The
Jerusalem Council
The
Issues
Act 15:1
Certain people came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the
believers: "Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom
taught by Moses, you cannot be saved."
Act 15:5-6
Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees
stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and
required to keep the law of Moses." (6) The apostles and elders
met to consider this question.
There
are two issues that some of the party of the Pharisees had when
dealing with Gentiles. These two issues are what the council came
together to discuss.
Issue
one is whether or not the Gentiles need to be circumcised to be
saved.
Issue
two is whether or not the Gentiles need to keep the Law of Moses.
These
issues were discussed by the council, that was made up of apostles
and elders.
Peter's
Dialog
Act 15:7-11
After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: "Brothers,
you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the
Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and
believe. (8) God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them
by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. (9) He did
not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by
faith. (10) Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the
necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been
able to bear? (11) No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord
Jesus that we are saved, just as they are."
After
much deliberation, Peter made it clear that the "yoke" is
not to be put on the necks of the Gentiles. It was common for the
Jews of that day to refer to the law as a "yoke".
John
Gill explains the "yoke":
"It
is common with the Jews to call the law a yoke; frequent mention is
made of ניר
פקידיא
and
מצות
עול,
"the yoke of the commandments" (o), and עול
התורה,
"the yoke of the law" (p): and by it here is meant, not
circumcision only and barely, for that the Jewish fathers had been
able to bear, and had bore it; nor the whole ceremonial law only,
which consisted of a multitude of commands and ordinances very heavy
and hard; but even the whole moral law, which circumcision obliged
those who submitted to it to keep it perfectly; see Gal 5:3,
which neither the apostles, nor their fathers, were ever able to do,
nor any mere man whatever; and therefore this yoke was intolerable
and insupportable, and not to be put upon the necks of the Gentile
believers; who here are called disciples, being taught the doctrine
of the Gospel, and the way of salvation; which was not by
circumcision, nor by any works of the law, but by the grace of
Christ, as in the following verse."
And
Matthew Henry:
"He
sharply reproves those teachers (some of whom, it is likely, were
present) who went about to bring the Gentiles under the obligation of
the law of Moses, Act 15:10.
The thing is so plain that he cannot forbear speaking of it with some
warmth: “Now therefore, since God has owned them for his, why tempt
you God to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, of the
believing Gentiles and their children” (for circumcision was a yoke
upon their infant seed, who are here reckoned among the disciples),
“a yoke which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?” Here
he shows that in this attempt, (1.) They offered a very great affront
to God: “You tempt him, by calling that in question which he has
already settled and determined by no less an indication than that of
the gift of the Holy Ghost; you do, in effect, ask, 'Did he know what
he did? Or was he in earnest in it? Or will he abide by his own act?'
Will you try whether God, who designed the ceremonial law for the
people of the Jews only, will now, in its last ages, bring the
Gentiles too under the obligation of it, to gratify you?” Those
tempt God who prescribe to him, and say that people cannot be saved
but upon such and such terms, which God never appointed; as if the
God of salvation must come into their measures. (2.) They offered a
very great wrong to the disciples: Christ came to proclaim liberty to
the captives, and they go about to enslave those whom he has made
free. See Nehe 5:8.
The ceremonial law was a heavy yoke; they and their fathers found it
difficult to be borne, so numerous, so various, so pompous, were the
institutions of it. The distinction of meats was a heavy yoke, not
only as it rendered conversation less pleasant, but as it embarrassed
conscience with endless scruples. The ado that was made about even
unavoidable touch of a grave or a dead body, the pollution contracted
by it, and the many rules about purifying from that pollution, were a
heavy burden. This yoke Christ came to ease us of, and called those
that were weary and heavy laden under it to come and take his yoke
upon them, his easy yoke. Now for these teachers to go about to lay
that yoke upon the neck of the Gentiles from which he came to free
even the Jews was the greatest injury imaginable to them."
The
net of Peter's dialog is that it was not God's intent to make Jews
out of the Gentile believers nor put them under either circumcision
for salvation nor to put them under the yoke of the Law of Moses.
This was the ultimate decision of the council. A requirement for
Gentiles to observe circumcision and the Law of Moses was flatly
rejected.
James's
Dialog
Act 15:13-21
When they finished, James spoke up. "Brothers," he said,
"listen to me. (14) Simon has described to us how God first
intervened to choose a people for his name from the Gentiles. (15)
The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is
written: (16) "'After this I will return and rebuild David's
fallen tent. Its ruins I will rebuild, and I will restore it, (17)
that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord, even all the Gentiles who
bear my name, says the Lord, who does these things'-- (18) things
known from long ago. (19) "It is my judgment, therefore, that we
should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God.
(20) Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from
food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of
strangled animals and from blood. (21) For the law of Moses has been
preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the
synagogues on every Sabbath."
James
mentions how Simon (Peter) had described the conversion of Cornelius.
James reminds the people listening that Peter had told how God had
determined to take for Himself a people for His name from the
Gentiles.
Act 10:1-5
At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion in what was
known as the Italian Regiment. (2) He and all his family were devout
and God-fearing; he gave generously to those in need and prayed to
God regularly. (3) One day at about three in the afternoon he had a
vision. He distinctly saw an angel of God, who came to him and said,
"Cornelius!" (4) Cornelius stared at him in fear. "What
is it, Lord?" he asked. The angel answered, "Your prayers
and gifts to the poor have come up as a memorial offering before God.
(5) Now send men to Joppa to bring back a man named Simon who is
called Peter.
With
respect to taking a people for His name from the Gentiles, James
recalls the prophecy of Amos 9:11-12.
He points out that Amos was in agreement with the inclusion of the
Gentiles in the house of God in order that the nations would bear the
Lord's name.
Amos 9:11-12
"In that day "I will restore David's fallen shelter-- I
will repair its broken walls and restore its ruins-- and will rebuild
it as it used to be, (12) so that they may possess the remnant of
Edom and all the nations that bear my name," declares the LORD,
who will do these things.
James's
reference to this passage is significant, while the religeous leaders
were expecting the Gentiles to come under Judaism and "become
Jewish" in order to be saved, James refuted this in saying that
"we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles". Instead
of requiring the Gentiles to be circumcised and keep the Law of
Moses, James was agreeing with Peter that no such yoke should be
placed upon the Gentiles.
Act 15:19
"It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it
difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God.
Finally,
James instructs that instead of placing circumcision and the Law of
Moses on the Gentiles, the only regulations that should be placed
upon them were to abstain from "food offered to idols, sexual
immorality, meat of strangled animals, and from blood.". These
four prohibitions gave offense to the Jews.
Matthew
Henry in part states:
"That
yet it would be well that in some things, which gave most offence to
the Jews, the Gentiles should comply with them. Because they must not
humour them so far as to be circumcised, and keep the whole law, it
does not therefore follow that they must act in a continual
contradiction to them, and study how to provoke them. It will please
the Jews (and, if a little thing will oblige them, better do so than
cross them)..."
"He
gives a reason for his advice - that great respect ought to be shown
to the Jews for they have been so long accustomed to the solemn
injunctions of the ceremonial law that they must be borne with, if
they cannot presently come off from them (Act 15:21):
For Moses hath of old those that preach him in every city, his
writings (a considerable part of which is the ceremonial law) being
read in the synagogues every sabbath day. “You cannot blame them if
they have a great veneration for the law of Moses; for besides that
they are very sure God spoke to Moses,”
From
Constables Expository Notes:
"Concerning
the nature of the prohibitions the most likely explanation is that
all four were associated to some degree with pagan religious
practices. Since this association was highly offensive to Jews,
Gentile believers were asked to avoid even the appearance of evil by
avoiding such practices altogether. Thus the purposes of the decree
and its prohibitions [cf. Act 15:29;
Act 21:25]
were to promote unity among believing Jews and believing Gentiles."
[Note: Charles H. Savelle, "A Reexamination of the Prohibitions
in Acts 15," Bibliotheca Sacra 161:644 (October-December
2004):468.]
"The
reason for these restrictions was this. In the weekly synagogue
Scripture readings, teachers of the Mosaic Law had stressed Jewish
scruples regarding these matters for generations. Consequently the
Jews regarded them as extremely important. If Gentile Christians
disregarded the convictions of these Jews, they would only alienate
those they hoped to bring to faith in Jesus Christ or to growth in
Christ (cf. 1 Cor 8:13)."
The
Four Prohibitions
Food
Offered To Idols
In
the case of "food offered to idols", Paul expounds on this
in the letter to the Corinthians.
From
the discussion of the council:
Act 15:20
Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food
polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled
animals and from blood.
From
the letter sent to the Gentiles:
Act 15:29
You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from
the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do
well to avoid these things. Farewell.
As
Paul states, the fact that food has been offered to idols is not the
problem here. He states "An idol is nothing at all in the
world." What is at issue is the perception of the religious
leaders towards meat offered to idols. It was an offense to the Jews
when someone would eat meat that had been offered to an idol.
It
was not due to any intrinsic nature of the meat that this prohibition
was put in place, but it was to ensure that the Gentiles were not a
stumbling block to the Jewish people they were trying to win to
Christ.
1Co 8:4-9
So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that "An
idol is nothing at all in the world" and that "There is no
God but one." (5) For even if there are so-called gods, whether
in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and
many "lords"), (6) yet for us there is but one God, the
Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is
but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through
whom we live. (7) But not everyone possesses this knowledge. Some
people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat
sacrificial food they think of it as having been sacrificed to a god,
and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. (8) But food does
not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no
better if we do. (9) Be careful, however, that the exercise of your
rights does not become a stumbling block to the weak.
Sexual Immorality
This
prohibition is not generally one that is debated today. All
Christians understand the moral law that prohibits sexual immorality.
However, during the time in which this issue was being discussed by
the council, Gentiles did not consider fornication to be criminal,
and they engaged in it frequently. This of course would have been
quite offensive to the Jews, and as in the case of the food
sacrificed to idols, Gentiles were told to abstain in order not to
cause offense to them.
John Gill explains:
"the reason why
this is put among, things indifferent is, not that it was so in
itself, but because it was not thought to be criminal by the
Gentiles, and was commonly used by them, and which must be offensive
to the believing Jews, who were better acquainted with the will of
God;"
Meat
of Strangled Animals
This
prohibition concerned Jewish law. The Jews were prohibited from
eating animals that were not killed properly so as to drain the blood
from them. Like the other prohibitions, this one was not binding on
the Gentiles, however, the Jews found the practice among Gentiles to
be offensive. So because of the offense, and to avoid causing a
stumbling block, the Gentiles were to avoid the meat of strangled
animals.
John
Gill helps us to understand the prohibition:
"from
eating them, and design such as die of themselves, or are torn with
beasts, or are not killed in a proper way, by letting out their
blood; but their blood is stagnated or congealed in the veins: the
Jews might not kill with a reaper's sickle, nor with a saw, nor with
the teeth, or nail; because these חונקין,
"strangled" (a):
and what was not slain as it should be, was reckoned all one as what
dies of itself; and whoever ate of either of these was to be beaten
(b);
the law respecting these things was of the ceremonial kind, and
peculiar to the Jews, and was not binding upon the Gentiles; for that
which died of itself might be given to a stranger, and he might eat
it, or it might be sold to an alien, Deu 14:21"
Blood
The
Jewish people had several laws regarding the eating of blood. As in
the previous abstentions, the intent of the abstention from blood was
not due to intrinsic values of the blood, but that Jews had been
commanded to abstain from eating animals that had not been properly
prepared, in which the blood had not been drained before cooking the
meat.
John
Gill
"There
were several laws about eating of blood, and which are different, and
ought to be carefully distinguished. The first is in Gen 9:4
"but flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood there of,
shall you not eat"; which forbids the eating of flesh with the
blood; but not the eating of flesh separately, nor the eating of
blood separately, provided they were properly prepared and dressed,
but the eating of them together without any preparation."
Matthew Henry
From
things strangled, and from blood, which, though not evil in
themselves, as the other two, nor designed to be always abstained as
those were, had been forbidden by the precepts of Noah (Gen 9:4.),
before the giving of the law of Moses; and the Jews had a great
dislike to them, and to all those that took a liberty to use them;
and therefore, to avoid giving offence, let the Gentile converts
abridge themselves of their liberty herein, 1 Cor 8:9,
1 Cor 8:13.
Thus we must become all things to all men.
These explanations of
the four prohibition reveal that the intent was to avoid offending
the Jewish people who Gentile believers were trying to win to Christ.
A
False Conclusion
There are some that
teach that the finding of the council was that no, circumcision is
not required for salvation, but yes, the Gentiles do need to keep the
Law of Moses. This teaching is propagated by those in the Hebrew
Roots Movement, and Torah Observant groups. This teaching states that
the Gentiles are to start with these four prohibitions, but are over
time to learn the rest of the Law of Moses by attending the synagogue
where Moses is read. They use the following passage:
Act 15:21
For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the
earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath."
There are significant
issues with this teaching. First of all, there is nothing in the text
of this verse that connects it with Gentiles learning the Law of
Moses. It doesn't say that Gentiles will be going to synagogue, and
it doesn't say that Gentiles should go to synagogue. It is simply a
statement that says that Moses is read in the synagogue every
Sabbath. It is an eisegetical conclusion to connect the factual
statement that Moses is read every Sabbath in the synagogue to
Gentiles learning the Law of Moses. The text simply doesn't say that.
Given the above
explanations of what the four prohibitions were, and why they were
prohibitions, it is far more sensible to deduct that the reason the
council brought this up is to explain the rational for the
prohibitions. The rational for the four prohibitions was to avoid
offending the Jews whom they were trying to win for Christ. It makes
no sense to claim that the prohibitions were just a starting point
for the Gentiles to learn the Law of Moses.
The view that James
mentions the Law of Moses being read in the synagogue every Sabbath
is connected to the sensibilities of the Jews and not the expectation
of the Gentiles to adopt the law of Moses is widely held:
Alexander
McLaren Explains:
"But
what does the reason in Act 15:21
mean? Why should the reading of Moses every Sabbath be a reason for
these concessions? Various answers are given: but the most natural is
that the constant promulgation of the law made respect for the
feelings {even if mistaken} of Jewish Christians advisable, and the
course suggested the most likely to win Jews who were not yet
Christians. Both classes would be flung farther apart if there were
not some yielding. The general principle involved is that one cannot
be too tender with old and deeply rooted convictions even if they be
prejudices, and that Christian charity, which is truest wisdom, will
consent to limitations of Christian liberty, if thereby any little
one who believes in Him shall be saved from being offended, or any
unbeliever from being repelled."
Thomas Constable:
"James
was not putting Gentile converts under the Mosaic Law by imposing
these restrictions. He was urging them to limit their exercise of
Christian liberty to make their witness to unsaved Jews more
effective and their fellowship with saved Jews more harmonious (cf.
1 Cor 9:19-23)."
Matthew Poole
"The reason why
St. James would not have the ceremonies buried as soon as they were
dead, was because the Jews had been so long confirmed in them, and
bare such a love unto them; and he would purchase concord between
them and the Gentile converts; though the Gentiles should bear with
some inconvenience into the bargain, as not presently using all the
liberty which through Christ they had a right unto."
Myers NT Commentary
See
Düsterdieck in the Götting. Monatschr. 1849, p. 282 ff. Γάρ]
gives the reason why it was indispensable to enjoin this fourfold
ἀπέχεσθαι—namely, because the preaching of the Mosaic
law, taking place from ancient generations in every city every
Sabbath day by its being read in the synagogues, would only tend to
keep alive the offence which the Jewish-Christians (who still adhered
to the synagogue) took to their uncircumcised brethren, in view of
the complete freedom of the latter from the law, including even these
four points.
Another view explaining
this verse is that it is simply stating that these four prohibitions
needed to be explained to the Gentiles, however, since Moses was read
every Sabbath, the Jewish Christians did not need to be taught these
four. The Jewish Christians would already be aware of and following
these prohibitions.
Ellicott explains:
For
Moses of old time.—Literally, of ancient generations. The
conjunction gives the reason for writing to the Gentiles, and giving
them these injunctions. The Jews, who heard the Law in their
synagogues every Sabbath, did not need instruction. It might be taken
for granted that they would adhere to the rules now specified. So, in
Acts 15:23, the encyclical letter is addressed exclusively to “the
brethren of the Gentiles.”
Clark's Commentary
Moses of old time hath
in every city - The sense of this verse seems to be this: As it was
necessary to write to the Gentiles what was strictly necessary to be
observed by them, relative to these points, it was not so to the
converted Jews; for they had Moses, that is, the law, preached to
them, κατα πολιν, in the city, that is, Antioch; and, by the
reading of the law in the synagogues every Sabbath day, they were
kept in remembrance of those institutions which the Gentiles, who had
not the law, could not know. Therefore, James thought that a letter
to the converted Gentiles would be sufficient, as the converted Jews
had already ample instruction on these points.
Outside of the Torah
Observant or Hebrew Roots Movement, there is scant support that the
Gentiles are still required to learn the Law of Moses, and these four
prohibitions are just a "soft start" for them. The reality
is that the ultimate decision of the council was that the Gentiles
were only required to abstain from the four, and were not required to
be circumcised or keep the Law of Moses. Saying that the Gentiles
would learn the Law of Moses in due time is contrary to the decision
of the council.
The
Letter
There is still
additional support to indicate that the Gentiles were not required to
learn the Law of Moses in an ongoing part as the Torah Observant and
Hebrew Roots Movement claims. Although they claim that Acts 15:21 is
contextually linked to the Gentiles learning the Law of Moses, the
fact is, this passage was never communicated to the Gentiles in the
context of this council. One would think that something of such
importance would certainly have been included in such a letter, but
it was not.
The following is the
complete letter that was sent to the Gentiles. The reader will note
that the fact that the Law of Moses was read in the synagogue each
Sabbath is not communicated to the Gentiles.
Act 15:23-29
With them they sent the following letter: The apostles and elders,
your brothers, To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and
Cilicia: Greetings. (24) We have heard that some went out from us
without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by
what they said. (25) So we all agreed to choose some men and send
them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul-- (26) men who
have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. (27)
Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth
what we are writing. (28) It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us
not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements:
(29) You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood,
from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You
will do well to avoid these things. Farewell.
The
discussion regarding the Law
of Moses being read in the synagogue each Sabbath was nothing more
than a discussion point among the members of the council, and was
never intended to be communicated to the Gentiles. The council was
simply stating that since the Jewish Christians and those they were
trying to win for Christ were familiar with the law, the Gentiles
should not offend their sensibilities. It could have alternatively or
in addition indicated that the council understood that the four
prohibitions did not need to be communicated to the Jews since they
heard Moses every Sabbath and would have been familiar with the
prohibitions already. Either of these would explain why the letter
was not included in the letter to the Gentiles, it wasn't meant for
them.
