Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Simon the tanner, clean or unclean | Acts 9:43 | Makarios | 225105 | ||
Greetings Sister Azure! Excellent Question! Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Whole Bible states, "Thus terminates what has not been improperly called the first period of the Christian Church, which began at the day of pentecost, Acts 2:1, and continued to the resurrection of Dorcas; a period of about eight years." Halley's Bible Handbook notes that throughout this whole encounter that Peter had with Cornelius, that "Cornelius was not required to quit his army work" and "It was from Joppa (Acts 10:5) that God sent Jewish Peter to Gentile Cornelius. From this same Joppa, 800 years before, God had to use a little extra persuasion on Jewish Jonah to get him to go to Gentile Nineveh (Jonah 1:3)." Zondervan's NASB Study Bible comments (Acts 9:43): "Occupations were frequently used with personal names to identify individuals further (see 16:14; 18:3; 19:24; 2 Tim. 4:14), but in this case it is especially significant. A tanner was involved in treating the skins of dead animals, thus contacting the unclean according to Jewish law; so he was despised by many. Peter's decision to stay with him shows already a willingness to reject Jewish prejudice and prepares the way for his coming vision and the mission to the Gentiles." (pg. 1592) Regarding the disposition of Peter, the commentary of Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown seems to agree: "with one Simon a tanner - a trade regarded by the Jews as half unclean, and consequently disreputable, from the contact with dead animals and blood which was connected with it. For this reason, even by other nations, it is usually carried on at some distance from towns; accordingly, Simon’s house was "by the seaside" (Acts 10:6). Peter’s lodging there shows him already to some extent above Jewish prejudice." And perhaps there was a distinction as far as what kind of a tanner Simon was, according to John Gill's Commentary: "where the Gemara (s) distinguishes between a great tanner and a little tanner; the latter, the gloss says, is one that is poor and has but few skins: which of these Simon was, cannot be said." But most interesting is the commentary from Robertson's Word Pictures: "With one Simon a tanner (para tini Simoni bursei). The use of para is usual for staying with one (by his side). "The more scrupulous Jews regarded such an occupation as unclean, and avoided those who pursued it. The conduct of Peter here shows that he did not carry his prejudices to that extent" (Hackett). One of the rabbis said: "It is impossible for the world to do without tanners; but woe to him who is a tanner." A Jewess could sue for divorce if she discovered that her husband was a tanner. And yet Peter will have scruples on the housetop in the tanner’s house about eating food considered unclean. "The lodging with the tanner was a step on the road to eating with a Gentile" (Furneaux)." If there was such a negative reaction to the occupation of Simon the tanner from a Jewish perspective, then why didn't Peter just simply stay with Dorcas? God was obviously working through Peter and leading him at that time. My conclusion is that he was simply led to the door of Simon the tanner by the Holy Spirit in much the same way that Philip was led in Chapter 8 and Paul would later be led by the Holy Spirit. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
2 | Simon the tanner, clean or unclean | Acts 9:43 | azurelaw | 225108 | ||
Dear Brother Makarios, Thank you very much for the helpful notes :-) Shalom Azure |
||||||
Up | Down | |||
Questions and/or Subjects for Acts 9:43 | Author | ||
|
azurelaw | ||
|
Makarios | ||
|
azurelaw | ||
|
Warren F. Kenney |