The aim of this paper is to sharpen the skills of modern readers to read and interpret biblical texts more appropriately in their social and cultural contexts. By applying a cross-cultural approach to the story of Peter and Cornelius in Acts 10:1–11:18, readers will not only grasp the heightened tension and understand the core conflict in this story but will also come to appreciate the missiological implications behind this watershed story of Luke.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BauerWalter2000A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2.
BoltPeter G.1998“Mission and Witness. In Witness to the Gospel: The Theology of Acts. MarshallI. HowardPetersonDavid, eds. Pp. 191–214. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans.
3.
DouglasMary1966Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. London: Routledge.
4.
DouglasMary1997“Deciphering a Meal.” In Food and Culture: A Reader. CounihanCaroleVan EsterikPenny, eds. Pp. 36–51. New York: Routledge.
5.
ElliottJohn H.1991a“Household and Meals versus Temple Purity: Replication Patterns in Luke-Acts (Acts 10).”Biblical Theology Bulletin: A Journal of Bible and Theology21 (3): 102–108.
6.
ElliottJohn H.1991b“Temple versus Household in Luke-Acts: A Contrast in Social Institutions.” In The Social World of Luke-Acts: Models for Interpretation. NeyreyJerome H., ed. Pp. 211–240. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
7.
ElliottJohn H.1993What Is Social-Scientific Criticism?Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press.
8.
EslerPhilip F.1987Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts: The Social and Political Motivations of Lucan Theology. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
9.
FitzmyerJoseph A.1998The Acts of the Apostles. New York: Doubleday.
10.
GrantR. M.1980“Dietary Laws among Pythagoreans, Jews, and Christians.”The Harvard Theological Review73 (1–2): 299–310.
11.
HarringtonDaniel J.1988“Second Testament Exegesis and the Social Sciences: A Bibliography.”Biblical Theology Bulletin: A Journal of Bible and Theology18 (2): 77–85.
12.
HengelMartin1983Between Jesus and Paul: Studies in the Earliest History of Christianity. Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press.
13.
HolladayJ. S.1992“House, Israelite.” In The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. III. FreedmanDavid, gen. ed. Pp. 308–318. New York: Doubleday.
14.
HouseC.1983“Defilement by Association: Some Insights from the Usage of Koinos/Koinou in Acts 10 and 11.”Andrews University Seminary Studies21 (2): 143–153.
15.
HumphreyE. M.1995“Collision of Modes? Vision and Determining Argument in Acts 10:1–11:18.”Semeia71: 65–84.
16.
JeremiasJoachim1975Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus. Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press.
17.
LenchakTimothy2000“Clean and Unclean.”Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible. FreedmanDavid N., ed. Pp 262–263. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans.
18.
MalbonElizabeth S.1986Narrative Space and Mythic Meaning in Mark. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
19.
MalinaBruce J.1991“Reading Theory Perspective: Reading Luke-Acts.” In The Social World of Luke-Acts: Models for Interpretation. NeyreyJerome H., ed. Pp. 3–23. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
20.
MalinaBruce J.1993The New Testament World: Insights from Cultural Anthropology. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press.
21.
MargueratDanielBourquinYvan1999How to Read Bible Stories: An Introduction to Narrative Criticism. BowdenJ., trans. London: SCM.
22.
MoxnesHalvor1987“Meals and the New Community in Luke.”Svensk Exegetisk Arsbok (Swedish Exegetical Yearbook) 51–52: 158–167.
23.
NeyreyJerome H.1991a“Ceremonies in Luke-Acts: The Case of Meals and Table Fellowship.” In The Social World of Luke-Acts: Models for Interpretation. NeyreyJerome H., ed. Pp. 361–387. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
24.
NeyreyJerome H.1991b“The Symbolic Universe of Luke-Acts: ‘They Turn the World Upside Down.’” In The Social World of Luke-Acts: Models for Interpretation. NeyreyJerome H., ed. Pp. 271–304. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
25.
NeyreyJerome H.1996“Meals, Food, Table Fellowship.” In The Social Sciences and New Testament Interpretation. RohrbaughRichard, ed. Pp. 160–182. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
26.
PourthuisMarcelSchwartzJoshua, eds. 2000Purity and Holiness: The Heritage of Leviticus. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill.
27.
SoardsMarion L.1994The Speeches in Acts: Their Content, Context, and Concerns. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press.
28.
ThompsonRichard P.PhillipsThomas E., ed. 1998Literary Studies in Luke-Acts: Essays in Honor of Joseph B. Tyson. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press.
29.
TiedeD. L.1988“Acts 11:1–18.”Interpretation: A Journal of Bible and Theology42 (2): 175–180.
30.
TrainorMichael F.2001The Quest for Home: The Household in Mark's Community. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press.
31.
WenhamG. J.1981“The Theology of Unclean Food.”Evangelical Quarterly53: 6–15.
32.
WitheringtonBenIII1998The Acts of the Apostles: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans.
33.
YaoSantos2004“Dismantling Social Barriers through Table Fellowship (Acts 2: 42–47).” In Mission in Acts: Ancient Narrative in Contemporary Context. GallagherRobert L.HertigPaul, eds. Pp. 29–36. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis.
