Acts 10:28

10:28 He said to them, “You know that ¹  it is unlawful ²  for a Jew ³  to associate with or visit a Gentile, ⁴  yet God has shown me that I should call no person ⁵  defiled or ritually unclean. ⁶ 

Acts 10:34-35

10:34 Then Peter started speaking: ⁷  “I now truly understand that God does not show favoritism in dealing with people, ⁸  10:35 but in every nation ⁹  the person who fears him ¹⁰  and does what is right ¹¹  is welcomed before him.

Acts 15:9

15:9 and he made no distinction ¹²  between them and us, cleansing ¹³  their hearts by faith.

Acts 15:1

The Jerusalem Council

15:1 Now some men came down from Judea ¹⁴  and began to teach the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised ¹⁵  according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.”

Acts 4:5

4:5 On the next day, ¹⁶  their rulers, elders, and experts in the law ¹⁷  came together ¹⁸  in Jerusalem. ¹⁹ 

Hebrews 9:13-14

9:13 For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a young cow sprinkled on those who are defiled consecrated them and provided ritual purity, ²⁰  9:14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our ²¹  consciences from dead works to worship the living God.

[10:28]  ¹ tn Here ὡς (Jws) is used like ὅτι (Joti) to introduce indirect discourse (cf. BDAG 1105 s.v. ὡς 5).

[10:28]  ² tn This term is used of wanton or callously lawless acts (BDAG 24 s.v. ἀθέμιτος).

[10:28]  ³ tn Grk “a Jewish man” (ἀνδρὶ ᾿Ιουδαίῳ, andri Ioudaiw).

[10:28]  ⁴ tn Grk “a foreigner,” but in this context, “a non-Jew,” that is, a Gentile. This term speaks of intimate association (BDAG 556 s.v. κολλάω 2.b.α). On this Jewish view, see John 18:28, where a visit to a Gentile residence makes a Jewish person unclean.

[10:28]  ⁵ tn This is a generic use of ἄνθρωπος (anqrwpo").

[10:28]  ⁶ tn Possibly there is a subtle distinction in meaning between κοινός (koinos) and ἀκάθαρτος (akaqartos) here, but according to L&N 53.39 it is difficult to determine precise differences in meaning based on existing contexts.

[10:34]  ⁷ tn Grk “Opening his mouth Peter said” (a Semitic idiom for beginning to speak in a somewhat formal manner). The participle ἀνοίξας (anoixa") has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[10:34]  ⁸ tn Grk “God is not one who is a respecter of persons,” that is, “God is not one to show partiality” (cf. BDAG 887 s.v. προσωπολήμπτης). L&N 88.239 translates this verse “I realize that God does not show favoritism (in dealing with people).” The underlying Hebrew idiom includes the personal element (“respecter of persons”) so the phrase “in dealing with people” is included in the present translation. It fits very well with the following context and serves to emphasize the relational component of God’s lack of partiality. The latter is a major theme in the NT: Rom 2:11; Eph 2:11-22; Col 3:25; Jas 2:1; 1 Pet 1:17. This was the lesson of Peter’s vision.

[10:35]  ⁹ sn See Luke 24:47.

[10:35]  ¹⁰ tn Or “shows reverence for him.”

[10:35]  ¹¹ tn Grk “works righteousness”; the translation “does what is right” for this phrase in this verse is given by L&N 25.85.

[15:9]  ¹² tn BDAG 231 s.v. διακρίνω 1.b lists this passage under the meaning “to conclude that there is a difference, make a distinction, differentiate.”

[15:9]  ¹³ tn Or “purifying.”

[15:1]  ¹⁴ sn That is, they came down from Judea to Antioch in Syria.

[15:1]  ¹⁵ tc Codex Bezae (D) and a few other witnesses have “and walk” here (i.e., instead of τῷ ἔθει τῷ Μωϋσέως [tw eqei tw Mwu>sew"] they read καὶ τῷ ἔθει τῷ Μωϋσέως περιπατῆτε [kai tw eqei tw Mwu>sew" peripathte]). This is a decidedly stronger focus on obedience to the Law. As well, D expands vv. 1-5 in various places with the overall effect of being “more sympathetic to the local tradition of the church at Jerusalem” while the Alexandrian witnesses are more sympathetic to Paul (TCGNT 377). Codex D is well known for having a significantly longer text in Acts, but modern scholarship is generally of the opinion that the text of D expands on the original wording of Acts, with a theological viewpoint that especially puts Peter in a more authoritarian light. The expansion in these five verses is in keeping with that motif even though Peter is not explicitly in view.

[4:5]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “It happened that on the next day.” The introductory phrase ἐγένετο (egeneto, “it happened that”), common in Luke (69 times) and Acts (54 times), is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[4:5]  ¹⁷ tn Or “and scribes.” The traditional rendering of γραμματεύς (grammateu") as “scribe” does not communicate much to the modern English reader, for whom the term might mean “professional copyist,” if it means anything at all. The people referred to here were recognized experts in the law of Moses and in traditional laws and regulations. Thus “expert in the law” comes closer to the meaning for the modern reader.

[4:5]  ¹⁸ tn Or “law assembled,” “law met together.”

[4:5]  ¹⁹ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[9:13]  ²⁰ tn Grk “for the purifying of the flesh.” The “flesh” here is symbolic of outward or ritual purity in contrast to inner purity, that of the conscience (cf. Heb 9:9).

[9:14]  ²¹ tc The reading adopted by the translation is attested by many authorities (A D* K P 365 1739* al). But many others (א D² 0278 33 1739^c 1881 Ï lat sa) read “your” instead of “our.” The diversity of evidence makes this a difficult case to decide from external evidence alone. The first and second person pronouns differ by only one letter in Greek, as in English, also making this problem difficult to decide based on internal evidence and transcriptional probability. In the context, the author’s description of sacrificial activities seems to invite the reader to compare his own possible participation in OT liturgy as over against the completed work of Christ, so the second person pronoun “your” might make more sense. On the other hand, TCGNT 599 argues that “our” is preferable because the author of Hebrews uses direct address (i.e., the second person) only in the hortatory sections. What is more, the author seems to prefer the first person in explanatory remarks or when giving the logical grounds for an assertion (cf. Heb 4:15; 7:14). It is hard to reach a definitive conclusion in this case, but the data lean slightly in favor of the first person pronoun.