Act 10:34-35 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 34. Then Peter opened his mouth . Began to speak, . Of a truth . Truly; evidently. That is, I have evidence here that God is no respecter of persons. Is no respecter of persons . The word used here denotes the act of showing favour to one on account of rank, family, wealth, or partiality, arising from any cause. It is explained in . A judge is a respecter of persons when he favours one of the parties on account of private friendship; or because he is a man of rank, influence, or power; or because he belongs to the same political party, etc. The Jews supposed that they were peculiarly favoured by God, and that salvation was not extended to other nations, and that the fact of being a Jew entitled them to this favour. Peter here says that he has learned the error of this doctrine. That a man is not to be accepted because he is a Jew , nor is he to be excluded because he is a Gentile . The barrier is broken down, the offer is made to all, and God will save all on the same principle--not by external privileges, or rank, but according to their character. The same doctrine is elsewhere explicitly stated in the New Testament, . It may be observed here, that this does not refer to the doctrine of Divine sovereignty or election. It simply affirms that God will not save a man because he is a Jew; nor because he is rich, or learned, or of elevated rank; nor by any external privileges. Nor will he exclude any man because he is destitute of these privileges. But this does not affirm that he will not make a difference in their character , and then treat them according to their character; nor that he will not pardon whom he pleases, which is a different question. The interpretation of this passage should be limited strictly to the case in hand--to mean that God will not accept and save a man on account of external national rank and privileges. That by receiving some, and leaving others, on other grounds , he will not make a difference , is not anywhere denied. Comp. . It is worthy of remark, further, that the most strenuous advocate for the doctrines of sovereignty and election in the New Testament--the apostle Paul--is also the one that laboured most to establish the doctrine that God was no respecter of persons; that is, that there was no difference between the Jews and Gentiles in regard to the way of salvation; that God would not save a man because he was a Jew, nor destroy a man because he was a Gentile. Yet, in regard to the whole race viewed as lying on a level , he maintained that God had a right to exercise the prerogatives of a sovereign, and to have mercy on whom he would have mercy. The doctrine may be thus stated: (1.) The barrier, between the Jews and Gentiles was broken down. (2.) All men thus were placed on a level--none to be saved by external privileges, none to be lost by the want of them. (3.) All were guilty, and none had a claim on God. (4.) If any were saved, it would be by God's showing mercy on such of this common mass as he chose. ; compared with . (k) "God is no respector of persons"

Acts 10:34-35

Verse 34. Then Peter opened his mouth. Began to speak, Mt 5:2.

Of a truth. Truly; evidently. That is, I have evidence here that God is no respecter of persons.

Is no respecter of persons. The word used here denotes the act of showing favour to one on account of rank, family, wealth, or partiality, arising from any cause. It is explained in Jas 2:1-4. A judge is a respecter of persons when he favours one of the parties on account of private friendship; or because he is a man of rank, influence, or power; or because he belongs to the same political party, etc. The Jews supposed that they were peculiarly favoured by God, and that salvation was not extended to other nations, and that the fact of being a Jew entitled them to this favour. Peter here says that he has learned the error of this doctrine. That a man is not to be accepted because he is a Jew, nor is he to be excluded because he is a Gentile. The barrier is broken down, the offer is made to all, and God will save all on the same principle--not by external privileges, or rank, but according to their character. The same doctrine is elsewhere explicitly stated in the New Testament, Rom 2:11, Eph 6:9, Col 3:25. It may be observed here, that this does not refer to the doctrine of Divine sovereignty or election. It simply affirms that God will not save a man because he is a Jew; nor because he is rich, or learned, or of elevated rank; nor by any external privileges. Nor will he exclude any man because he is destitute of these privileges. But this does not affirm that he will not make a difference in their character, and then treat them according to their character; nor that he will not pardon whom he pleases, which is a different question. The interpretation of this passage should be limited strictly to the case in hand--to mean that God will not accept and save a man on account of external national rank and privileges. That by receiving some, and leaving others, on other grounds, he will not make a difference, is not anywhere denied. Comp. 1Cor 4:7, Rom 12:6. It is worthy of remark, further, that the most strenuous advocate for the doctrines of sovereignty and election in the New Testament--the apostle Paul--is also the one that laboured most to establish the doctrine that God was no respecter of persons; that is, that there was no difference between the Jews and Gentiles in regard to the way of salvation; that God would not save a man because he was a Jew, nor destroy a man because he was a Gentile. Yet, in regard to the whole race viewed as lying on a level, he maintained that God had a right to exercise the prerogatives of a sovereign, and to have mercy on whom he would have mercy. The doctrine may be thus stated:

(1.) The barrier, between the Jews and Gentiles was broken down.

(2.) All men thus were placed on a level--none to be saved by external privileges, none to be lost by the want of them.

(3.) All were guilty, Rom 1, 2, 3 and none had a claim on God.

(4.) If any were saved, it would be by God's showing mercy on such of this common mass as he chose. Rom 3:22, 10:12, 2:11, Gal 2:6; compared with Rom 9, Eph 1.

(k) "God is no respector of persons" De 10:17, 2Chr 19:7, Job 34:19 Rom 2:11, Gal 2:6, 1Pet 1:17 Verse 35. But in every nation, etc. This is given as a reason for what Peter had just said, that God was no respecter of persons. The sense is, that he now perceived that the favours of God were not confined to the Jew, but might be extended to all others on the same principle. The remarkable circumstances here, the vision to him, and to Cornelius, and the declaration that the alms of Cornelius were accepted, now convinced Peter that the favours of God were no longer to be confined to the Jewish people, but might be extended to all. This was what the vision was designed to teach; and to communicate this to the apostles was an important step in their work of spreading the gospel.

In every nation. Among all people; Jews or Gentiles. Acceptance with God does not depend on the fact of being descended from Abraham, or of possessing external privileges, but on the state of the heart.

He that feareth him. This is put for piety towards God in general. Acts 9:31. It means, that he that honours God and keeps his law--that is a true worshipper of God, according to the light and privileges which he has--is approved by him, as giving evidence that he is his friend.

And worketh righteousness. Does that which is right and just. This refers to his conduct towards man. He that discharges conscientiously his duty to his fellow-men, and evinces by his conduct that he is a righteous man. These two things comprehend the whole of religion, the sum of all the requirements of God--piety towards God, and justice towards an men; and as Cornelius had showed these, he showed that, though a Gentile, he was actuated by true piety. We may observe here,

(1.) that it is not said that Cornelius was accepted on account of his good works. Those works were simply an evidence of true piety in the heart; a proof that he feared and loved God, and not a meritorious ground of acceptance.

(2.) He improved the light which he had.

(3.) He embraced the Saviour when he was offered to him. This circumstance makes an essential difference between the case of Cornelius, and those who depend on their morality in Christian lands. They do not embrace the Lord Jesus, and they are, therefore, totally unlike the Roman centurion. His example should not be pleaded, therefore, by those who neglect the Saviour, for it furnishes no evidence that they will be accepted, when they are totally unlike him.

(a) "in every nation" Rom 2:13,27, 3:22,29, 10:12,13, Eph 2:13-18 (*) "with" "by"