Acts 11:3

KJV

Saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.

KJV (with Strong's)

Saying {G3004},{G3754} Thou wentest in {G1525} to {G4314} men {G435} uncircumcised {G203}{G2192}, and {G2532} didst eat {G4906} with them {G846}.

Complete Jewish Bible

saying, “You went into the homes of uncircumcised men and even ate with them!”

Berean Standard Bible

and said, “You visited uncircumcised men and ate with them.”

American Standard Version

saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.

Commentary

### SUMMARY
Acts 11:3 captures the sharp criticism leveled against the Apostle Peter by Jewish believers in Jerusalem, often referred to as "those of the circumcision." Their accusation, "Saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them," reveals the deep-seated cultural and religious tension within the early church regarding the inclusion of Gentiles. This verse marks a pivotal moment of confrontation, highlighting the profound challenge of reconciling traditional Jewish purity laws and social customs with the expanding, inclusive nature of the Gospel.

### CONTEXT
* **Literary Context:** This verse immediately follows Peter's return to Jerusalem after his groundbreaking ministry in Caesarea at the home of Cornelius. The narrative in [Acts 10](/acts/10 "Acts 10 - Peter's Vision and Cornelius's Conversion") details Peter's transformative vision on a rooftop in Joppa, where God declared all foods clean and, by extension, all people acceptable for fellowship ([Acts 10:9-16](/acts/10-9-16 "Acts 10:9-16 - Peter's Vision of the Sheet")). Guided by the Holy Spirit, Peter then entered the home of Cornelius, a Roman centurion, preached the Gospel, and witnessed the Holy Spirit fall upon Cornelius and his entire household, leading to their baptism ([Acts 10:44-48](/acts/10-44-48 "Acts 10:44-48 - The Holy Spirit Falls on Gentiles")). The accusation in [Acts 11:3](/acts/11-3 "Acts 11:3 - The Accusation Against Peter") is the direct consequence of Peter's actions in Caesarea, setting the stage for his defense and explanation to the Jerusalem church.
* **Historical & Cultural Context:** For devout first-century Jews, adherence to the Mosaic Law, including dietary restrictions and purity laws, was central to their identity and covenant relationship with God. Circumcision was the physical sign of this covenant, distinguishing Jews from Gentiles. Entering a Gentile home, and especially sharing a meal with "uncircumcised" individuals, was considered a severe breach of these purity laws, leading to ritual defilement. Such an act would not only render a Jew unclean but also signify a profound compromise of their religious and ethnic distinctiveness. The Jewish believers in Jerusalem, still deeply rooted in these traditions, viewed Peter's actions as a scandalous transgression, reflecting the significant cultural and religious chasm that existed between Jews and Gentiles.
* **Key Themes:** [Acts 11:3](/acts/11-3 "Acts 11:3 - The Controversy over Gentile Inclusion") encapsulates several critical themes. Firstly, it underscores the **breaking down of barriers** between Jew and Gentile, a radical shift initiated by God through the Gospel. The act of eating together, a profound symbol of fellowship and acceptance, was revolutionary in a society marked by deep divisions. Secondly, it highlights the immense theological and practical challenge of **inclusion of Gentiles** into the nascent Christian community without requiring them to first convert to Judaism and adhere to its ceremonial laws. This controversy was a crucial step in the Gospel's expansion beyond its Jewish origins. Finally, the verse reveals the **early church's internal conflict** and growing pains as it grappled with understanding and implementing God's expanding plan for salvation, necessitating Peter's subsequent defense and the eventual resolution at the [Jerusalem Council](/acts/15 "Acts 15 - The Jerusalem Council").

### EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
#### Key Word Analysis
* **wentest in (Greek, _eisérchomai'_ G1525):** This verb means "to enter" or "to go in." In the context of Acts 11:3, it specifically refers to Peter's physical entry into the home of Cornelius, a Gentile. For devout Jews, entering a Gentile's house, particularly one not ritually purified, was an act that could lead to ceremonial defilement, requiring purification rituals. The accusation emphasizes not just the presence, but the deliberate act of crossing a significant social and religious boundary.
* **uncircumcised (Greek, _akrobystía'_ G203 and _échō'_ G2192):** The term _akrobystía_ literally refers to the prepuce or foreskin, and by extension, an uncircumcised state or person. It was the primary marker of Gentile identity, distinguishing them from Jews who bore the sign of the Abrahamic covenant through circumcision. The verb _échō_ (to have or possess) here indicates that these men were "having uncircumcision," meaning they were Gentiles. The accusers use this term not merely as a physical description but as a powerful theological and cultural indictment, signifying those outside the covenant and therefore considered ritually unclean and separate from God's chosen people.
* **didst eat (Greek, _synesthíō'_ G4906):** This compound verb means "to eat with" or "to take food in company with." Sharing a meal was, and still is, a profound act of fellowship, intimacy, and acceptance in many cultures, especially in the ancient Near East. For Jews, eating with Gentiles was a direct violation of purity laws and a symbol of deep association that was strictly forbidden. This act was seen as a defilement, a betrayal of Jewish identity, and a compromise of their covenant distinctiveness. The accusers' emphasis on "eating with them" highlights the perceived depth of Peter's transgression and the breaking of a fundamental social and religious barrier.

#### Verse Breakdown
* **"Saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised":** This initial clause presents the first part of the accusation against Peter. The Jewish believers are expressing their shock and disapproval that Peter, a prominent apostle and a Jew, would enter the dwelling of Gentiles. This act, in itself, was a significant breach of traditional Jewish purity laws and social customs, which mandated separation from Gentiles to avoid ritual defilement.
* **"and didst eat with them":** This second clause amplifies the gravity of Peter's perceived transgression. Not only did he enter their home, but he also engaged in the most intimate form of fellowship—sharing a meal. For a Jew, eating with uncircumcised Gentiles was considered an even greater defilement than merely entering their home, symbolizing full acceptance and communion with those deemed outside the covenant and ritually unclean. This act represented a profound challenge to the established social and religious order of the time.

#### Literary Devices
The verse employs several significant literary devices. **Metonymy** is evident in the term "uncircumcised," which stands in for the entire Gentile people and their status outside the Mosaic Covenant. This single physical characteristic serves as a shorthand for a complex cultural and religious identity. **Symbolism** is powerfully at play with the act of "eating with them." Shared meals in the ancient world were not merely about sustenance; they profoundly symbolized fellowship, acceptance, and covenant relationship. Therefore, Peter's act of eating with Cornelius's household symbolized a radical breaking of traditional barriers and an embrace of those previously considered "unclean." Finally, the verse immediately sets up a dramatic **conflict** within the early Christian community, highlighting the tension between deeply ingrained Jewish traditions and the new, inclusive movement of the Holy Spirit.

### THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
Acts 11:3 stands as a crucial theological marker, illustrating God's active dismantling of human-made divisions and the expansion of His saving grace beyond ethnic and cultural boundaries. The controversy surrounding Peter's actions underscores the radical nature of the Gospel, which transcends the old covenant's ceremonial distinctions to create a new humanity in Christ. God's revelation to Peter, culminating in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on Gentiles, unequivocally demonstrates that salvation is by grace through faith for all who believe, regardless of their background or prior religious status. This event paved the way for the universal mission of the church, emphasizing that the Spirit's presence, not human rituals or lineage, is the true sign of God's acceptance.

* [Ephesians 2:14](/ephesians/2-14 "Ephesians 2:14 - Breaking Down the Dividing Wall")
* [Galatians 2:11-14](/galatians/2-11-14 "Galatians 2:11-14 - Peter's Hypocrisy at Antioch")
* [Colossians 3:11](/colossians/3-11 "Colossians 3:11 - No Jew or Gentile in Christ")

### REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
The confrontation in Acts 11:3 offers profound and enduring lessons for believers today, challenging us to examine our own biases and embrace the radical inclusivity of the Gospel. Just as Peter was compelled to move beyond deeply ingrained traditions, we are called to prioritize God's expansive love and mission over human-made divisions, cultural comforts, or personal prejudices. The church is meant to be a welcoming space where all people, regardless of their background, ethnicity, social status, or past, are embraced in genuine fellowship. This requires a willingness to listen to the Holy Spirit's leading, even when it challenges our preconceived notions, and to engage in patient, Spirit-led dialogue when disagreements arise within the community. Ultimately, the power of shared meals and authentic fellowship remains a potent symbol of unity and acceptance within the body of Christ, reflecting God's desire for all humanity to be reconciled to Him and to one another.

#### Questions for Reflection
* **What "uncircumcised" barriers or social distinctions might we inadvertently erect in our churches or communities today that hinder genuine fellowship?**
* **How willing are we to challenge our own cultural norms or personal preferences when they conflict with God's inclusive love and the mission of the Gospel?**
* **In what ways can we more intentionally practice radical hospitality and shared fellowship with those who are different from us, mirroring Peter's actions with Cornelius?**
* **When disagreements arise within the Christian community, how can we emulate Peter's willingness to explain and the Jerusalem believers' openness to listen to the Holy Spirit's testimony?**

### FAQ
**Why was eating with uncircumcised men such a big deal for Jewish believers?**

Answer: For Jewish believers in the first century, eating with uncircumcised Gentiles was a profound violation of their deeply held religious and cultural purity laws. According to the Mosaic Law and subsequent rabbinic interpretations, contact with Gentiles, especially sharing a meal, could lead to ritual defilement. Circumcision was the physical sign of God's covenant with Israel, marking them as a distinct, holy people. To associate intimately, particularly through shared table fellowship, with those who were "uncircumcised" was seen as a compromise of their covenant identity, a betrayal of their heritage, and an act that rendered them ritually unclean, separating them from the community of faith and worship. This concern was rooted in a desire to maintain holiness and distinctiveness as God's chosen people, as outlined in passages like [Leviticus 11](/leviticus/11 "Leviticus 11 - Dietary Laws") and [Deuteronomy 7:1-6](/deuteronomy/7-1-6 "Deuteronomy 7:1-6 - Separation from Nations").

**Did Peter violate Jewish law by eating with uncircumcised men?**

Answer: From the perspective of the Jewish believers in Jerusalem and the traditional understanding of the Mosaic Law, Peter's actions certainly appeared to be a violation of established purity codes and social customs. However, Peter's defense in [Acts 11:4-18](/acts/11-4-18 "Acts 11:4-18 - Peter's Defense to the Jerusalem Church") makes it clear that he was not acting on his own initiative or in rebellion against God's law. Instead, he was directly obeying a new, divine revelation given through a vision ([Acts 10:9-16](/acts/10-9-16 "Acts 10:9-16 - Peter's Vision")) and confirmed by the undeniable outpouring of the Holy Spirit on Cornelius and his household ([Acts 10:44-47](/acts/10-44-47 "Acts 10:44-47 - The Holy Spirit Falls on Gentiles")). Peter understood that God Himself was declaring Gentiles clean and acceptable, thereby reinterpreting the scope and application of the purity laws in light of the new covenant. Thus, while seemingly a violation of old traditions, Peter was actually aligning himself with God's unfolding plan.

**What was the outcome of this confrontation with Peter?**

Answer: The confrontation in [Acts 11:3](/acts/11-3 "Acts 11:3 - The Accusation") led to Peter's detailed explanation of his experiences in Caesarea. In [Acts 11:4-17](/acts/11-4-17 "Acts 11:4-17 - Peter's Account"), Peter recounted his vision, the Holy Spirit's explicit command, and the undeniable evidence of the Spirit falling upon Cornelius and his household, just as He had fallen upon the Jewish believers at Pentecost. Peter concluded by asking, "If then God gave them the same gift as He gave us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God's way?" ([Acts 11:17](/acts/11-17 "Acts 11:17 - Peter's Concluding Question")). The outcome was remarkable: the Jewish believers, upon hearing Peter's testimony and recognizing God's sovereign hand, ceased their opposition. They glorified God, acknowledging, "Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life" ([Acts 11:18](/acts/11-18 "Acts 11:18 - The Jerusalem Believers' Response")). This pivotal moment marked a significant step in the early church's understanding and acceptance of the universal scope of the Gospel.

### CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
Acts 11:3, with its focus on the breaking of barriers between Jew and Gentile, finds its ultimate fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. The "middle wall of partition" that separated humanity, both spiritually from God and ethnically between Jew and Gentile, was definitively broken down by Christ's sacrificial death on the cross ([Ephesians 2:14-16](/ephesians/2-14-16 "Ephesians 2:14-16 - Christ Our Peace")). Jesus, the Lamb of God, took away the sin of the world, making all who believe in Him acceptable to God, regardless of their lineage or past adherence to ceremonial laws ([John 1:29](/john/1-29 "John 1:29 - Jesus, the Lamb of God")). His new covenant, established in His blood, superseded the old distinctions, creating one new humanity where there is "neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" ([Galatians 3:28](/galatians/3-28 "Galatians 3:28 - One in Christ")). Peter's vision and subsequent actions in Acts 11 are merely the outworking of Christ's finished work, demonstrating the universal scope of the Great Commission to "make disciples of all nations" ([Matthew 28:19](/matthew/28-19 "Matthew 28:19 - The Great Commission")). The inclusion of the "uncircumcised" into the fellowship of God's people is a direct consequence of Christ's reconciling ministry, showing that in Him, all are made clean and invited to the table of fellowship with God and one another.

Note: Commentary is generated by AI with a directive for Biblical fidelity. Always rely on the Holy Spirit for discernment. The Scripture text and cross-references are from verified, non-AI sources.

Cross-References

Acts 10:28

And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

Galatians 2:12

For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.

Luke 15:2

And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.

1 Corinthians 5:11

But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

2 John 1:10

¶ If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into [your] house, neither bid him God speed:

Acts 10:48

And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

Acts 10:23

Then called he them in, and lodged [them]. And on the morrow Peter went away with them, and certain brethren from Joppa accompanied him.