Acts Chapter 15:1-35

The Council of Jerusalem – Read Acts 15:1-21

The return of Paul and Barnabas from Asia Minor, having founded Christian churches there among Gentiles, had repercussions. In Jerusalem the church was growing and now included members of the Pharisees. Some of these were teaching that circumcision – and its attendant responsibility to follow Mosaic Law – was a requirement of becoming Christian. Some of these Pharisaic Christians came to Antioch and made the same assertions. This brought them into sharp dispute with Barnabas and Paul who were just back from an extended journey that featured the conversion of Gentiles into the faith.

This was not a trivial issue for the early church. Jesus was a devout Jew and the apostles all were observant Jews – Christianity was, in one sense, just a different strain of Judaism. The Holy Spirit had brought the apostles into contact with all sorts of people outside of Judaism, and many had been converted to the new faith. What, exactly, were the obligations of the Christian with respect to observing Jewish Law?

This issue also cut to the heart of the missionary efforts in Antioch. A resolution was required so that the work could go forward. Paul and Barnabas as well as some others from Antioch were appointed to travel to Jerusalem to confer with the apostles there to formulate a workable policy. Although this issue was controversial within the church, Paul and Barnabas are received cordially both in Jerusalem and along the way. Once they arrive, they relate their missionary travels, and, as Luke notes, “reported everything that God had done through them.”

Again the Pharisees state: “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the Law of Moses.” This provoked much discussion among the elders and apostles. Peter then addresses the assembly and relates his experiences in the home of Cornelius (Acts 10:9-48). Peter makes the point that God chose to reach out to the Gentiles through the Holy Spirit and that God “made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith.” Peter concludes by stating that the Law has proven to be an impossible standard for Jews, and, in any case, Christians are now saved by the grace of Jesus Christ. Barnabas and Paul next related the events of their missionary journey and the acceptance by the Gentiles of the Christian message.

Finally, James – whose authority everyone seems to acknowledge – rises to announce his decision. James is apparently convinced by Peter’s arguments and adds further support by quoting from Amos that “the remnant of men may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who bear my name…” This quotation from the Hebrew Bible effectively counters the scriptural authority of the Pharisees’ argument and the result reported by Luke is that the church “should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God.” The only requirements to be imposed on new Gentile Christians are a series of abstentions: from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals (sacrifices) and from the blood of animals. Many of the “God-fearing” Gentiles that Paul had converted were probably already observing these requirements – and possibly much more of the Mosaic law - and so the letter was seen as making a minimal burden on new Christian converts yet also making a distinctive contrast to what Gentiles may be hearing in Jewish synagogues.


Paul’s Account of the Council – Read Galatians Chap 2

Some years after the meetings in Jerusalem, Paul wrote of his experiences there in his letter to the Galatians. The Galatians were experiencing theological difficulties of similar nature – to what extent must the Christian observe Jewish Laws?

Paul’s description of the events at the Council of Jerusalem differ in a number of details from Luke’s account. Paul characterizes the meeting as a private one where Luke infers that it was more like a church-wide assembly. Paul, somewhat harshly, characterizes Christians preaching in favor of circumcision as “false brothers.” Paul also describes Peter as the “Apostle to the Jews” and himself as preaching to the Gentiles. Paul also takes issue with Peter who, on a visit to Antioch, associated freely with the Gentile Christians there – in violation of Jewish Law. But when other Christians of the Pharisaic persuasion arrived from Jerusalem, Peter withdrew and began to behave in a more orthodox fashion. Paul was outspoken in calling out Peter for his hypocrisy.

Paul uses the story as a way to illustrate the saving grace of Jesus Christ – as opposed to observance of the Law. But the account in Galatians is rather more adversarial in nature than the same events portrayed by Luke in Acts.


The Council’s Letter to Gentile Believers – Read Acts 15:22-35

The decision by James and the assembled body in Jerusalem is formalized in a letter to the churches in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia. This letter is transmitted to Antioch by Paul and Barnabas. Judas and Silas of the Jerusalem church accompanied them so that the decision of the council could be confirmed in person. The letter was received by the church in Antioch, who were “glad for its encouraging message.”


Links of Interest

Detailed commentary on Acts 15: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/mcgarvey/acts.ch15.html

A Summary of the Council of Jerusalem is here: http://www.keyway.ca/htm2000/20000730.htm

Detailed analysis of the Council of Jerusalem is here: http://www.ntgateway.com/weblog/2006/09/jerusalem-council-gal-21-10-acts-15.html


Study/Discussion Questions

1. Read Matthew 3:4-10, Matthew 23:1-36. What is the opinion about Pharisees expressed in these verses? Why are Pharisees in the Christian church at Jerusalem?

2. Why is Peter, a wanted man, back in Jerusalem?

3. Why is Peter’s speech so persuasive?

4. How do you account for the harsher tone of Paul’s recollection of the council as written in Galatians?

5. Do you think that the letter issued by the council was the last word on this issue in the early church? Why or why not?

6. To what extent does the Council of Jerusalem represent inclusiveness in Christianity? How is this different from Judaism?

7. What are some contemporary church issues that divide congregations? How are they resolved?