A House Which Invites Everyone In

October 16th, 2026

I often pause to think about the finer details of the conversion of the Ethiopian nobleman recorded for us in Acts 8:26-40. So much can be overlooked in this short account. For example, for those not familiar with geography, it might not register that this man made a difficult journey of literally thousands of miles to come to Jerusalem. For those not familiar with the Law of Moses, it also might not register that upon reaching the temple “to worship,” he would likely have found himself unable to enter because he was “a eunuch” (Acts 8:27; Leviticus 21:18-20; Deuteronomy 23:12).^[1]As “a man of Ethiopia,” he might also have been excluded as a gentile, or, if he was a proselyte, he might have been held in contempt for his role in a government of the gentile world (Acts 8:27; cf. Acts 10:28). Was the entire trip disappointing? Frustrating? Heartbreaking?

What’s often given me further pause though is this simple question: why didn’t the church at Jerusalem make contact with him? Why is it that God had to send Philip on a special mission to chase after the Ethiopian after he had already left Jerusalem and “was returning” to his home in Ethiopia (Acts 8:28)?

Perhaps the context provides part of the answer. The Bible describes the early Jerusalem church as “continuing daily with one accord in the temple” (Acts 2:46). How much impact did the persecution of Saul have on this habit? We know at his instigation, members of “the church […] were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria” (Acts 8:1). Either 1) this is one of those rare occasions where all doesn’t mean all or 2) this scattering was short lived for some, because only a few verses later Luke describes, “the apostles who were at Jerusalem” (Acts 8:14). Either way, it’s likely that ongoing persecution in Jerusalem caused the church to keep a lower profile.

While persecution might explain why members of the church in Jerusalem might have missed the Ethiopian when he went to the temple, it doesn’t explain why God did not use anyone in the church there to talk to him. It isn’t hard to imagine why though. Judging from 1) how much convincing it took for Peter to go to Cornelius’ house; 2) Peter’s own words regarding intercultural contact (“You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation” – Acts 10:28); 3) the church’s sad response to hearing “that the Gentiles had also received the word of God,” when they “contended with” Peter for daring to talk to gentiles (Acts 11:1-3), it’s hard to imagine anyone, Peter included, as being ready and willing to receive that mission from God. The church believed in the Abrahamic promise of salvation (cf. Acts 2:39; 3:25-26), but they clearly did not understand its implications. The door of Jesus’ church, “the house of God” (1 Timothy 3:15), was open to the Ethiopian, but the Jerusalem church was not interested yet in showing Gentiles the way in.

God never opens a door without also making a way though. Since the Jerusalem church evidently wasn’t ready to be a part of God’s mission to the Gentiles yet, God, as He always does, brought “relief and deliverance […] from another place” (Esther 4:14). Perhaps even before the Ethiopian started on his journey to Jerusalem, God was working on the heart of one of the members of the Jerusalem church that wasn’t there when the Ethiopian visited. God first equipped Philip “for the work of ministry” (cf. Ephesians 4:12) to the Grecian widows whom the rest of the Jerusalem church had been neglecting (Acts 6:1-6). The love that grew in Philip’s heart for excluded souls saw him be the first on record to take the Gospel to the Samaritans (Acts 8:5), and perhaps these two works both made Him ready to answer God’s call to seek the Ethiopian (Acts 8:26-29).

Of course, God was not only working around the Ethiopian; He was also working in the Ethiopian. Perhaps a dissatisfying visit to Jerusalem followed by an impassioned reading of the book of Isaiah might have helped prepare the Ethiopian’s heart for the Gospel. This is another small detail of this account that shouldn’t be overlooked: it was not common for individuals to have copies of Biblical books, and, when someone did have them, it meant that he or she had obtained them at great cost. Did he have a copy of the book prior to going to Jerusalem? Did he obtain one in Jerusalem, just to make something of the journey? Either way, God’s providence saw him somehow obtain a copy and saw him reading exactly the right passage when he encountered Philip.

The passage he was reading was a portion of what we know today as Isaiah 53. What a powerful text! I find that Isaiah 53 pulls me closer to the crucifixion than the Gospel accounts do; it’s an amazing, powerful prophecy. Luke says, “Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him” (Acts 8:35). What a great place to start!

It occurred to me during a recent read through Isaiah though that while we know where Philip began preaching Jesus in the text of Isaiah, we do not know where he stopped. Could it be that Philip continued to walk him through the text or perhaps moved him forward to the passage we now know as Isaiah 56? Could it be that together they read these words:

“Do not let the son of the foreigner who has joined himself to the LORD Speak, saying, ‘The LORD has utterly separated me from His people’; Nor let the eunuch say, ‘Here I am, a dry tree.’ For thus says the LORD: ‘To the eunuchs who keep My Sabbaths, and choose what pleases Me, and hold fast My covenant, even to them I will give in My house and within My walls a place and a name better than that of sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off’” (Isaiah 56:3-5).

Whether they read it that day or not, it’s incredibly powerful to think that long before the Ethiopian’s trip, long before Philip’s call to serve the widows, long before the first Gospel sermon, long before the first promise of salvation to Abraham and through him to all nations and peoples, God was planning through “the lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Revelation 13:8) to establish a place in a house that would include all kinds of people, even (and perhaps especially) an Ethiopian eunuch.

Christians, we should thank God everyday that we have been invited into “the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15). We should thank God for the way He worked through the Holy Scriptures as well as through the “Philips” of the world so that we could understand what we were reading. And we should pause and consider who the Lord might be inviting into His house whom we might be ignoring or even purposefully excluding. As J.M. McCaleb wrote, “Of one the Lord has made the race, thro’ one has come the fall; where sin has gone must go His grace; the Gospel is for all.”

-Patrick Swayne
patrick@tftw.org

_{[1] Some commentators try to soften the application of these Old Testament prohibitions by speculating on the reason why such individuals were excluded and limiting these statements to those who had been mutilated or castrated in the name of idolatrous religion. While this is possible, it can’t really be proven, and, even if it is true, it’s worth pausing to consider how the scribes and Pharisees (who held tremendous sway over what happened at the temple in the first century) might have interpreted these passages and subsequently what treatment the Ethiopian might have received through their guidance.}