets back to Jerusalem, the Jews "accuse" him of eating with Gentiles. So Peter lays the events out chronologically.
Vss 14-16 should clear up any questions as to what the falling of the Holy Spirit was about:
15 As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning. 16 And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, 'John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.' [Act 11:15-16 ESV]
Baptism of the Spirit is a supernatural event whereby the Spirit of God Himself covers/immerses/empowers us with the gifts God intends us to use in his service. It would seem to me that Baptism of the Spirit has degrees and distinctions that vary by individual, but all receive this Baptism. Whatever it is, it was at that time an external proof of God's salvation to those so affected. At this point, I think Baptism of the Spirit is a separate thing from indwelling by the Holy Spirit, though both may occur simultaneously. We have examples in Acts where they are not simultaneous...don't we???
While Baptism of the Holy Spirit is an external proof of salvation, it is not a prerequisite of salvation without which we should believe still that we are lost. The earnest of salvation is the indwelling Holy Spirit, not the Baptism of the Spirit. I think I could make a case for all this. It wold be a good study.
Peter uses the Baptism exactly this way. He concludes saying that having seen this baptism with his own eyes, any doubts as to the salvation of these Gentiles went away. People can claim to be saved, and we don't really know, but the Baptism of the Spirit and the supernatural abilities that go with it are undeniable. Again, miraculous events bear witness to the work of God.
2025 - Look at vs 16. Peter acknowledges here that water baptism and baptism with the Spirit are distinct and different. Peter says that baptism by the Spirit grants the gifts of God to the person so baptized. Water baptism did nothing like that. It was a symbol when John did it, and it is still a symbol. Baptism in the Spirit, when visible to those nearby, is an evidential argument that the person so affected is truly saved. So...does baptism in the Spirit even happen anymore or was that something that happened to affirm, was it visual evidence, that what was happening was God's own will, a sign on the same order as the miracles of Jesus to confirm that God endorsed what was done? If we look at it this way, we have an argument that baptism of the Holy Spirit and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in all saved people are in fact separate things. What did Grudem say about this???
2023 - "the Holy Spirit fell on them". That is one thing. The "earnest of our salvation" is another thing. I believe the first one can happen even to the lost so that God can carry out His will. God can use the lost. I think of Nebuchadnezzar and the King in Ezra that sent Israel home. Remember the reply of Salmaneser or whoever it was... who told Judah's King to go away because he was already doing God's will? And that King didn't, so he ended up dead.? Well maybe he was already doing God's will. The Spirit also fell ON Saul, but it could still leave him, and did so. An earnest of salvation - which happens only in the NT - cannot be taken back.
Several good lines above. Underlined and bolded the best one, and put a tag below.
2023 - This verse: 15 As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning. [Act 11:15 ESV]. So...were the apostles - the 12 - not saved until the Holy Spirit fell on them? That cannot be right, and the only way to say that it is right is to go full-on dispensational and say that soteriology took a different form in the NT than it ever had in the OT, and those caught in the overlap had to be saved BOTH ways! What a can of worms that opens up!!!
2023 - John's baptism was to be immersed in water. The water stayed on the outside. You got wet, and others saw that you were dripping with water. Baptism of the Holy Spirit's outward sign, at the beginning, was speaking in tongues, healing, all sorts of gifts. We STILL get those, just not often as observably as it was in those days. But all are now INDWELLED by the Holy Spirit. Absolutely all, and that is all that is necessary, and the rest can be entirely invisible forever, and that does NOT mean you aren't saved!
2023 - But then this verse gets thrown in:
17 If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God's way?" [Act 11:17 ESV]. It's good reasoning...but I wish it was better stated. Need to analyze the Greek more closely...and if that fails, I guess what is left is that it is imprecise because Luke is writing a history book not a doctrinal book. AND, consider how the hearers would have understood this statement. Would they have seen it as distinguishing between "in" and "on"???
vs 19 says those who scattered because of Stephen's death preached only to the Jews, though they scattered widely. Some however, from Cyprus and Cyrene, also speak to Greek-speaking non-Jews. The Hellenists. This verse:
21 And the hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number who believed turned to the Lord. [Act 11:21 ESV] Does this verse imply that one can believe, yet not turn to the Lord? (2025 - Of course it does. Even the demons believe, and tremble.) I know Acts is a history, not a doctrinal book, but Luke traveled with Paul so you still have to wonder about verses like this. MSB has no comment on it at all.
2025 - I think the real point of vs 19, what Luke wants Theophilus to catch here is yet another "expansion" of the mission field, and this not at all led by the Apostles. We just saw where Peter's visit with Cornelius had indisputably affirmed that the gospel of repentance was to be preached to the Gentiles. BUT...those who had previously scattered from Jerusalem after Stephen was stoned were long gone before this broader mission was recognized. But as the persecuted continued moving out. SOME OF THEM, not apostles but those scattered from Jerusalem, ALSO BEGAN to preach to the Greeks - that is, to the Gentiles, and God was also behind that effort, leading many to both believe and be saved. Word of this gets to Jerusalem, and they send Barnabas up to see what's happening. Jerusalem had sent no one up there with this new directive to preach to the Gentiles also, it just kind of sprang up there, and those in Jerusalem would have been concerned that it was a false gospel. Barnabas found out otherwise. Barnabas adds his voice to those already preaching the gospel to the Gentiles and "considerable numbers" were brought to the Lord.
Word of this also gets back to Jerusalem and they send Barnabas to Antioch, where this is taking place. Barnabas is glad at what he finds, exhorts them to stay faithful, and then goes on to Tarsus to see Saul. Barnabas brings Saul back to Antioch with him. Together, they teach for over a year. It is here in Antioch that Jesus' followers are first called Christians. 2021 - So Paul had gone to Tarsus several chapters back to escape persecution. He must have just stayed there where he was from, perhaps making tents. We have no record of any evangelism while Paul was "home". But when these Gentiles start to be converted, Barnabas for some reason, fetches Paul back. Paul had shown no interest in Gentile conversions to this point, and seems to have been pretty fed up with the Jews. It was Peter and his vision of unclean food that was the big impetus to evangelize non-Jews. So the word to Antioch did not start with apostles, but by others, and as a result of persecution. But Barnabas goes and gets Saul, and they stay there for over a year.
2023 - Barnabas knew what had happened with Paul and the house of Cornelius, so he had no trouble believing that these Hellenists were indeed saved, and that WITHOUT having to see the confirming sign of the Holy Spirit's gifts. To argue the other side, we must only say that the gifts were immediate and had died down by the time Barnabas got there. But then, what of all the rest that got saved after Paul got there also. Why nothing about confirmation by signs?
Agabus, in Antioch, foretells a famine in Judea. It does not say here that Agabus is a prophet. The famine he foretells is not in his home city or country, but another place. The result of this is that those in Antioch send relief - food? money? - to the church in Jerusalem.
2024 - Did not read this whole article, but it represents itself to be a proof from extra-Biblical sources that a very widespread famine did indeed occur during this time, as recorded by Luke:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/harvard-theological-review/article/abs/universal-famine-under-claudius/C8361B61A9ACCB99ED4312906938955D
I hope to read it later today.