This post follows from the article on the Ethiopian eunuch, so if you haven’t read that one, you might want to go back and read it first.
Introduction – Why Cornelius’s Conversion Matters for Inclusion
Cornelius’s conversion, the giving of the Holy Spirit to Gentiles, and Peter’s confronting of the change to dietary laws are fundamental moments for the developing identity of the early Church.
This story is the last time Peter is a significant figure in the account of the early Church given in Acts or by the rest of the New Testament. It is the last part of what’s called the Petrine narrative, which begins in Acts 9 with the healing of Aeneas and raising Tabitha from the dead and ends here in Acts 11 with the centre of focus for the church moving from Jerusalem to Antioch.
Peter is seen twice more in Acts: in Acts 12, when he is miraculously freed from prison, and in Acts 15, at the council of Jerusalem (the next blog post is about this).
The story of Cornelius is part of the beginning of the church and is foundational to how we should understand it today. The ending of the dietary laws, the end of the difference between Gentiles and Jews, and the emphasis on the Holy Spirit as the evidence for belonging to the church all point towards something special.
There are two key points which define the uniqueness of the church in its early moments:
* The church is formed and defined by radical inclusion.
* Holiness no longer means separation but unification.
When we grasp these two points, our understanding and knowledge of the church today will expand to exciting new dimensions.
Understanding The Law: Holiness As Separation
Holiness is traditionally understood to mean separation. The primary Old Testament word for holiness means to cut or to separate. Holiness and the adjective holy occur more than 900 times in the Bible.
Neil Gilman writes: This separated quality is probably the basic meaning of the Hebrew word kadosh. Much like the English word “distinguished,” which can mean both separate and special, kadosh begins by meaning separate and ends by meaning special or sacred, holy, elevated.
There is a transition from the word’s literal meaning to the figurative meaning. What meant cut off becomes something sacred.
Does being holy mean being set apart?
There is frequently the sense that we should regard this world or its things as evil or corrupted. God is separate from the world. God is holy in God’s difference. Therefore, when we are called to be holy, we are called to be set apart from the world for the sake of God.
Israel was to be a light on a hill, which is also what Jesus told his disciples they needed to be like. Something which is seen but is out of reach, something which illuminates and inspires but which is beyond.
Michael Horton writes: We no longer live in a world in which God is conceived as being transcendent and holy. When people think about God today, they rarely conceive of him as “the Holy One of Israel,” but are more likely to think of him as a kind of buddy or friend. Though we are sometimes inspired in our worship to say “Wow!,” we are seldom induced to cry “Woe!
The problem is that this kind of thinking, positioning God as a faraway and very different thing, led to the heresies and false beliefs of Gnosticism and Deism. It was more influenced by Platonism and the supposed superiority of spirit to flesh than by looking at how we know God in Jesus.
It is significant for our discussion that the section in Leviticus from chapters 17 to 25 is known as the holiness code. This section includes a long list of ritual and personal behaviours that are or are not acceptable, and that set the Israelite people apart from other nations.
Ritual purity and the holiness codes
The Leviticus holiness codes include dietary laws, what kind of clothes to wear, how to prepare objects for worship in the Temple, how to harvest crops, and how to treat refugees, amongst other things.
Ritual and moral behaviour are combined to establish how a person should be holy. The practices of holiness create a distinctive way of life for the Israelites that separates them from the surrounding nations.
Adin Steinsaltz writes: The root meaning of the concept of the holy in the holy language is separation: it implies the apartness and remoteness of something. The holy is that which is out of bounds, untouchable, and altogether beyond grasp: it cannot be understood or even defined, being so totally unlike anything else. To be holy is, in essence, to be distinctly other.
To be holy is to be set apart. As an individual, this meant morally and ritually separated from things which would pollute or corrupt them, which included Gentile culture. As a community, it meant non-conformity to the cultural practices of Gentile people.
Ultimately, holiness and separation are brought together to make holiness into purity—purity of people and purity of practice. Impure things would make a person impure, and they would then have to perform certain ritual acts to make themselves pure again. It was better not to be exposed to impurity in the first place. It was better to stay separate and, therefore, stay holy.
Peter Learns to Eat – Acts 10: 1-23
However, in the story of Peter we see God seemingly doing away with some of those purity codes.
In Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion of the Italian Cohort, as it was called. 2 He was a devout man who feared God with all his household; he gave alms generously to the people and prayed constantly to God. 3 One afternoon at about three o’clock he had a vision in which he clearly saw an angel of God coming in and saying to him, ‘Cornelius.’ 4 He stared at him in terror and said, ‘What is it, Lord?’ He answered, ‘Your prayers and your alms have ascended as a memorial before God. 5 Now send men to Joppa for a certain Simon who is called Peter; 6 he is lodging with Simon, a tanner, whose house is by the seaside.’ 7 When the angel who spoke to him had left, he called two of his slaves and a devout soldier from the ranks of those who served him, 8 and after telling them everything, he sent them to Joppa.
9 About noon the next day, as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat; and while it was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw the heaven opened and something like a large sheet coming down, being lowered to the ground by its four corners. 12 In it were all kinds of four-footed creatures and reptiles and birds of the air. 13 Then he heard a voice saying, ‘Get up, Peter; kill and eat.’ 14 But Peter said, ‘By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is profane or unclean.’ 15 The voice said to him again, a second time, ‘What God has made clean, you must not call profane.’ 16 This happened three times, and the thing was suddenly taken up to heaven.
17 Now while Peter was greatly puzzled about what to make of the vision that he had seen, suddenly the men sent by Cornelius appeared. They were asking for Simon’s house and were standing by the gate. 18 They called out to ask whether Simon, who was called Peter, was staying there. 19 While Peter was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit said to him, ‘Look, three men are searching for you. 20 Now get up, go down, and go with them without hesitation; for I have sent them.’ 21 So Peter went down to the men and said, ‘I am the one you are looking for; what is the reason for your coming?’ 22 They answered, ‘Cornelius, a centurion, an upright and God-fearing man, who is well spoken of by the whole Jewish nation, was directed by a holy angel to send for you to come to his house and to hear what you have to say.’ 23 So Peter invited them in and gave them lodging.
This part of the story is told as a Chiasmus. It follows the pattern of Part A (vs.1-8)—Part B (vs.9-16)—Part A (vs.17-23). The middle part of the story, Part B, gives meaning and context to the other parts. This was a common storytelling method, and Luke used it in his Gospel account and in the book of Acts.
Who was Cornelius and Why Does He Matter?
The story starts by establishing the credentials of the Roman Centurion Cornelius. Given that he is a member of the occupying forces, he is a surprising main character for a conversion narrative. As a centurion, he was an officer in the military with probably at least ten years of experience. He was trusted and had been rewarded.
The cohort he belonged to was called the Italian Cohort. Josephus highlighted this distinction by saying that most Imperial soldiers garrisoned in Caesarea were Syrians. The likelihood is that the Italian Cohort were not full legionaries but auxiliary soldiers from the Italian lands surrounding Rome. Auxiliaries were used for guarding roads, collecting taxes, and keeping the peace in troublesome provinces. After 25 years of service, they would be rewarded by being made a Roman Citizen. You can find more about them here.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohors_II_Italica_Civium_Romanorum
Then, to add to the surprise, Cornelius is described as a devout man and a God-fearer. He had received the news of God and believed in God but had not received circumcision. He had not become Jewish. They were close to God but still Gentiles, still on the outside. This is the same experience that the Ethiopian eunuch had.
Except it probably wasn’t too surprising that Cornelius was a God-fearer.
Conversion to the extent of becoming a God-fearer was perhaps more common than you might imagine. Hellenistic syncretism meant Roman and Greek gods, particularly Zeus and Jupiter, had been identified with the Israelite God.
This made conversions easier for Romans and Greeks. They just understood themselves as worshipping the same God as before, just with a different name. They would have to get to know their God all over again from the perspective of a different country.
Romans also had a fascination for strange Eastern mystery religions, and they saw Judaism as part of that sub-sect of religions. There was a growth in the popularity of focusing on only one God during this period of the Roman Empire, particularly in Galatia and in the Eastern provinces of the Empire.
Cornelius has distinguished himself through the prayers and alms that have ascended to God. He has been recognised for what he has done—not only his faith but also what he did about it. A sense of active Righteousness is tied to service to the poor, as exemplified by almsgiving.
There is unity in Cornelius between his prayers and his almsgiving. What is true of his faith is mirrored in his actions.
A Comparison Between Cornelius and the Pharisees
Jesus speaks of this in Luke 11:39-44, where he criticises the Pharisees for obeying the letter of the law but being filled with corruption on the inside.
They fail to act with justice and love, revealing that their inward reality does not fit with what they present. Almsgiving is the mark of righteousness rather than strict obedience to the Law:
39Then the Lord said to him, ‘Now you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and of the dish, but inside you are full of greed and wickedness. 40 You fools! Did not the one who made the outside make the inside also? 41 So give for alms those things that are within; and see, everything will be clean for you.
42 ‘But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and herbs of all kinds, and neglect justice and the love of God; it is these you ought to have practised, without neglecting the others. 43 Woe to you Pharisees! For you love to have the seat of honour in the synagogues and to be greeted with respect in the market-places. 44 Woe to you! For you are like unmarked graves, and people walk over them without realizing it.’
Perhaps unsurprisingly, we can compare the Pharisees in Luke and Cornelius in Acts since Luke wrote both.
On the outside, Cornelius seems like someone who shouldn’t be considered righteous, but his prayers and almsgiving reveal who he is as a follower of God. Cornelius behaved like someone who followed God was meant to behave.
He was a memorial to God, a living witness of God in the world. The union of prayer and almsgiving went before God and made him a witness to God. His faith led to his righteous acts. This is similar to what we see elsewhere in James 2: 14-17:
14 What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if you say you have faith but do not have works? Can faith save you? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and lacks daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace; keep warm and eat your fill’, and yet you do not supply their bodily needs, what is the good of that? 17 So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead.
A central element of the holiness codes was the dietary laws. These can be found in Leviticus 11:1-47 and Deuteronomy 14:3-20. The dietary codes were perhaps the most distinctive feature of Judaism.
It meant that obedient Jews wouldn’t eat with Gentiles to make sure they didn’t eat anything unclean or that had been offered to idols or which had been improperly prepared. Without table fellowship, there was no opportunity for the different communities to come together.
Did God Change the Rules?
Then something strange and different happens. Peter is given a vision from God. In it, Peter is given all kinds of animals and birds, and God says to kill and eat them, but Peter refuses. He actually refuses three times, just like he denied Jesus three times.
At first, Peter doesn’t understand the vision. But when the men sent by Cornelius arrive, the Spirit tells Peter that God has sent the people. They are Gentiles. Peter shouldn’t invite them into the house where he is staying. But, suddenly, the vision makes sense.
The vision was not just about the food. It was about humanity. Luke Timothy Johnson writes: the implication is that all things God created are declared clean by him, and are not affected by human discriminations.
Just as God told Peter that he could eat whatever he wanted because God had made it all, and whatever God makes is clean, the Spirit reveals that the Gentiles are ‘clean’ because God also made them.
At that moment, everything began to change for Peter, just as it had for Phillip in Acts 8. These moments of revelation were shaping the church.
God was revealing something that contradicted what they knew from scripture and tradition. What they were discovering was that when the Messiah came, and the Law was fulfilled, things were going to be different.
Guests of a Gentile – Acts 10: 24-43
The next day he got up and went with them, and some of the believers from Joppa accompanied him. 24 The following day they came to Caesarea. Cornelius was expecting them and had called together his relatives and close friends. 25 On Peter’s arrival Cornelius met him, and falling at his feet, worshipped him. 26 But Peter made him get up, saying, ‘Stand up; I am only a mortal.’ 27 And as he talked with him, he went in and found that many had assembled; 28 and he said to them, ‘You yourselves know that it is unlawful for a Jew to associate with or to visit a Gentile; but God has shown me that I should not call anyone profane or unclean. 29 So when I was sent for, I came without objection. Now may I ask why you sent for me?’
30 Cornelius replied, ‘Four days ago at this very hour, at three o’clock, I was praying in my house when suddenly a man in dazzling clothes stood before me. 31 He said, “Cornelius, your prayer has been heard and your alms have been remembered before God. 32 Send therefore to Joppa and ask for Simon, who is called Peter; he is staying in the home of Simon, a tanner, by the sea.” 33 Therefore I sent for you immediately, and you have been kind enough to come. So now all of us are here in the presence of God to listen to all that the Lord has commanded you to say.’
34 Then Peter began to speak to them: ‘I truly understand that God shows no partiality, 35 but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him. 36 You know the message he sent to the people of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ—he is Lord of all. 37 That message spread throughout Judea, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John announced: 38 how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power; how he went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him. 39 We are witnesses to all that he did both in Judea and in Jerusalem. They put him to death by hanging him on a tree; 40 but God raised him on the third day and allowed him to appear, 41 not to all the people but to us who were chosen by God as witnesses, and who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead. 42 He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one ordained by God as judge of the living and the dead. 43 All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.’
Here, we start to see the consequences of what happened to Peter.
Unlawful for Jew and Gentile to Mix
Peter establishes right at the beginning why what is about to happen is so radical. Peter says, “You know that it is unlawful for a Jew to associate with a Gentile, but God has shown me that I should not call anyone profane or unclean.” With that one statement, Peter is challenging everything underpinning his previous beliefs.
The thing is, there isn’t actually any law in the Old Testament against mixing with Gentiles. The prohibition comes from Rabbinical codes and prohibitions designed to make the Law easier to keep. This was a common enough practice to be known by Romans and commented on.
Witherington, in “The Acts of the Apostles: A socio-rhetorical commentary”, writes: Texts written by Roman authors such as Juvenal (Sat. 14.104ff.) and Tacitus (Hist. 5.5) show that Jews did regularly refuse to associate with Gentiles and were objects of suspicion because of their “antisocial” behaviour.
Jews did not mix with other people. This was something people just knew.
An example of the written prohibition can be found in the deuterocanonical book of Jubilees 22:16, which says: Keep yourself separate from the nations, and do not eat with them, and do not imitate their rites, nor associate yourself with them.
An example of this in practice can also be seen in John 4: 7-43, where the Samaritan woman obviously knew about the injunction on meetings between Jews and Gentiles and was surprised that Jesus would meet with her.
Keener, in the IVP Bible Commentary, writes: Devout Jews would not enter into idolaters’ homes lest they unwittingly participate in idolatry; they apparently extended this custom to not entering any Gentile’s home. It was considered unclean to eat Gentiles’ food or to drink their wine; although this purity regulation did not prohibit all social contact, it prevented dining together at banquets and made much of the Roman world feel that Jews were antisocial. Cornelius is undoubtedly accustomed to accepting reluctant (10:22) snubs, so Peter’s statement in 10:28 would mean much to him.
The word for unlawful used in verse 28 is only used in one other place in the Bible, in 1 Peter 4:3, where it is associated with idolatry. The word should probably be translated as taboo rather than unlawful.
It was against custom, but by then, custom had become associated with Law.
Belonging to God is Radically Transformed
But now customs and laws were being overturned, just as the dietary laws had been abolished. Peter says that God shows no partiality and that everyone in every nation who fears God (worships God) and does what is right (like almsgiving) is acceptable to all because Christ is Lord of all.
Anyone who believes receives forgiveness through his name. Faith in Jesus, and the faith of Jesus, is the basis of salvation. Gentiles did not have to become Jews. Only faith was necessary.
Entry into the church was based only on faith. The church was established and built on this principle. It is by faith alone that a person enters the church community.
The Holy Spirit Has the Final Word – Acts 10: 44-48
While Peter was still speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard the word. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astounded that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles, 46 for they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter said, 47 ‘Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?’ 48 So he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they invited him to stay for several days.
The Holy Spirit came upon Cornelius and his household.
This was the final mark of belonging, the crowning glory of God’s salvation. God lived in them. They had been baptised by the Holy Spirit. Peter could not argue with that. None of the circumcised believers could, even though they were astounded by what God had done.
People that they thought could never have been part of God’s covenant were suddenly and irrefutably included. God had demonstrated that they were members. Peter does not give them permission to belong. He recognises Christ in their life and so recognises that they already belong. He asks if anyone can withhold water for baptism when they have received the Holy Spirit?
Baptism with water is less than baptism by the Spirit. Water cannot do what Spirit does.
Sanctification Changes Everything
Baptism marks their entry but does not cause their entry. The baptism by water was part of Peter’s Jewish faith and culture, absorbed into early Christianity. The baptism of repentance became the baptism of membership.
But it wasn’t necessary.
Baptism by the Holy Spirit is what is needed. If Peter had never baptised them with water, they would still be church members because God had baptised them with God’s own Spirit.
This is key to how the church is understood.
Who gets to be in, who gets to be out, and who decides it. Peter knew it wasn’t up to him. God had shown him that his assumptions were wrong, including those he had based on scripture. Only the Holy Spirit gets to decide. If someone has received God, they are part of the church.
Peter and the Disciples – Acts 11: 1-18
Now the apostles and the believers who were in Judea heard that the Gentiles had also accepted the word of God. 2 So when Peter went up to Jerusalem, the circumcised believers criticized him, 3 saying, ‘Why did you go to uncircumcised men and eat with them?’ 4 Then Peter began to explain it to them, step by step, saying, 5 ‘I was in the city of Joppa praying, and in a trance I saw a vision. There was something like a large sheet coming down from heaven, being lowered by its four corners; and it came close to me. 6 As I looked at it closely I saw four-footed animals, beasts of prey, reptiles, and birds of the air. 7 I also heard a voice saying to me, “Get up, Peter; kill and eat.” 8 But I replied, “By no means, Lord; for nothing profane or unclean has ever entered my mouth.” 9 But a second time the voice answered from heaven, “What God has made clean, you must not call profane.” 10 This happened three times; then everything was pulled up again to heaven. 11 At that very moment three men, sent to me from Caesarea, arrived at the house where we were. 12 The Spirit told me to go with them and not to make a distinction between them and us. These six brothers also accompanied me, and we entered the man’s house. 13 He told us how he had seen the angel standing in his house and saying, “Send to Joppa and bring Simon, who is called Peter; 14 he will give you a message by which you and your entire household will be saved.” 15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them just as it had upon us at the beginning. 16 And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he had said, “John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.” 17 If then God gave them the same gift that he gave us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could hinder God?’ 18 When they heard this, they were silenced. And they praised God, saying, ‘Then God has given even to the Gentiles the repentance that leads to life.’
The opening line, saying that the apostles and believers had heard what was happening, is a standard piece of classical rhetoric. It allows the transition from one scene to the next while maintaining narrative integrity. It demonstrates Luke’s education and grasp of classical writing techniques.
The phrase ‘accepted the word of God’ was also used in Acts 8:14 to represent gentiles who had become God-fearers. A connection is drawn between the events in Acts 8 and those here in Acts 10 and 11. The message of the Gospel was taken to Samaria, then to Phillip, and then to the Romans, from close cousins to the gender non-conforming and then to Gentiles.
‘Circumcised believers’ is a poor translation of ‘the circumcised’. At that time, every believer in Jerusalem was circumcised. It was not a distinction between those who were circumcised and those who weren’t, but rather, it meant the group of believers who were committed to followers of Jesus becoming Jews first. They were a faction committed to the Law, similar to what Pharisees were for Jews. They believed that circumcision was the way to be adopted into the covenant.
Peter’s experiences challenged this assumption. It was not circumcision but faith.
Luke uses repetition of events through speeches given by his characters to demonstrate where something is important, and attention needs to be paid to it. This section is not only a way of moving the narrative along. It is a reminder that Peter is part of something larger.
The members of the circumcision party were critical of Peter because he was eating with Gentiles. But Peter says no, these people have been given the Holy Spirit. Who was Peter (or them) to hinder the work of God? Only faith and the gift of the Holy Spirit mattered.
They Were Called Christians – Acts 11: 19-26
19 Now those who were scattered because of the persecution that took place over Stephen travelled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch, and they spoke the word to no one except Jews. 20 But among them were some men of Cyprus and Cyrene who, on coming to Antioch, spoke to the Hellenists also, proclaiming the Lord Jesus. 21 The hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number became believers and turned to the Lord. 22 News of this came to the ears of the church in Jerusalem, and they sent Barnabas to Antioch. 23 When he came and saw the grace of God, he rejoiced, and he exhorted them all to remain faithful to the Lord with steadfast devotion; 24 for he was a good man, full of the Holy Spirit and of faith. And a great many people were brought to the Lord. 25 Then Barnabas went to Tarsus to look for Saul, 26 and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. So it was that for an entire year they associated with the church and taught a great many people, and it was in Antioch that the disciples were first called ‘Christians’.
The narrative’s gaze is expanded in this final section of the text.
From Peter, the story moves to Antioch. Believers fleeing persecution travelled across the Middle Eastern world and preached only to Jews, but some went to Antioch and preached to Hellenists (Gentiles).
When the Church in Jerusalem heard what was happening, they sent Barnabas, who then went to find Saul (who would become Paul), and they spent a year in Antioch.
Some of Paul’s earliest experiences came from his time in Antioch when Gentiles were converted and brought to salvation. It was here that people were called Christians for the first time.
The church needed a new name. They were no longer a Jewish messianic sect. They were something different. Something new. Welcoming Gentiles into the Church transformed what the Church was. It was established on the grounds of inclusion, by faith alone, marked by the Holy Spirit.
Thinking About Inclusion
As with the story of the Ethiopian Eunuch, it is important to recognise what this story is not doing.
The conversion of Cornelius does not directly give any kind of argument for inclusion from the perspective of sexuality or of gender. This story is doing something more fundamental than that.
The conversions of the Ethiopian eunuch and Cornelius take us back to first principles and make us think again. How do we read the holiness codes of the Old Testament? Where do we draw lines for who is in and who is out of the church? Who actually determines membership?
Working out what inclusion means requires us to go one step backwards rather than beginning with the end in mind. It’s important to build up a sense of where scripture is leading, particularly in these stories about the church’s foundation.
I suggest that understanding the Ethiopian eunuch, the conversion of Cornelius, and the council of Jerusalem, will help shape the theology required to think through questions of Inclusion.
God vs. Scripture?
We do not see a case of God versus Scripture in these chapters. Nor is it a case of people applying their cultural context to ancient scripture and interpreting it according to their own predetermined views. What we see going on here is something else altogether.
Phillip Peter and the Preachers in Antioch recognised that something had changed in the world since Jesus was resurrected. Peter had to have it drilled into him by the Holy Spirit and a full-on vision, but he got there in the end.
Since Jesus was the Messiah, the way the Law should be understood had changed. Jesus had fulfilled the purpose of the Law because salvation was now possible for all people. Anyone who loves God and acts righteously is accepted by God.
What does acting righteously mean? It doesn’t mean following the holiness code of the Old Testament anymore (although it also doesn’t mean completely ignoring it and throwing it away) but rather following the example of Cornelius. Almsgiving. Caring for people in need and loving the neighbour. This is in line with the prophetic tradition, particularly in Amos 5.
Scripture is being understood in a new way because of who Jesus is. The authority of scripture was not undermined by this but was reinforced. Jesus revealed what scripture was pointing towards all along.
Inclusion through Sanctification by the Holy Spirit
The inclusion of all peoples into God’s family is how God is faithful to the covenant made with Abraham.
The new covenant is made by grace alone through faith and is assured through the Holy Spirit’s blessing and baptism. Anyone who has faith in Jesus and has been blessed by the Holy Spirit is a member of Christ’s church. This will result in them carrying out righteous deeds such as almsgiving and caring for the poor.
Through the Holy Spirit, all people are united as one family. To reject someone and deny the work of the Holy Spirit in their life is to play at the edges of denying the Holy Spirit itself.
The question that follows is what actions might constitute unrighteous behaviour, and would those actions lead to someone leaving the church?
Is someone welcomed into the church while they are still sinful? Yes. The church is the church of sinners.
Is someone still saved even if they sin again? Yes. It is continued obedient faith which maintains salvation, not continued obedient perfection.
Only the rejection of faith in Jesus, seen in willingly choosing to act against what a person knows to be right and doing so with no sense of guilt or regret or desire to do better, means the person has left the church.
The question after that is, of course, what actions may or may not be sinful.
Ultimately, the only mark of membership in the Church is not what someone else thinks is sinful but what God chooses to bless. If someone has the Holy Spirit in their life, has obedient faith, and seeks to act according to the law of love, then who is anyone else to hinder the work of God?
This text is not about being gay or being trans or what marriage may or may not be. It is much, much bigger than that.
This is about how Jesus has transformed what it means to be a child of God.
It is about the radical commitment to salvation by faith alone and what that means in practice.
What Comes Next?
In the next article, I will look at Acts 15 and the Council of Jerusalem, where the events of this post and the previous one come together. Was the church to be a place of inclusion or exclusion? Could there be a place for more than one position on the question of circumcision? What did it actually mean that God was welcoming in Gentiles? All of this and more next time.
I love feedback and comments, so please let me know what you think.
If you want to keep up to date, sign up to My Theology Corner Newsletter for a weekly lite-bite theology hit. Get short-form reflections from topics on the main blog and or on other interesting topics from that week.
https://chrisbutton.substack.com
