Jan 11, 2015
Acts 15:1-31
Download Audio:
Outline:
Acts 15:1-2, “And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” Therefore, when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem, to the apostles and elders, about this question.”
“Certain men came down from Judea…” Later in the chapter we will learn that these men were believers “from the sect of the Pharisees.” These men were Pharisaical Jews who had accepted Jesus as their Messiah, but had also remained dedicated to the Law of Moses.
We’re also told they traveled the 300 miles from Jerusalem to Antioch in order to “teach the brethren that unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” Sadly, many present these men as misguided legalists (men adding to the word of God) when in reality I would argue these men were instead heretics.
Note: Their claim was that the Gentiles members of this church in Antioch weren’t saved “unless they were circumcised.” Basically, they were teaching a gospel of salvation by Jesus through works! To become a Christian you had to also practice the Jewish Law.
With this in mind it’s no wonder “Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them…” The language indicates the argument was about to come to blows! Paul and Barnabas were enraged at what they were teaching the people. Fundamentally, they were tampering with the most critical issue of all… The mechanism by which a person is saved!
Obviously, the issue was of great importance. Not only was the church in Antioch comprised of Gentiles who’s very salvation was now being called into question, but Paul and Barnabas had recently wrapped up a missionary journey whereby Gentiles all throughout the region of Galatia had converted under the presence that it was only “through Jesus that forgiveness of sins and justification” might be attained!
According to Luke, recognizing the need to deal with an issue of this magnitude head on, the church leaders in Antioch “determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them go to Jerusalem” and discuss “this question” with the “apostles and elders.”
Before we continue we should point out that in Galatians 2:1-10 Paul provides his own description of the following events… “Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and also took Titus with me. And I went up by revelation, and communicated to them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to those who were of reputation, lest by any means I might run, or had run, in vain. Yet not even Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised. And this occurred because of false brethren secretly brought in (who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage), to whom we did not yield submission even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.”
“But from those who seemed to be something - whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man - for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me. But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. They desired only that we should remember the poor, the very thing which I also was eager to do.”
Acts 15:3, “So, being sent on their way by the church, they passed through Phoenicia and Samaria, describing the conversion of the Gentiles; and they caused great joy to all the brethren.”
Paul, Barnabas, Titus, and an undefined number of believers leave Antioch heading south through Phoenicia into Samaria on their way to Jerusalem. While they’re making this 2 week journey Luke tells us they used this opportunity to visit churches along the way.
We’re also told they “described the conversion of the Gentiles” which “caused great joy among all the brethren.” Note: Luke includes this detail in order to highlight how much of a minority these Pharisaical heretics really were.
Acts 15:4-5, “And when they had come to Jerusalem, they were received by the church and the apostles and the elders; and they reported all things that God had done with them. But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.”
Once again it’s important to point out the argument of those Paul was so adamantly opposing… This issue this “Jerusalem Council” had gathered to address. The claim of “the sect of the Pharisees” was that “it was necessary” for the Gentiles to be “circumcised” and “keep the Law of Moses” if they were to be saved from their sins.
Please keep in mind… The issue at hand and thus the issue the Apostles will make a decision concerning was not the existence of Christian liberty or even the nature of sanctification… The issue concerned the very nature of salvation itself!
Please understand why this was such a monumental issue? If the apostles ruled with the Pharisees Christianity would have been deemed nothing more than a sect of Judaism and as Paul stated so bluntly in Galatians the movement would have quickly died off.
You see… If salvation came through Jesus but by the Law then Paul’s honest evaluation was that he would have “run in vain” concluding that “not even Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised.
Acts 15:6-7, “Now the apostles and elders came together to consider this matter. And when there had been much dispute Peter rose up and said to them…”
Set the Scene: The apostles and elders are hearing out the oral arguments with both sides being allowed to make their case. Counter arguments then ensue “and when there had been much dispute” before Peter decides to weigh in on the matter. He begins…
Acts 15:7-11, “Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they.”
Peter’s approach is brilliant because he’s going to weigh in on the issue not by declaring an edict or even voicing an opinion, but by simply calling God to the witness stand. In essence, Peter begins by giving a history lesson explaining why the Gentiles were even among them to begin with… In the process Peter will lay out 5 compelling points:
First, Peter recounts that while he may have been the vessel it was “God who chose that the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe.” His point is that this whole Gentile controversy hadn’t started with Paul and Barnabas, nor even with himself… The Gospel extending to the Gentiles occurred because God chose for it to happen!
Secondly, Peter says that God “who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us.” His argument is that the authenticity of the Gentiles’ salvation could not be a subject of dispute since they had been given the Holy Spirit in the same manner as the Jews on the Day of Pentecost.
Thirdly, Peter sees this reality as further evidence that God “made no distinction between Jew and Gentile” when He “purified their hearts by faith.” Peter is emphatic that the claim these Gentiles had to be circumcised and obey the Law to be saved simply wasn’t consistent with the precedent God initially established.
God poured out the Holy Spirit onto these Gentiles, purifying their hearts, because of their faith in Jesus alone! “How can you claim God is now requiring something for salvation today when He didn’t do it back then?” If anything it’s illogical.
Fourthly, Peter highlights the overarching flaw in their argument. What right did these Jews have to require the Gentiles be saved through their obedience to the Law when “neither our fathers nor we were able to bear” that particular “yoke?” It’s as though Peter is reminding them that no man but Jesus has ever been able to fully obey the Law of Moses.
Finally, Peter closes his arguments… “We believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they.” The ultimate flaw in their argument was based in a fundamental oversight concerning the very nature of their own salvation. The only reason they wanted the Gentiles to obey the Law and be circumcised was because they had a misunderstanding concerning their own salvation!
There is no doubt Peter’s statement that as Jews “we shall be save in the same manner as they” sent shock waves throughout the room. In making this statement Peter was elevating the Gentiles in the discussion by pointing out that they had a better understanding of the true nature of salvation because they didn’t come with all the religious baggage.
Peter closes by declaring without equivocation that the very mechanism of the Gentiles salvation was the very mechanism of their own. Not one of them had been saved because they were Jewish or because they had been obedient to the Law… Salvation only comes to both the Jew and the Gentile “through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.”
Acts 15:12, “Then all the multitude kept silent and listened to Barnabas and Paul declaring how many miracles and wonders God had worked through them among the Gentiles.”
“God had worked…” In recounting story after story from their first missionary journey (not to mention the work that was happening through this largely Gentile church in Antioch) Barnabas and Paul provided further evidence aimed at substantiating Peter’s argument.
Acts 15:13-15, “And after they had become silent, James answered, saying, “Men and brethren, listen to me: Simon has declared how God at the first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name. And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written…”
Following Peter, Barnabas, and Paul Luke tells us “James” took the floor. Note: This is the half-brother of Jesus who it would appear has risen to a position of prominence within this church in Jerusalem. He will later author the Epistle of James.
James begins his argument by restating Peter’s fundamental position…“God visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name” with the intention of showing how Scripture concurred with Peter’s argument. He’ll now quote directly from Amos the prophet.
Acts 15:16-21, “‘After this I will return and will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins, and I will set it up; So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord, even all the Gentiles who are called by My Name, says the Lord who does all these things.’ Known to God from eternity are all His works. Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God, but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses has had throughout many generations those who preach him in every city, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath.”
After pointing to Scripture as the final arbitrator on this issue (which clearly concurred with the arguments of Peter, Barnabas, and Paul), James presents a decisive ruling on the matter. “Therefore I judge that we…” Because this ruling will be repeated and refined in just a few verses, we’ll leave our commentary to later in the chapter.
Acts 15:22-23, “Then it pleased the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas, namely, Judas who was also named Barsabas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren. They wrote this letter by them…”
Following their decision, Luke tells us “it pleased” everyone to “send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas.” In order to insure the issue was cleared up and the decision clearly stated, beyond simply having Paul and Barnabas bring back word to the church in Antioch, the counsel felt it wise to send a letter explaining the ruling while also providing two additional witnesses or corroborate its validity: Judas and Silas.
Acts 15:23-29, “The apostles, the elders, and the brethren, To the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia: Greetings. Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, “You must be circumcised and keep the law” - to whom we gave no such commandment - it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who will also report the same things by word of mouth. For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”
First, by distancing themselves from the men who had come teaching this heresy, the Apostles were rejecting their message… “Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, “You must be circumcised and keep the law” - to whom we gave no such commandment…”
Secondly, by aligning themselves with Paul and Barnabas, the Apostles were confirming their message… “It seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives (literally, laid down their lives) for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
Knowing these men had been under attack and publicly questioned, the apostles go above and beyond in expressing their public respect and admiration for Paul and Barnabas. Their underlying point in doing so… We agree with what these men have been teaching you (Salvation comes by faith in Jesus through the grace of God alone)!
Finally, the Apostles close the letter by requesting that the “brethren of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia… abstain” from four specific things: (1) “From things offered to idols…” (2) “From blood…” (3) “From things strangled…” (4) “And from sexual immorality.”
Before I attempt to explain why the apostles make this particular request, I need to first make three observation that set the stage for what I believe is being communicated:
First Observation: This particular instruction was clearly given to specific churches, in specific areas, during a specific time. It is an error to apply this passage universally.
Second Observation: The four things listed by the apostles all related to a set of ceremonial laws recorded in Leviticus 17-18 which would be foreign to the Gentiles.
The first three instructions deal with specific Jewish dietary restrictions. The Jews were prohibited from eating meat that had been sacrificed to pagan idols, and they were required to only eat meat that was considered clean (without blood or strangled).
In regards to “sexual immorality,” within this context, it is likely this was not a reference to relations outside of marriage, but was more specifically a prohibition against marriage occurring between family members (which was a common practice in the 1st century).
Third Observation: The language used in this letter indicates these four instructions were presented as recommendations. They were suggestions, not a mandate! The apostles had already made it clear no one (Jew or Gentile) was bound by the Mosaic Law; however, they do express that “if you keep yourself from these things, you will do well.”
Now the question… Why did the Apostles deem it necessary these Gentile Christians abstain from these things? While some believe the exhortation was aimed at maintaining unity within a group of churches comprised of both Jewish and Gentile believers (laying aside liberty so you don’t cause a brother to stumble), I’m not convinced this was the case.
First of all, the belief that the Apostles were telling these Gentile believers to forgo the freedom to eat what they wanted and adhere to the Jewish dietary restrictions so as not to cause their Jewish brethren to stumble doesn’t seem to be shared by the believers in Antioch nor does it seem to be supported by the Apostle Paul (seems unBiblical).
While we’ll place this event in context next Sunday, understand just a few weeks following the delivery of this letter Paul will recount in Galatians 2:11-13 that “when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.”
Did you catch that? The issue wasn’t that Gentiles believers were eating as they always had while the Jewish believers remained kosher. It would seem each group within the church remained free to obey their own conscience concerning such things. Instead, Paul’s contention was that Peter was comfortable enjoying his liberty with these Gentiles brethren, until fellow Jews arrived. The bur in Paul’s saddle was not disunity, but hypocrisy!
It would seem the concern of the Apostles (the one which prompted these instructions) was aimed at helping Gentile believers reach unbelieving Jews. As demonstrated by the very nature of the original complaint, the Apostles were concerned that as the church became more Gentile it would have less appeal to their own Jewish brethren.
The idea was that if these Gentiles were sensitive to these four ceremonial laws whenever they were among unbelieving Jews they would stand a better chance at effective evangelism. It’s clear by Paul’s earlier reaction to Peter, that Jewish Christians were at ease with Gentiles enjoying their liberty. (The legalist problem was Peter eating un-kosher, but Paul’s issue was Peter being inconsistent with his own behavior.)
Understand… Because Christian liberty only exists because of the atoning work of Jesus on the cross, to restrict this liberty in any way is to undermine the very nature of grace itself! The limitation of Christian liberty should never be a matter of maintaining unity within the church, but rather a concession a Christian makes in order to reach the lost.
If your liberty restricts your ability to reach a group of unsaved people God has called you to reach “you would do well” to lay aside that liberty. Once again (and not to get to far ahead of ourselves) this seems consistent with what Paul does in the next chapter… A young Gentile named Timothy is circumcised so he could reach the Jewish people with the Gospel.
In conclusion… I believe the entire debate concerning “Christian Liberty” gains incredible clarity when we understand the only Biblical limitation occurs for the benefit of the lost and not for the maintaining of Church unity. For example… Look at 1 Corinthians 10:23-33, “All things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful; all things are lawful for me, but not all things edify. Let no one seek his own, but each one the other's well-being. Eat whatever is sold in the meat market, asking no questions for conscience' sake; for "the earth is the LORD's, and all its fullness." If any of those who do not believe invites you to dinner, and you desire to go, eat whatever is set before you, asking no question for conscience' sake. But if anyone says to you, "This was offered to idols," do not eat it for the sake of the one who told you, and for conscience' sake; for "the earth is the LORD's, and all its fullness."
"Conscience," I say, not your own, but that of the other. For why is my liberty judged by another man’s conscience? But if I partake with thanks, why am I evil spoken of for the food over which I give thanks? Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. Give no offense, either to the Jews or to the Greeks or to the church of God, just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved.”
Acts 15:30-31, “So when they were sent off, they came to Antioch; and when they had gathered the multitude together, they delivered the letter. When they had read it, they rejoiced over its encouragement.”