CHAPTER 15
THE FIRST CHRISTIAN COUNCIL; OR, THE TERMS OF CHURCH MEMBERSHIP FOR THE GENTILES DEFINITELY SETTLED
§
1. Judaising Teachers at Antioch; or, the Circumcision Controversy Raised (Acts 15:1-5).
§
2. The Council at Jerusalem; or, the Controversy Settled (Acts 15:6-21).
§
3. The Apostolic Letter; or, the Publication of the Settlement (Acts 15:22-35).
§
4. The Second Missionary Journey commenced; or, the Separation of Paul and Barnabas (Acts 15:36-41).
CRITICAL REMARKS
Acts 15:1. Certain men which came down from Judæa.—Lit. having come down from Judœa. These were not the emissaries who came from James (Galatians 2:12), but the “false brethren unawares brought in” (Galatians 2:4), most likely Christianised Pharisees from Jerusalem, who, in their zeal for the Law, had undertaken a mission to Antioch, perhaps on the invitation of some of the same class in the Syrian capital. According to Epiphanius their leaders were Cerinthus and Ebion. With this party Paul was in conflict all his life. Taught the brethren.—Their teaching consisted mainly in an assertion of the necessity of circumcision for salvation.
Acts 15:2. Dissension—In their views. The word στάσις (compare Acts 23:7; Acts 23:10), used by Thucydides (3:82) and Aristotle (Polit., Acts 15:2) to express political faction, suggests that parties, in accordance with those views, had begun to be formed in the Church at Antioch. Discussion, or questioning, about the points in dispute (Acts 25:20). They,—i.e., the brethren, or the Church, in a public meeting, and by formal resolution, determined, appointed, or arranged. Certain other of them.—Not named, but see “Homiletical Analysis.” Should go up to Jerusalem.—This, the apostle’s third visit to Jerusalem (Galatians 2:1), took place fourteen years after his first, that to Cephas and the other apostles to whom he was introduced by Barnabas (Acts 9:27; Galatians 1:18). His second visit was made shortly before the Gentile mission (Acts 12:25).
Acts 15:4. The Church, the apostles and elders.—The reception of the deputies from Antioch took place in a public convocation of the Christian disciples in Jerusalem.
Acts 15:5. The sect of the Pharisees.—First mention of any converts from this body and of the Pharisees as a sect. The name (“Separated Ones”), probably bestowed on them by their opponents, expressed the same idea as their self-chosen designation, Chasidim (“Holy Ones”)—viz., separation, not so much from their fellow Jews as from the heathen world. Their practical obligations, were to observe with strictness all the ceremonial ordinances of the Law of Moses, and to be scrupulous in payment of tithes as well as in discharge of all religious duties. Originating in a genuine impulse towards superior sanctity, Pharisaism in our Lord’s time had degenerated into dead formalism, and become little better than a cloak for hypocrisy (Matthew 23; Luke 11:37-52). In Josephus’s day the association numbered six thousand members.
CRITICAL REMARKS
Acts 15:6. The apostles and elders came together.—Not alone, but in presence of and with the Church (see Acts 15:23). How many were present cannot be conjectured.
Acts 15:7. Much disputing, questioning, or debating, concerning the point of controversy. A good while ago.—Lit., from early days. Comparatively speaking (compare “in the beginning,” Acts 11:15); not an exaggeration, in order to take from the conversion of the heathen the aspect of novelty (Wendt). The phrase has a parallel outside of Scripture (polyk. ad Philippians, 1, 2; ἐξ�). Peter referred to the conversion of Cornelius, which had taken place while Paul was at Tarsus (Acts 9:30), probably about fourteen years previous. Baur (Paul, his Life and Works, i., 130), in the interest of his tendency theory, considers that Peter could not have appealed to what took place with Cornelius, or have talked in so Pauline a manner us he here does: but such an assertion will convince none except those who have decided, à priori, that an impassable theological gulf separated the two apostles. Impelled by a like motive, Weizsäcker (The Apostolic Age, i., 208), asserts that “Peter was not the pioneer of the mission to the heathen, but entirely and solely the apostle of the Jews,” and accordingly impeaches the credibility of the whole Cornelius story, By my mouth.—Peter did not mean that never before had the gospel been preached to a Gentile (see Acts 8:35), but that the circumstances under which he preached to Cornelius were such as to show that God wished the door of faith to be opened to the Gentiles.
Acts 15:8. God who knoweth the hearts.—Therefore looks not upon merely outward and accidental marks, such as one’s nationality, but upon the inner moral and spiritual quality of the soul. Compare Acts 1:24.
Acts 15:9. Purifying their hearts by faith.—Therefore not by circumcision or works of any kind. “The thought is quite as much Petrine (compare Acts 3:16; Acts 3:19) as it is Pauline (Acts 13:38; Romans 3:24 ff) or Johanuine (1 John 1:8; 1 John 2:2; Revelation 7:14)” (Zöckler).
Acts 15:10. To put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples.—Compare Galatians 5:1. Decidedly Gentile-Christian and universalist sounds this statement of Peter; yet is it not on that account improbable. “Through frequent conversations with Paul and Barnabas, which, according to Acts 15:4 and Galatians 2:3, must have taken place, Peter was unquestionably once more relieved of all his perhaps temporarily cherished doubts, and completely carried back to the standpoint of apostolic freedom which he had taken after Cornelius’s baptism, and which he had asserted in opposition to the party of James” (Zöckler).
Acts 15:11. Even as.—Better, in like manner, or in the same way, even as they—viz., the Gentiles; i.e., through grace alone, by faith without works. Compare Romans 1:7; Romans 5:15; 1 Corinthians 1:3; 2 Corinthians 1:2; 2 Corinthians 13:13; Ephesians 1:2.
Acts 15:12. The multitude.—I.e., the Church, consisting, no doubt, of members and adherents, or believers, enjoying full ecclesiastical status and catechumens. Kept silenee.—Having been tranquillised by Peter’s speech. Out of this statement, and the similar one concerning James (Acts 12:17), Catholic expositors infer, but wrongly, that only clergy are entitled to speak at Church councils.
Acts 15:13. James.—Not the apostle, but our Lord’s brother (Acts 12:17), who was “a pillar” in the Jerusalem Church (Galatians 2:9), its chief elder, and probably its president.
Acts 15:14. Simeon.—The Hebrew name of Peter (2 Peter 1:1), who is never again mentioned in the Acts, though he is found later at Antioch (Galatians 2:11), and perhaps at Babylon (1 Peter 5:13). According to tradition, not well founded, he ended his career at Rome.
Acts 15:15. The words of the prophets are cited from Amos 9:12, and conform closely to the LXX.—the Hebrew text reading, “That they may possess the remnant of Edom and of all the heathen who are called by My name,” or “upon whom My name is called” (compare James 2:7); so that they are also in the highest sense God’s children. If James, who spoke in Greek (Alford), or in Aramaic (Holtzmann), followed the LXX., it may be reasonably supposed that he regarded it as expressing with suflicient accuracy the essential idea of the Hebrew.
Acts 15:16. The tabernacle of David which is fallen down meant the divided and sunken state into which the theocracy had lapsed since the days of Rehoboam.
Acts 15:18. Known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world.—Taken from A. D. Vulgate and Syriac. The original words, “known from the beginning,” have been enlarged by the addition of “unto God are all His works,” in order to make a complete sentence. The best reading (א B C) may be thus rendered: Saith God, who maketh the things knoum from the beginning, or who doeth these things which are known from the beginning. In either case the sense is the same. Whether James found these words, “known from eternity,” in another text of the Hebrew prophet which was circulating in Palestine, or added them of his own accord, to express the idea that nothing could take place in the development of the plan of salvation without the Divine foreknowledge (Bengel, De Wette, Overbeck, Wendt, Holtzmann, Zöckler), cannot be determined.
Acts 15:20. Pollutions of idols.—I.e., Sacrificial victims, regarded as polluted by being offered to idols rather than such defilements as arose from unlawful contact with idols (Holtzmann). The word for pollutions (ἀλισγημάτων =εἰδολοθύτων, Acts 15:25), occurring only here, should not be viewed as governing the four succeeding genitives, but restricted to the first. “The James clauses represent no arbitrary selection of historical material, but correspond with the regulations for Israel as these at the time existed in the Old Testament.” … They belong, therefore, “to the earliest time of the Church” (Holtzmann). Fornication.—Has been understood here of “forbidden marriages,” as in Leviticus 18 (Baur, Zeller, Ritschl, Overbeck, Wendt, Holtzmann, Zöckler), but should probably be taken in the wider sense of uncleanness generally (Bengel, De Wette, Weiss, Alford, Hackett, and others).
CRITICAL REMARKS
Acts 15:22. To send chosen men should be, having chosen men from among themselves to send them.
Acts 15:23. The apostles and (lit. the) elders and (lit. the) brethren.—Signifying three separate bodies, as in Acts 15:22. The best MSS., however, read, “The apostles and the elders, brethren,” which may signify, “The apostles and the elder brethren” (R.V.), or “The apostles and the elders (who are) brethren” (Holtzmann), or “and the brethren who are elders.” This reading is justified by Wordsworth on the grounds
(1) that Paul and Barnabas are said to go up to the apostles and elders (Acts 15:2);
(2) that the apostles and elders are said to have come together to consider this matter (Acts 15:6); and
(3) that Paul is said to have delivered to the Churches the decrees determined by the apostles and elders (Acts 16:4); and by Alford, who thinks “and the” before “brethren” may have been inserted to make the text harmonise with that in Acts 15:22. On the other hand it may be argued
(1) that the whole Church was present at the deliberations of the apostles and elders (Acts 15:4; Acts 15:6; Acts 15:12);
(2) that the whole Church is represented as having at least acquiesced in the finding of the court (Acts 15:22), which certainly implies that they possessed the power to modify, if not reject. the same, and
(3) that the words καὶ οἱ before ἀδελφοί might just as easily have been dropped from the text at a subsequent period in order to justify the exclusion of the laity from all share in Church Synods. Upon the whole it seemed reasonable to conclude that in apostolic times the entire membership, either directly or through representatives, enjoyed the right, if not of initiating measures, at least of voting on them. Who have hazarded their lives.—Not “dedicated themselves soul and body to the service of our Lord the Messiah” (Hess), but exposed themselves to the perils of death, as at Damascus (Acts 9:24), Antioch (Acts 13:50), Iconium (Acts 14:5), and Lystra (Acts 14:19).
Acts 15:27. Who shall also tell you the same things by month, or by word of mouth.—Not the same things—i.e., truths and doctrines that Barnabas and Paul have taught, as if the teaching of these beloved brethren required confirmation; but the same things that we now write.
Acts 15:28. It seemed good unto the Holy Ghost and to us.—The combination of the Divine and human authors of the ecclestical decree is instructive. The expression shows that the apostles and elders claimed for themselves that they had been guided in their deliberations by the Holy Ghost, and for their conclusions that these possessed the authority of an inspired and infallible decision. Necessary things.—Not demanding abstinence as wrong in themselves (except the last), but in obedience to the law of charity (Romans 14:15), which required Christians to avoid what might offend weaker brethren.
Acts 15:33. Unto the apostles.—The best authorities read, unto these that had sent them forth.
Acts 15:34 is omitted by the best texts. It was probably inserted to explain Acts 15:40. Ramsay (St Paul, etc., p. 175) thinks it must have formed part of the original text and been “at some period omitted, from the mistaken idea that Acts 15:33 declared the actual departure of Judas and Silas,” whereas, he continues, “the officials of the Church in Antioch simply informed Judas and Silas that their duties were concluded and that they were free to return home,” a permission of which Silas did not avail himself. In any case, if Silas did depart, he must have soon after returned, on receiving Paul’s invitation to join him in a second missionary tour.