Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still.
[Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still.] The evidence against the genuineness of this verse is decisive [it is wanting in 'Aleph (') A B E G H, and in about fifty cursives; in the Syriac, the Vulgate, and other versions, and in the two most critical of the later fathers-Chrysostom and Theophylact only C and D have it-the latter of scarce any authority in additions; and the printed Vulgate, on the authority of one inferior manuscript, inserts it]. No doubt this late addition to the text was suggested by the apparent inconsistency of Acts 15:33 with Acts 15:40; and in point of fact, it is by no means improbable that Silas had returned to Antioch before the second missionary journey was proposed.
Teaching and preaching the word of the Lord - the "teaching" being directed to the disciples, and the "preaching" to those who were without.
With many others (many other labourers) also. How rich must Antioch have been at this time in the ministrations of the Gospel! To this period we must refer the painful scene between Paul and Peter, described in Galatians 2:11-14. 'The inconsistency,' says Professor Lightfoot, 'which Peter thus appears to have shown so soon after his championship of Gentile liberty at the congress, is rather in favour of than against this view; for the point of Paul's rebuke is his inconsistency. But in fact there is no alternative. An earlier residence at Antioch (Acts 13:1-3) is out of the question; for Paul is plainly narrating events in chronological order. Neither, again, can a later occasion (Acts 18:23) be meant, for it does not appear that Barnabas was with him then.' (See also Howson's full and able statement, as against Paley and Wieseler, vol. 2:, pp. 244-250.)
Remarks:
(1) When we find with what extreme difficulty Jewish Christians-to whom circumcision had been for ages the divine signature of the covenant-people-could bring themselves to shown to he the will of God, should not Christians strive to shake themselves free from the prejudices which traditional teaching and ancestral usage tend to beget, so as to be ready to enter cordially into the work of God, wherever it clearly discovers itself to be His, even though in forms and modes very different from those to which they have been accustomed? At the same time, remembering how the same apostle who so earnestly inculcated and so uniformly acted on this principle, enjoins upon the strong in such things that they should bear with the infirmities of the weak (Romans 14:1-23; Romans 15:1-33), it will be the wisdom of those who have surmounted prejudice themselves to treat with forbearance and love their weaker brethren, who, while equally conscientions with themselves, are not able to act with the same freedom as they are.
(2) This famous Council of Jerusalem-the first that was ever held in the Christian Church-unquestionably involves a principle of Church action for all time. But since the most unwarrantable assumptions have been built on this as a precedent, not only by the Church of Rome, but by other hierarchical Churches, care must be taken-before any precedent be drawn from this council in justification of the procedure of subsequent councils in the Christian Church-in the first place, to see that the composition of the two bodies be substantially the same-and particularly, that they be not composed exclusively of what are called the clergy; and next, since the supernatural illumination and the divine authority flowing from it, which resided in the apostles, have most certainly been withdrawn (for the signs of its presence, which the apostles exhibited, cannot be produced by any existing body of Christians), that no such illumination and authority be claimed by any modern council or synod of the Church; but that-trusting in the gracious guidance of Him who walketh in the midst of the golden candlesticks, and who hath said, "If ye abide in Me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you" - the decisions of all modern councils, synods, or assemblies of the Church should be given forth to such as are in church-fellowship with them, to be by them observed simply as the condition of their continued unity.
(3) It has been observed by Lechler, that 'not the whole resolution of the assembly is referred to the Holy Spirit, but only the weighty decision'-not to impose on the Gentiles a eke which would have destroyed the freedom of the Gospel (Acts 15:28); whereas the resolution to send deputies to the Christians of Antioch is introduced merely with the words, "It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord" (Acts 15:25). We are not sure that any such distinction was intended by the different phraseology of the two verses. Nay, rather, when, in the latter of the two verses, it is said, "It seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us," it would seem that the whole result of these solemn deliberations is referred at once to a divine and a human source; the Holy Spirit being regarded as the animating and grading Spirit of the assembly, and the members of it, who either gave utterance to their judgment or assented to that judgment as expressed by others, doing so in the full conviction of a Higher presence and direction throughout.
(4) In every age there have been purists in the Church, who insist on right principles being gone through with in all circumstances, without regard to the views and feelings of those who want light to approve of them. Let such study the beautiful action of this council. Beyond all reasonable doubt, abstinence from "things strangled, and from blood," was enjoined on the Gentile Christians merely out of tenderness to the views and feelings of their weaker brethren of the circumcision. And when the thing to be avoided is merely the denying of ourselves in what we can perfectly well do without, who that loves his brother in the Lord would not do so, when by an opposite course he has reason to believe that he will wound a brother's conscience and probably endanger a brother's soul? Such voluntary sacrifices, however, are not to be confounded with cowardly compromises-such as that of the great apostle of the circumcision on one occasion, for which he was rebuked by the greater apostle of the Gentiles (Galatians 2:11-13). Nor is it necessary to give in to every weak prejudice, on the plea of not hurting the conscience of others. Such intolerable bondage is no real benefit to the weak, who should learn to grow into strength and liberty in Christ Jesus.
The Proposal (15:36)