Peter Spitaler 88 Fourth, Baumert’s proposal to translate μηδὲν διακρινόμενος in 10:20, “in no way distancing yourself” from (Cornelius’ gentile servants24), is sig- nificant because Baumert confines his interpretation to meaning within the common Greek language system in which NT Greek partakes. Con- textually, Baumert’s translation anticipates Peter’s statements in 11:12 and 15:9 that he does not “differentiate” between Gentiles and Jews. Two aspects of his analysis call for further comment. 1) Quoting the spirit’s final declaration to Peter, “I have sent them”, in support of one’s interpre- tation of διακρίνομαι’s meaning (as Baumert does)25 does not prove its accuracy. Other scholars appeal to the same phrase to argue διακρίνομαι means “doubt”. 2) Dismissing any link with the middle διακρίνομαι in 11:2 (“dispute/contest”) with the statement, “was aber für unsere Stelle nicht paßt” (“which does not fit our passage”)26, Baumert neither explains his assertion nor explores possible literary links between these passages. In the following section, I offer an analysis of Acts 10:20 that also pays attention to the meaning of the middle, διακρίνομαι, in classical/Hellen- istic Greek. However, contrary to Baumert, I suggest translating the verb “contest”, “dispute”, or “object”, and the phrase, μηδὲν διακρινόμενος, “without contest/dispute/objection”, and attempt to show that the literary context supports these renderings. In my opinion, the phrase, “without objection”, expresses continuation with the command/(dis-)obedience pattern that dominates the vision account (10:9-16). In other words, as Baumert relates μηδὲν διακρινόμενος to Peter’s anticipated distancing himself from Cornelius’ servants, which action the spirit prevents with a final command, I relate the phrase to Peter’s likely objection to follow Cornelius’ servants: as Peter objects to the spirit (during the vision), he must not object to the spirit’s messengers (after the vision)27. Contex- tually, this interpretation of μηδὲν διακρινόμενος agrees with Peter’s persistent objections to the spirit’s commands during his vision (10:9-16), with Peter’s own report about his trouble-free (ἀναντιρρήτως, “without protest”) departure with the servants (10:29), and with Peter’s statement about the unlawful nature of Jews meeting Gentiles (10:28), with which he justifies theoretically his readiness to object to Cornelius’ invitation if the spirit had not intervened. Forge 1996] 150) suggests either “making no distinctions” or “without doubting”. Johnson attempts to capture both active and passive text traditions with the translation, “without debating” (Acts 198). “Wortspiel” 32. 24 “Wortspiel” 32. 25 “Wortspiel” 31. 26