But we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will. Acts 15:11 

Acts 15:1–35– The Story of the Church: Living Into This Drama in the 21st Century
Thirteenth Sunday after Pentecost – August 22, 2021 (am)
  

Theological disagreement is in our crosshairs today. And when I say that, quite possibly you think I mean, in our day today. I don’t. I mean, in our passage today. Theological disagreement is being handled in Acts 15 in a way that has set a precedent for the church ever since with regard to how such matters are addressed and resolved. This is the first Church Council. And since then, more have followed.

The Creeds we recite and sometimes read together in our corporate worship were hammered out in different Church Councils (and our Church Covenants imitate them). The language of orthodoxy that we commit to memory in order to think properly about God and His Word and His ways come to us from these gatherings: the doctrine of the Trinity, the two-fold nature of Christ, even the books that belong in the Bible are the collective work of the church gathered in discussion of the big questions we’ve faced about our Christian faith, the gospel, and the eternal truths of God that we believe and stand on and defend, often with our lives.

Now, to be clear, these truths aren’t generated by these whole-church discussions, they’re clarified and articulated by them. What we’re dealing with is the direct revelation of God in Scripture, in Jesus and the Holy Spirit, and in nature. And what we’re working on is a clarification of what that revelation says in answer to the questions that arise on matters which Scripture doesn’t directly address, but which it insinuates or assumes in what it does address.

The council convened in Jerusalem, which Luke narrated here in Acts 15, was addressing how the good news of reconciliation with God through the Jews’ Messiah applied to the Gentiles who were receiving Him by faith. And this was a harder question then than we often recognize now. John Stott’s description can help us feel the tension that had arisen. So far it had been assumed that [Gentiles] would be absorbed into Israel by circumcision, and that by observing the law they would be acknowledged as bona fide members of the covenant 241 people of God. Something quite different was now happening, however, something which disturbed and even alarmed many. Gentile converts were being welcomed into fellowship by baptism without circumcision. They were becoming Christians without also becoming Jews. They were retaining their own identity and integrity as members of other nations. It was one thing for the Jerusalem leaders to give their approval to the conversion of Gentiles: but could they approve of conversion-without-circumcision, of faith in Jesus without the works of the law, and of commitment to the Messiah without inclusion in Judaism? Was their vision big enough to see the gospel of Christ not as a reform movement within Judaism but as good news for the whole world, and the church of Christ not as a Jewish sect but as the international family of God? These were the revolutionary questions which some were daring to ask (Stott 240-241).

And when we hear this, perhaps we can gain a deeper appreciation for what the early church was struggling with—why it was worth [sending] Peter and John to check out what was happening in Samaria (8:14-16), why Peter had to answer for his encounter with Cornelius (11:1-18), and why Barnabas was [sent] to see the work in Antioch (11:22). Now, Paul and Barnabas go up to meet with the apostles and elders in Jerusalem about this question (2) of what happens when Gentiles receive Jesus by faith. And as a result, we’ll learn good lessons about how to handle theological disagreements. Let’s walk through this passage in four steps.

The Need for Clarification – 1-5

Some unnamed men from Judea (1), likely Jerusalem (cf. 2, 24), came down to the multi-ethnic (11:19-21; 13:1) church in Antioch teaching that [circumcision], the sign of the old covenant, was required for Gentiles to be enter the new covenant community (1). Paul and Barnabas [disagreed] and engaged in debate with these men (2). But evidently it wasn’t going anywhere because [these two] and some… others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem, to the apostles and elders, [and discuss] this question (2) with them.

All along their way they shared the story of the spread of the gospel among the Gentiles (3), probably with the dispersed Christian Jews who were living in Phoenicia and Samaria, and Luke records that it brought [them] great joy (3). Remember that the [Samaritans] had their own story of faith (8:4-25), but that probably just added to their delight!

Paul and Barnabas were warmly received when they arrived in Jerusalem (4). Then they immediately initiated the subject which had brought them there—they [told their story] (4)—but the response was split. Some [converted] Pharisees continued to assert that it is necessary to circumcise Gentiles and to order them to keep the law of Moses (5). It’s quite possible that the men who originally went to Antioch with this teaching came from this very group. But notice down in v.24 that they weren’t sent officially. This could’ve been messy!

This scene, then, established the need for clarification.

The Process of Clarification – 6-21

The apostles and elders convened a council to discuss the issue (6) and batted it around for quite a while (7). Finally, Peter spoke up (7) and reminded them of his own carrying of the gospel to the Gentiles, initiated by God Himself—God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe (7). Then God Himself went the full route, we might say, and [gave] them the Holy Spirit just as he did to [the Jews] (8). And remember, He did so in an intentional and very dramatic fashion (10:44-48; cf. 8:15-17) to underscore that he made no distinction between [Jews] and [Gentiles], having cleansed their hearts by faith (9). Both alike trust in Christ and receive the Holy Spirit. Gentiles are reconciled to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob by faith, just like Jews!

Then, Peter exhorted the brothers with an impassioned, rhetorical question: 10 Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? Why [would] you [require] the Gentiles to keep the law of Moses [when we weren’t even able to keep it]? And then he added the affirmation that stands at the heart and expresses the soul of this passage, and this debate: 11 … we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will. This is the heart of the gospel for Jews and Gentiles alike! And with a stroke of humble deference as well as perhaps a tinge of ethnic brush-back, Peter reversed the order and said that [Jewish] salvation will happen in the same way that [Gentile] salvation does!

Next Barnabas and Paul wowed the assembly with their stories of all God had done on their missionary journey (12). Then James spoke next (13), introduced as one who had the authority to deliver the final word, and his expression was filled with rich, biblical-theological reflection and insight.

14 Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take from them a people for his name. 15 And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written, and here he quotes from Amos 9:11-12771, just as the prophet is finishing all that he intended to write. He’s reminding them that God has always intended to call the Gentiles—that’s been His plan all along! 16 “After this I will return, and I will rebuild the tent of David that has fallen, the kingdom of Israel (2Sa.7:16) that He promised would endure forever; and Amos records God as saying: I will rebuild its ruins, and I will restore it, 17 that the remnant of mankind, the called, the elect, may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by my name, says the Lord, who makes these things 18 known from of old.”

Chronologically, Amos was the first, the earliest, among the writing prophets. He spoke to the ten northern tribes in about 790 bc, prior to their captivity under Assyria that began in 722. So, he prophesied the destruction of Israel (Amo.9:7-10), but also that a remnant would be restored (Amo.9:11-12). Then through them, Israel would receive in the previously godless nations who’d always opposed them, they’d be a blessing to those whom God had called to Himself from among the nations.

So, God had people among the Gentiles who belonged to Him! He loved them! They’d be called by [His] name (17), just like a new bride! [A]nd nothing in [this] text suggests that they [had] to become Jews in order to become [His] people (Marshall 980 268).

19 Therefore, said James, my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, 20 but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood, a strange collection of restrictions to our ears. But he gives a basis for them that identifies them as an expression of respect for the for [Jewish] customs. 21 For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues. So, because the Jews are constantly [reading] Moses, let’s be sensitive to certain expressions of the law that they could find offensive if we don’t.

But why these four: things polluted by idols, sexual immorality, [things] strangled, and… blood? What do they have in common? Greg Beale suggests that they’re each connected to expressions of idolatry. Gentiles could become 'clean' and become true end-time Israelites by receiving [the] prophesied 233 Spirit by faith without having to keep the Law (vv. 5, 10). Thus, while the whole Law is in mind, it is the laws of cleanness and uncleanness that are uppermost in mind. When James says that Gentiles must 'abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood' (v. 20; see v. 29), he is not imposing Mosaic food laws on them, but telling them to abstain from idolatry in order to be spiritually 'clean' in the new age. Each of the four things Gentiles are to stay away from are connected to the worship of idols, the first, third and fourth referring to the animal sacrifices offered to idols ('fornication' may refer to cult prostitution or merely to immorality in which all Christians must not participate) (Beale 2004 232-233).

The whole point here, though, the bottom line, is that the law no longer holds sway in the acceptance of the gospel. Rather, it seems that the point (21, cf. 29b) is to abstain voluntarily from practices that would be offensive to Jews of any stripe who are routinely hearing the law read at the [synagogue] (21). And new believers who also hear it won’t lose touch with the law even while not having to obey it (this argument resembles those in 1Co.8:4-13 and 10:23-33).

Now this message needs to be communicated.

The Report on Clarification – 22-29

The importance of this council’s conclusion is underscored by its immediate repetition in this letter (23-29) written to the church in Antioch (22). But still, Judas, called Barsabbas, and Silas were [sent] along with Paul and Barnabas back to Antioch (22, 30) because face-to-face communication added something even to this written message in at least two ways: first, these two guys magnified the authenticity of the letter’s contents (27) on behalf of the apostles and the elders, with the whole Jerusalem church (22). And second, they also affirmed this group’s deep and sincere [love] for Barnabas and Paul (24).

So, how did this message land back home in Antioch?

The Result of Clarification – 30-35

The people were glad to receive the letter (31). And the two from Jerusalem spent some fruitful time there in Antioch (32) before returning home with blessings for their church (33).

Vs.34 is not in our ESV because it’s not in some of the older manuscripts (But it seemed good to Silas to remain there [f.n. 4].). But Silas clearly either stayed there or returned soon after (Longenecker 955, cf. 40) because he ended up being Paul’s partner on his second journey (40ff.). In the meantime, though, Paul and Barnabas and others continued in the work at Antioch (35).

Conclusion

So, what difference does this make to us? It makes a great difference. We can talk about the truths of our faith, the truths of the gospel as though they’re just bare, intellectual propositions that exist somewhere, etched in stone for our memorization, review, recitation, like they dropped from heaven fully formed and we just study them, bleary-eyed, in a dim and musty classroom.

But that is not so! The truths of the gospel, of our faith, are the very descriptions of our life, our hope, our forever well-being! They’ve been forged in the fire of human experience and suffering, from our engagements as image-bearing creatures with the eternal and unchanging Word of God! It matters, deeply, what they say, and how they’re defended.

Three Lessons are worthy of mention on this topic.

Theological disagreements will be present even within a spiritually vibrant community. These days we can think otherwise. And that can make us nervous. What difference does it really make? What was wrong with what we believed before? Can’t we all just get along? But even back in the first century church (which many think we should still imitate) there were theological (and relational [36-41; Gal.2:11ff.]) disagreements that needed to be addressed and resolved. That really is okay! We’re fallen human beings. We’ll always be growing in our knowledge and understanding of these things. Always! So, they’ll always be with us!

Theological disagreements are worthy of debate until resolution is reached. There isn’t any agree to disagree in this early church discussion. There are some subjects which may take a while, or may need more time or information to resolve (e.g., models of creation, divine sovereignty vs. human responsibility, ordo salutis). We take positions on these matters. We dialogue graciously with those who disagree. And disputes remain. But when eternal truth is the subject, it really is worth any amount of work required to grasp, explain, clarify, defend, even apply it! So, the best advice at such times is to press on with humility, gentleness, respect, and patience (1Pe.3:15; 5:5; Phi.2:3, 2Ti.4:2), just as Scripture teaches and the apostles modeled here, and do so until the matter is resolved to the glory of God.

Theological disagreement was best addressed though dialogue even when supernatural gifts were present. Don’t miss this striking point: Judas and Silas, who went with Paul and Barnabas to Antioch, were prophets! (32) But discerning God’s truth still rested on dialogue and debate among mature believers, along with prayer and the ministry of the Spirit among them (cf. 28), not on supernatural pronouncements! This is an important reminder, and also a genuine reassurance to us today! We might otherwise think that we’re fighting a losing battle when we’re working through difficult matters of biblical or theological interpretation, like we can’t really settle them fully because God doesn’t seem to gift people today in the same ways He did back then. No. He works though His church, through His Spirit and His Word, still today, just like He did back them. This strengthens us!

And now let’s come to the Table of the Lord, an expression that has generated much discussion, and even division, in the history of the church, but still we come based on our clearest understanding of God in His Word that He has called us here to remember the sacrifice of our Lord and to anticipate the full reward that comes to us through it, and that He is present with us by His Spirit as we do so in faith.

 ________________

Resources

Beale, G. K. and D. A. Carson, eds. 2007. Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Acts, by I. Howard Marshall, 513-606. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.

Beveridge, Henry, ed. Commentary upon the Acts of the apostles, vol. 1, by John Calvin. Translated by Christopher Featherstone.

Bruce, F. F., ed. 1988. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. The book of Acts, revised, by F. F. Bruce. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

Carson, D. A., R. T. France, J. A. Motyer, and G. J. Wenham, eds. 1994. New Bible Commentary 21st Century Edition. Acts, by Conrad Gempf, 1066-1114. Leicester, Eng.: InterVarsity.

Carson, D. A., ed. 2004. New Studies in Biblical Theology. The Temple and the Church’s Mission, by G. K. Beale. Downers Grove: InterVarsity.

Dockery, David S, ed. 1992. New American Commentary. Vol. 26, Acts, by John B. Polhill. Nashville: Broadman & Holman.

Grudem, Wayne, ed. 2008. ESV Study Bible. Study notes on Acts, 2073-2156, by John B. Polhill. Wheaton: Crossway.

Longman III, Tremper and David E. Garland, eds. 2007. Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Vol. 10, Acts, by Richard N. Longenecker, 665-1102. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

Morris, Leon, ed. 1980. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Vol. 5 Acts, by I. Howard Marshall. Downers Grove: InterVarsity.

Stott, John, ed. 1990. The Bible Speaks Today. The Message of Acts, by John Stott. Leicester, Eng.: InterVarsity.

NEXT WEEK: There Arose a Sharp Disagreement, Acts 15:36–16:5