Charles Ellicott Commentary Acts 2:46

"And day by day, continuing stedfastly with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread at home, they took their food with gladness and singleness of heart," — Acts 2:46 (ASV)

Continuing daily with one accord in the temple.—At first, it would have seemed natural that the followers of a Teacher whom the priests had condemned to death, who had once nearly been stoned, and once almost seized in the very courts of the Temple (John 8:59; John 10:31; John 7:45), should keep aloof from the sanctuary that had thus been desecrated.

But they remembered that He had claimed it as His Father’s house, that His zeal for that house had been like a consuming passion (John 2:16–17). Therefore, they had attended its worship daily before the Day of Pentecost (Luke 24:53). It was not less, but infinitely more, precious to them now as the place where they could meet with God than it had been in the days of ignorance, before they had known the Christ and, through Him, had learned to know the Father.

The apparent strangeness of their being allowed to meet in the Temple is explained partly by the fact that its courts were open to all Israelites who did not disturb its peace. It is also partly explained by the existence of a moderate, half-believing party in the Sanhedrin itself, including Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimathea, and Gamaliel (Acts 5:35), and by the popularity gained for a time by the holiness and liberal almsgiving of the new community.

Breaking bread from house to house.—It is better, with the marginal note, to understand this as at home—that is, in their own house. The Greek phrase may have a distributive force, but Romans 16:5, 1 Corinthians 16:19, and Colossians 4:14, where the same formula is used, seem to show that this is not the meaning here.

They met in the Temple, and they also met in what, in the modern sense of the word, would be the “church” of the new society. This was for the act of worship, above all, for the highest act of worship and fellowship, for which the Temple was, of course, unsuitable.

Did eat their meat . . .—We again have the tense that implies a customary act. The words imply that, at that time, the solemn breaking of bread was closely connected with their daily life. Anticipating the language of a few years later, the Agapè, or Love-feast, was united with the Eucharistic Communion. The higher sanctified the lower. It was not until love and faith grew colder that people were forced to separate them, lest (as in 1 Corinthians 11:20–21) the lower should desecrate the higher.

Gladness and singleness of heart.—This “gladness” is significant. The word was the same as that which had been used by the angel to Zacharias (Luke 1:44) in announcing the birth of the Forerunner. The verb from which the noun was derived had been employed by our Lord when He instructed His disciples to rejoice and be glad (Matthew 5:12).

The literal meaning of the word translated “singleness,” which does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament, was the smoothness of soil without stones. From there, it came to be used for evenness and simplicity, unity of character; then for that unity showing itself in love; and by a further transition, for unalloyed benevolence, manifesting itself in action.