The Benefits of Staying with a Tanner (Acts 10)

This sermon was preached on 20/5/2012

When we read incidents in the lives of Bible characters it is necessary to remember that they are not finished articles. Usually each of them has made some spiritual progress, but still has a good way to go. This is true of Simon Peter, whether in the stories in the Gospels or those in the Book of Acts. It is also true whether he is involved in little decisions or important occasions. Peter was always a disciple in progress.

In the final verse of the previous chapter (Acts 9) Luke tells us that Peter went to stay with a man called Simon the tanner. This was a strange choice in at least one way because a Jew would be regarded as ceremoniously unclean if he came in contact with dead bodies. Of course, Peter had been taught by Jesus that the ceremonial law would be abrogated and would no longer be binding on his people. Yet Peter made slow progress in this regard. Nevertheless we can also say that Peter’s choice was a spiritual one, that his decision-making was based on his understanding of God’s truth, even if he had a long way to go. We can even say that he was exercising his Christian liberty.

What is Christian liberty? It is not that Jesus has freed me so that I can do as I like. Nor is it merely that Jesus has freed me from man-made laws, although it is an application of that reality. I would say that Christian liberty is the freedom to live in any manner that furthers the gospel. If the neutral activity that I want to do will hinder the gospel in my current location, then I am not free to do it. But Jesus has set me free from doing things that would hinder the gospel. And obviously the Jewish ceremonial law was a barrier to Gentiles, so Peter on this occasion chose to ignore it. But there were other reasons why Peter chose to stay in that location.

Arranging for prayer

First, Peter chose a place to live where he would have time to pray.

When we think of prayer, there are two inadequate responses. The first is that it will happen automatically and the second is that it will happen spontaneously. Both these suppositions seem spiritual but in reality each is an expression of spiritual laziness. Obviously there is a sense in which a Christian automatically prays, such as when he speaks to God when driving a car or walking along a road; there is also a sense in which he will pray spontaneously when matters come to mind suddenly without any prior hint. But neither of these responses is a substitute for regular prayer. The only adequate alternative is organised time for prayer.

This raises the next question, which is, when should we pray? The answer to this question is that each of us has to find the answer personally. There is not a verse in the Bible that specifies a particular time, although there are examples of regular prayer. Daniel prayed regularly three times a day (Dan. 6:10), as did David in Psalm 55:17, whereas one of the other psalmists prayed seven times a day (Ps. 119:164). But here Peter prays at noon.

Another important question is, Why should we pray? The answers are many. First, prayer is a statement that we have confidence in God. Second, prayer is a confession that we need God’s help. Third, prayer is the evidence that we have matured to the spiritual state which realises that without God’s input nothing of spiritual value will happen. Fourth, prayer is the glad admittance that we are not self-sufficient. Fifth, prayer is the realisation that we should not take a step without asking for God’s guidance, not even if you are an apostle.

Peter says to us from this incident, ‘Is your current arrangements helping you to pray?’ He says, ‘I arranged my location in Joppa and ensured that I would have a time and a place for prayer.’ If our lifestyle makes it difficult to find time to pray, we need to reconsider how we live.

Listen to God

Second, Peter chose a place where God would have time to speak to him. On the occasion described in the chapter, the time God chose to speak to him was between his prayer time and his breakfast. The important detail is that God knew there was a period of time in which he could explain important information to Peter.

How did God go about it? The first detail that Luke mentions is that Peter became hungry and therefore had to wait while his breakfast was made. From one point of view, this is so normal that we would not even notice it usually. But Peter must have recalled it afterwards because he told Luke about it. What would have happened if Peter had not been hungry? He might have gone and done something else and if he had the whole story in this chapter would have changed. So we should observe that the Lord’s providence includes the small, everyday things of life.

The second detail is that God spoke to him in a supernatural way by means of a trance in which he saw a vision. A common response to this experience is to wonder whether or not God speaks in visions today. There are five things I would say about such a response. First, I think it is a pointless question because if he has not done it for you then you don’t know what is being described and if he has done it then you will know. Second, God knows how to speak to you and if he decides not to use such methods with you, why would you want it? Third, what is important is what God says, not how he says it. The method of visions is of little significance, but the message of the vision is of great importance. Fourth, if God does send a vision the content will always be according to God’s Word and never contrary to it. Fifth, the particular detail that was conveyed to Peter is now found in God’s Word and we don’t need a vision to tell us about it.

The third detail is that the vision was designed to cause Peter to make progress, and this is always why God speaks to us in any way. That is why we read the Bible on a regular basis. Peter had taken some steps in the right direction when he went to live with Simon the tanner because it showed that some of his scruples about the Jewish ceremonial law were diminishing. But the vision tells us that they had not all been dealt with because that is what the vision is about. The vision dealt with an imminent issue with Cornelius the Gentile, but we know that the issue of the ceremonial law was a big one for Peter because later he had to be rebuked by Paul in Antioch for succumbing to those who demanded that it be implemented (Gal. 2:11).

One of the benefits of having the Bible recorded on CDs is that they tell us we can listen to the whole Bible in about seventy hours. CDs can be played virtually anywhere, so we can listen to God’s Word in all kinds of places. If we listened to it for one hour a day, we would listen to the whole Bible in ten weeks. Something similar can be done with Bible reading plans.

Of course, it is not enough to read the Bible. We have also to meditate on it and apply it to ourselves. I began this week to read the Book of Numbers. In Numbers 1, the author Moses keeps repeating his words a dozen times as he works his way through describing each of the tribes of Israel and how they are to become an army. Then he does something similar in Numbers 2, when he informs us of the position that each tribe took up as the nation marched through the desert. Why did God lead Moses to write in such a way? I thought about it, came up with some suggestions, looked up a commentary to see what others thought, and now I have some applications from that passage to apply to myself.

The point is that we have to make time to listen to God as well as to speak to God.

Look for God’s hand

Third, as he lived in Simon the tanner’s house Peter discovered that God was working behind the scenes, not only in Peter’s immediate vicinity, but miles away. Peter only discovered this was the case because he engaged in regular spiritual disciplines. What was God doing? The day before, he had informed Cornelius through an angel that he should send men to Peter in Joppa. Peter was totally unaware of this divine agenda, yet he was part of it. The reason why he was able to be part of it was that he was faithful in his discipleship.

Are there lessons from this situation for us? I would mention two.  One is that God will not ask you to do something big until you are willing to do the same thing in a small way. The big thing was to speak to Cornelius the Gentile centurion and the small thing was to go and stay in the house of Simon the tanner. Peter had done the little thing and adapted himself to make it possible for others to see that he was not controlled by the ceremonial law. Perhaps he wondered if any benefit would come from his decision to go and stay with Simon. We are not told that anything happened until Cornelius’ men arrived. So for day after day Peter was tested on the little thing until the time came when the big activity arrived. I doubt if Peter would have gone to Cornelius if he had stayed in the tanner’s house. A little step for Peter led eventually to a giant stride forward to the church.

The other lesson is that God usually gives hints from his Word that he is about to lead us in a certain manner. He did this with Peter and the vision. We will not be able to identify exactly what God has in mind until it happens. But we will be able to look back and see that God prepared us for what was coming. And when we see that such things have taken place, we will be strengthened in our faith, as no doubt Peter was.