4/3/24
Bruce, F.F. (1988). "Peter's Action Endorsed at Jerusalem (11:1-18)." In The Book of Acts (Revised). (pp. 219-223). William B. Eerdmans Publishing,
Peter's actions in Acts 10 were not typical of any established Jewish customs. When he left Caesarea and returned to Jerusalem it is not surprising to Bruce that there would be questions (Bruce 1988, p. 219). His entering into a Gentile household and eating with them was a significant breach of protocol. Bruce briefly mentions the persecution of James, an arrest of Peter, and the fact that a non-apostle emerges as the leader of the church in Jerusalem, rather than one of the apostles (Bruce 1988, p. 220).
Acts 10:2-3 describes people "of the circumcision," whom he takes to be particularly zealous Jewish believers, though earlier, in 10:45, the term is used for those who accompanied Peter to the home of Cornelius, simply distinguishing them from Gentiles (Bruce 1988, p. 220). The use of the same term in Galatians 2:12 suggests the former, rather than the latter description. Bruce observes that Acts 10 makes no mention of eating, but that it was implied by the actions. He notes that the eating where the food would not fit Levitical standards was the reason for the prohibition against entering a Gentile home.
Peter describes the events from chapter ten in 11:4-17. Bruce notes that the account is similar in construction to the event in chapter ten, but it has been abridged and there is some variety in the language used (Bruce 1988, p. 221). The emphasis is on God's salvation for Cornelius' whole household, only by the grace of God. This grace is announced by Peter (Bruce 1988, p. 222). The gift of the Holy Spirit descended on the people, at which point Peter saw it was appropriate to baptize them.
Acts 11:18 portrays Peter's questioners making the same conclusion Peter had reached. Repentance and God's blessing had come to the Gentiles just as to the Jews (Bruce 1988, p. 223). This was news which inspired praise to God. Bruce speculates that the news may have been more readily accepted by the apostles than by the church as a whole, thus explaining the leadership role taken on later by James the Just, rather than by one of the apostles (Bruce 1988, p. 223).