Did the Jerusalem congregation have its sin issues? How did they handle their problems? Sins of the Saints -- Acts 4:32-5:11

 

As the Church grew it began to encounter the problems of an institution.  No nation has ever had a greater sense of responsibility for the less fortunate brethren than the Jews.

 

In the synagogue there was a routine custom.  Two collectors went round the market and the private houses every Friday morning and made a collection for the needy partly in money and partly in goods.  Later in the day this was distributed.  Those who were temporarily in need received enough to enable them to carry on; and those who were permanently unable to support themselves received enough for fourteen meals, that is, enough for two meals a day for the ensuing week.  The fund from which this distribution was made was called the Kuppah or Basket.  In addition to this a house-to-house collection was made daily for those in pressing need.  This was called the Tamhui, or Tray.

 

It is clear that the church had taken over this custom.  But amidst the Jews themselves there was a cleavage.  In the church there were two kinds of Jews.  There were the Jerusalem and the Palestinian Jews who spoke Aramaic, the descendant of the ancestral language, and prided themselves that there was no foreign admixture in their lives. 

 

There were also Jews from foreign countries who had come up for Pentecost and made the great discovery of Christ.  Many of these had been away from Palestine for generations; they had forgotten their Hebrew and spoke only Greek. 

 

The natural consequence was that the spiritually snobbish Aramaic-speaking Jews looked down on the foreign Jews.  This contempt affected the daily distribution of alms and there was a complaint that the widows of the Greek-speaking Jews were being-possibly deliberately-neglected.  The apostles felt they ought not to get themselves mixed up in a matter like this; so the Seven were chosen to straighten out the situation.

 

It is extremely interesting to note that the first office-bearers to be appointed were chosen not to talk but for practical service.

 

Christians, someone once said, become very unchristian when they get organized. That remark crystallizes one side of the long-running debate over church polity:

1. One extreme, affirming the power of Christ in His church, would agree with that sentiment. Its proponents argue that the church should reject formal organization or structure and just flow with the Spirit. Whatever is organized, they insist, cannot be from God. Some would even reject the concept of church membership. Such a loose, unorganized model of the church, however, underestimates the strength of the flesh and is inconsistent with the character of God (cf. 1 Cor. 14:33). All creation reflects the highly organized nature of its Creator. Nor is it consistent with the thoughtful New Testament teaching on how the church is to function.

2. Others would structure the church like a Fortune 500 corporation, complete with detailed organizational charts, job descriptions, boards, committees, and subcommittees. The Holy Spirit, they hope, will operate within the rigid framework they have constructed. They will reject any bold, new proposals because “We’ve never done it that way before.” These people tend to underestimate the strength of the new nature and the power of the Spirit.

 

Both extremes are wrong; the church is neither a highly contrived corporation nor a loose commune, but an organism. It has both an organic unity and an operative life principle, since all members are connected to its living Head, the Lord Jesus Christ. Yet just as living organisms require structure and organization to function, so does the church.

 

The early church set the example of a living, interdependent organism. Their unity and power gave them a testimony that swept Jerusalem. Multitudes had come to faith in Jesus Christ. No persecution or opposition from the Jewish authorities could stop the spread of the gospel. The believers’ love for each other, expressed in the sharing of material goods, had made a profound impact on the community. As a result, even unbelievers held the church in high regard (5:13).

 

The church’s explosive growth had brought with it the need for further organization. It was already somewhat organized. They knew (at least early on) the number of converts (2:41) and members (4:4). Someone must have been keeping count. They met together in specific places at specific times. The believers also met for meals in private homes. Money and goods were collected by the apostles and distributed to those in need. Sin had to be dealt with. All those activities also demanded some level of organization. The church became further structured as its life and growth demanded.

 

That illustrates an important principle: Biblical church organization always responds to needs and to what the Spirit is already doing. To organize a program and then expect the Holy Spirit to get involved in it is to put the cart before the horse. We dare not try to force the Spirit to fit our mold. Organization is never an end in itself but only a means to facilitate what the Lord is doing in His church.

 

Church problems also give us an opportunity to exercise our faith, not only faith in the Lord, but also faith in each other. The leaders suggested a solution, and all the members agreed with it. The assembly selected seven qualified men, and the Apostles set them apart for ministry. The church was not afraid to adjust their structure in order to make room for a growing ministry. When structure and ministry conflict, this gives us an opportunity to trust God for the solution. It is tragic when churches destroy ministry because they refuse to modify their structure. The Apostles were not afraid to share their authority and ministry with others.

 

In Acts chapter 6 the church faced its first serious organizational crisis. To eliminate a potentially divisive problem required further organization. From this first organizational meeting four features stand out: the reason, the requirements, the roster, and the results.

 

The Reason

Now at this time while the disciples were increasing in number, a complaint arose on the part of the Hellenistic Jews against the native Hebrews, because their widows were being overlooked in the daily serving of food. And the twelve summoned the congregation of the disciples and said, “It is not
desirable for us to neglect the word of God in order to serve tables.… But we will devote ourselves to prayer, and to the ministry of the word.” (6:1–2, 4)

 

The church was experiencing “growing pains” and this was making it difficult for the Apostles to minister to everybody. The “Grecians” were the Greek-speaking Jews who had come to Palestine from other nations, and therefore may not have spoken Aramaic, while the “Hebrews” were Jewish residents of the land who spoke both Aramaic and Greek. The fact that the “outsiders” were being neglected created a situation that could have divided the church. However, the Apostles handled the problem with great wisdom and did not give Satan any foothold in the fellowship.

 

When a church faces a serious problem, this presents the leaders and the members with a number of opportunities. For one thing, problems give us the opportunity to examine our ministry and discover what changes must be made. In times of success, it is easy for us to maintain the status quo, but this is dangerous. Henry Ward Beecher called success “a last-year’s nest from which the birds have flown.” Any ministry or organization that thinks its success will go on automatically is heading for failure. We must regularly examine our lives and our ministries lest we start taking things for granted.

 

At the very time that the disciples were increasing in number another problem arose. It was related to their rapid growth. Just how large the church had become is not known, since they no longer kept an accurate count. The last figure given, 5,000 (4:4), apparently included only the men. To that figure must be
added the women and youths and those who had joined the church since then (cf. 5:14). There must have been more than 20,000 in the Jerusalem church at this point.

 

Without means of mass communication, the leadership and administrative problems associated with such a large congregation were enormous. Merely to meet their spiritual needs and to deal with sin would have been a daunting task, let alone caring for their physical needs. Not only did the size of the church create problems, but also its explosive growth left little time to adjust. As a result, the apostles could no longer handle the entire load of caring for the congregation. Further organization was needed.

 

There was another reason for the church to organize. They had fulfilled the first part of the Lord’s four-part charge to them (1:8). They had saturated Jerusalem with the gospel message (5:28) and even begun to reach out to the surrounding region (5:16). Now they were poised to evangelize Samaria and the Gentile world. To do so successfully required further planning and structuring of the assembly.

 

In a congregation of that size, it was inevitable that someone’s needs would be overlooked. It comes as no surprise to learn that a complaint arose on the part of the Hellenistic Jews against the native Hebrews, because their widows were being overlooked in the daily serving of food. Here was an issue that Satan could use with devastating force against the church. He had already attacked it through persecution (4:1–31; 5:17–41). That, however, had merely caused the church to grow faster (4:4). Next, he had sought to cripple it by introducing sin into the body (5:1–11). God stepped in quickly and judged Ananias and Sapphira, and again Satan’s attack failed ignominiously. As with persecution, it only made the church’s number increase (5:14). The purified church was even more effective in spreading the gospel.

 

Having failed to stop the church through persecution or corruption, Satan tried a third tactic. He sought to create dissension within the church. A church racked by internal conflict finds its message lost in conflict, its energy dissipated. And a church thus focused on itself will find it difficult to reach out to the lost world. Before the church could evangelize the Gentile world, they would have to deal with any division within their ranks. That was the need that spurred the church to further organization.

 

The Hellenistic Jews were those of the Diaspora. Unlike the native or Palestinian Hebrews, their native language was Greek, not Aramaic or Hebrew. They used the Septuagint instead of the Hebrew Scriptures. While remaining loyal to Judaism, they had absorbed some of the Greek culture that surrounded them. That made them suspect to the Palestinian Jews, especially the Pharisees. “According to the Talmud, Pharisaism made little secret of its contempt for Hellenists … they were frequently categorized by the native-born and assumedly more scrupulous populace of Jerusalem as second-class Israelites” (Richard N. Longenecker, “The Acts of the Apostles,” in Frank E. Gaebelein, ed., The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 9 [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981], 329). Some of that racial and cultural hostility carried over into the church.

 

Many of the Hellenists had been in Jerusalem for Passover and Pentecost. After their conversion, they decided to remain there under the apostles’ teaching. Others were older people who had returned to Palestine to live out their lives. They were a minority in the church, which helps explain why their needs were
overlooked.

 

As often happens, matters came to a head over a seemingly insignificant issue. The Hellenists complained that their widows were being overlooked in the daily serving of food. Care of widows was traditional in Jewish society (cf. Deut. 14:29; 16:11; 24:19–21; 26:12). Paul later defined it as the responsibility of
the church (1 Tim. 5:3ff.). Given the natural dichotomy between the Hellenists and native Palestinians, this issue could easily have split the church. Certainly the fact that the Hellenist Jews spoke of their widows collectively indicates they felt the neglect was deliberate.

 

The Hellenists’ complaint eventually came to the attention of the twelve. Luke uses that term to describe the apostles only here in Acts, though he uses it six times in his gospel. Recognizing the legitimacy of the Hellenists’ grievance, they summoned the congregation of the disciples to seek a solution. The Apostles studied the situation and concluded that they were to blame: they were so busy serving tables that they were neglecting prayer and the ministry of the Word of God. They had created their own problem because they were trying to do too much. Even today, some pastors are so busy with secondary tasks that they fail to spend adequate time in study and in prayer. This creates a “spiritual deficiency” in the church that makes it easy for problems to develop.

 

This is not to suggest that serving tables is a menial task, because every ministry in the church is important. But it is a matter of priorities; the Apostles were doing jobs that others could do just as well. D.L. Moody used to say that it was better to put ten men to work than to try to do the work of ten men. Certainly it is better for you, for the workers you enlist, and for the church as a whole.

 

It was not desirable for the apostles to neglect the word of God in order to serve tables. It may be helpful to note that the word for tables can mean “a table or counter of a money changer,” or “money matters,” as well as an eating table (cf. such use in Matt. 21:12; Luke 19:23). To involve themselves in the details of serving meals and handling money matters would take them away from their calling. Instead, they would devote themselves to prayer, and to the  ministry of the word. The apostles knew their priority was praying, preaching, teaching, and studying the Word. They would let nothing, however pressing, distract them from those duties. They said, in effect, “You serve the tables and we will serve the Word.” Paul was concerned that the needs of the poor be met (Rom. 15:26; 2 Cor. 8–9), but never wanted to be distracted by the details (1 Cor. 16:1–4).

 

Church—Leaders: the democratic recommendation.

1.  The leaders (apostles) called the whole church together. Note: they did not deny the problem, but they graciously acknowledged that the problem might (or did) exist. The leaders knew how easily people, in particular cliques when they feel neglected, can become suspicious and cause even more problems within the church. The point to see is that the whole church was involved in the decision. The leaders wisely sought everyone’s...

·         thoughts ·         advice ·         counsel ·         understanding

·         cooperation ·         involvement ·         love

 

2.  The leaders declared their primary call and mission. They had to concentrate on the Word of God, its study and proclamation. Note:

• their unmistakable sense of call and mission.

• their unwillingness to be distracted from their primary mission.

• the church’s understanding and acceptance of their mission. (How desperately this understanding and acceptance is needed by churches today!)

 

The apostles could have been easily sidetracked, caught up in day to day ministry—the ministry of sitting and listening, serving and meeting the needs of the needy. Such needs must be met; it is the church’s duty to minister and meet them. If the church had been smaller, the apostles could have met the needs themselves. But when the church became large, there were just too many people.

 

There is a breaking point at which ministers must put up a guard and protect their primary call to proclaim the Word of God. They must above all else have time to prepare and preach and teach the Word.

 

Many in the ministry today have left the emphasis on prayer and the Word of God. They are so involved in the administrative details of their church that they have little time left for intercession and study. Yet ministers are given to the church “for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ” (Eph. 4:12). Their calling is to mature the saints so they can do the work of the ministry. By neglecting that calling, they doom their congregations to languish in spiritual infancy. Programs are no substitute for the power of God and His Word. Those whom God has called to the ministry of prayer and the Word must make it their priority.

 

Prayer and the ministry of the word are inseparably linked. Prayer must permeate a minister’s sermon preparation, or his sermons will be superficial and dry. He must also pray constantly that his people will apply the truths he teaches them. The man of God must also pray that he would be a pure channel through
which God’s truth can flow to his congregation.

 

The greatest proclaimer of God’s Word who ever lived, the apostle Paul, was a man devoted to prayer. He assured the Romans that “God, whom I serve in my spirit in the preaching of the gospel of His Son, is my witness as to how unceasingly I make mention of you always in my prayers” (Rom. 1:9–10). He told the Ephesians “[I] do not cease giving thanks for you, while making mention of you in my prayers (Eph. 1:16). To the Philippians he wrote, “I thank my God in all my remembrance of you, always offering prayer with joy in my every prayer for you all” (Phil. 1:3–4). Paul also prayed constantly for the Colossian church: “For this reason also, since the day we heard of it, we have not ceased to pray for you and to ask that you may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding” (Col. 1:9). Paul’s passion for the Word was equaled only by his devotion to prayer.

 

The apostles’ pledge to devote themselves to their ministry set the pattern for all to follow. The ministry demands total commitment, everything a man has to give. There is no substitute for hard work and discipline. A young man once said to Donald Grey Barnhouse, “I’d give the world to be able to teach the Bible like you.” Looking him straight in the eye Dr. Barnhouse replied, “Good, because that’s exactly what it will cost you.”

 

Again, Paul serves as an appropriate model of the commitment to the Word that the ministry demands. In his farewell speech to the Ephesian elders he said, You yourselves know, from the first day that I set foot in Asia,
how I was with you the whole time, serving the Lord with all humility and with tears and with trials which came upon me through the plots of the Jews; how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you publicly and from house to house, solemnly testifying to both Jews and Greeks
of repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. (Acts 20:18–21)

 

Acts 19:9–10 describes Paul’s ministry at Ephesus: “But when some were becoming hardened and disobedient, speaking evil of the Way before the multitude, he withdrew from them and took away the disciples, reasoning daily in the school of Tyrannus. And this took place for two years, so that all who lived in Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks.” Imprisoned in Rome, he nevertheless “was solemnly testifying [to the Jews of Rome] about the kingdom of God, and trying to persuade them concerning Jesus, from both the Law of Moses and from the Prophets, from morning until evening” (Acts 28:23). That continued for two years (28:30–31).

 

Paul expressed his personal philosophy of ministry in the following words: If I preach the gospel, I have nothing to boast of, for I am under compulsion; for woe is me if I do not preach the gospel. For if I do this voluntarily, I have a reward; but if against my will, I have a stewardship entrusted to me. Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air; but I buffet my body and make it my slave, lest possibly, after I have preached to others, I myself should be disqualified. (1 Cor. 9:16–17, 26–27)

 

From his dramatic conversion on the Damascus Road to the day a Roman executioner ended his life, Paul gave himself totally to the ministry. There is no other way. Every minister of Jesus Christ must give heed to Paul’s exhortation to Timothy: Prescribe and teach these things. Let no one look down on your youthfulness, but rather in speech, conduct, love, faith and purity, show yourself an example of those who believe. Until I
come, give attention to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation and teaching. Do not neglect the spiritual gift within you, which was bestowed upon you through prophetic utterance with the laying on of hands by the presbytery. Take pains with these things; be absorbed in them, so that your progress may be
evident to all. (1 Tim. 4:11–15)

 

The devotion that Paul demanded of his young protégé is the same devotion the Lord Jesus Christ demands of all who serve Him.

 

The Requirements

But select from among you, brethren, seven men of good reputation, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may put in charge of this task. (6:3)

 

While the apostles had to remain faithful to their priorities, the problem of distributing the food and money equitably remained. That important ministry needed oversight, and others would have to be found to do that. Accordingly, the apostles commanded the believers to select from their own ranks seven men. The word translated select is from the verb meaning “to oversee,” or “to supervise.” The congregation was to look over the men who were respected and present their choices to the apostles. They would make the final decision regarding their appointment to the task, as indicated by the words whom we may put in charge of this task.

 

This brief verse lists five required characteristics for those appointed to church ministry. First, those who would lead the church must be men. Women certainly have vital roles to fill (cf. Titus 2:3–5). In the early church, such women as Dorcas, Lydia, Phoebe, Priscilla, and Philip’s daughters were greatly used by
God. Nevertheless, God’s design for the church is that men assume the leadership roles (1 Cor. 11:3, 8, 9; 14:34; 1 Tim. 2:11–12).

 

A second requirement is that they be from among you. That indicates more than the obvious truth that those who lead the church must be believers. Churches should seek to develop their leadership from within their own ranks. A church committed to the ministry of edifying and equipping its members will not have to look elsewhere for its leaders.

 

A third requirement for leaders is that they be men of good reputation. They must be men of integrity, above reproach, as is required of elders and deacons in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1. Servants must set an example of godliness for their people to follow. And they must be qualified spiritually regardless of their
position in the world or their human ability. To have a good reputation was essential for these seven, since they would be entrusted with large sums of money to purchase the food to be distributed.

 

Those who would lead the church must also be full of the Spirit. They must be fully yielded to His control in every area of their lives. Such men were Stephen (Acts 6:5) and Barnabas (Acts 11:24).

 

A final requirement is that they possess wisdom. They must have biblical and theological knowledge, and the practical wisdom to apply biblical truth to the situations of everyday life. They must be men of sober, righteous judgment. First Chronicles 12:32 describes some wise leaders of Israel as “men who understood
the times, with knowledge of what Israel should do.” Such men does God call to serve His church.

 

The question arises as to whether these seven can be properly viewed as the first official deacons. They performed some functions of the later deacons, and forms of the Greek word are used to describe their ministry (vv. 1–2). Yet to view them in terms of a formal office is anachronistic. Of the seven, only Stephen and Philip appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they are never called deacons. Indeed, Stephen’s later ministry was clearly that of an evangelist, as was Philip’s (Acts 21:8). While Acts later refers to elders (14:23; 20:17), there is no mention of deacons. That is strange, if the office of deacon began in Acts 6. Further, all seven had Greek names, implying that they may have been Hellenists. It seems unlikely, however, that a permanent order of deacons for the Jerusalem church would include no native Palestinian Jews.

 

There are important principles in this passage for the continuing life of the church. Here we see that the congregation is to nominate certain spiritually qualified men to serve, with the final appointment resting with those already in position as teachers and spiritual leaders. Still, it seems best to see the selection of these seven as the Jerusalem church’s response to a temporary crisis. It should be noted that the Greek word group from which our English word “deacon” derives denotes service in general. Significantly, when the church at Antioch later sent famine relief to the Jerusalem church, no mention is made of deacons (Acts 11:29–30). Instead, the relief was sent to the elders. Stephen and Philip certainly did not continue long in this role, since both became evangelists. And persecution would shortly scatter the Jerusalem congregation (Acts 8:1), ending the ministry of the other five. God raised them for a brief period of ministry, to handle a crisis. The continuing unity of the church shows the effectiveness of their ministry.

 

The Roster

And the statement found approval with the whole congregation; and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch. And these they brought before the apostles; and after praying, they laid their hands on them. (6:5–6)

 

The apostles’ plan found approval with the whole congregation, and seven men were appointed to the ministry. That all seven bore Greek names suggests all were Hellenists. If true, it was a demonstration of the loving unity of the church. Since the Hellenists felt slighted, the church decided to appoint seven from among them to rectify the situation. A split was thus avoided, and again Satan’s attack was thwarted.

 

Stephen was to play a pivotal role in the spread of the gospel beyond Jerusalem. It was the persecution connected with his martyrdom that propelled the church out of Jerusalem (Acts 8:1). The commendation of him as a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit reveals his character.

 

Philip also plays a prominent role in Acts. He took the gospel to the Samaritans (8:4–25), and to the Ethiopian eunuch (8:26–40). Four of his daughters became prophetesses (21:8).

 

Nothing definite is known about the remaining five men. Some early traditions connect Prochorus with John the apostle, possibly as his amanuensis when he wrote his gospel. According to those traditions, he later became bishop of Nicomedia and was martyred in Antioch (John B. Polhill, The New American Commentary: Acts [Nashville: Broadman, 1992], p. 182).

 

All that is known for certain about Nicolas is that he was a proselyte (a Gentile convert to Judaism) from Antioch. Some of the church Fathers associated him with the heretical group known as the Nicolaitans (Rev. 2:6, 15). But there is no evidence, apart from the similarity in the names, to connect him with that group. And as Lenski rightly observes, “It ought to be understood that decidedly more evidence is required in a matter of so serious a charge” (R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of the Acts of the Apostles [Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1961], 246).

 

The congregation brought the seven before the apostles; and after praying, they laid their hands on them. This first occasion in the New Testament of laying on of hands signified the identification and affirmation of the church with these men, and the support of their ministry. Elders, deacons, and all who served in the early church were ordained this way (cf. Acts 13:3; 1 Tim. 4:14; 5:22; 2 Tim. 1:6).

 

All though little is known about most of these men, they played a crucial role in the foundational history of the church. But for them, either the apostles’ priorities would have been compromised, or the church may have split. Either would have been disastrous.

 

Note four significant points.

     1.   The church acted in love and humility. Neither the apostles nor anyone else had ruffled feelings. The apostles and Hebrew believers (thousands of them) responded in love and humility. Everyone of the seven men chosen were Grecian Jews. Their names were Greek, not Jewish. The largest segment of the church had humbled itself to the minority. What an example!

     2.   “The whole multitude” of believers was pleased. The body had been reunited as one in spirit and purpose, worship and ministry.

     3.   The fact that they were all Grecian believers points toward God moving the church out into the whole world. Christ had commissioned the first disciples to go into the whole world (Matthew 28:19-20; Acts 1:8). Now, He was providentially preparing the church for the day that was soon to come, the day of persecution that would scatter the believers all over the world (Acts 8:1-4). These seven men, being Grecian ministers, could touch the Gentile world wherever they went—by language, by training, and by culture. God was preparing the church without their knowing it for the day when they were to be scattered all over the world.

     4.   The men chosen were unknown except for Stephen and Philip. The point to note is that they were men who had the qualities given in Acts 8:3.

 

Note the name Nicolas, a Jewish proselyte. He was a Gentile who had been converted to Judaism and then to Christ. Some try to connect him with the Nicolatians who went off on a doctrinal error and created a sect. There is no basis for this. In fact, the likelihood is that he was instrumental in starting the church at Antioch, one of the greatest churches of all time (cp. Acts 11:19-30).

 

The Results

And the word of God kept on spreading; and the number of the disciples continued to increase greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were becoming obedient to the faith. (6:7)

 

What was the result? The blessing of God continued and increased! The church was still unified (Acts 6:5), multiplied (Acts 6:7), and magnified (Acts 6:8). Acts 6:7 is one of several “summaries” found in the book, statements that let us know that the story has reached an important juncture (see Acts 2:41; 4:4; 5:12-16; 6:7; 9:31; 12:24; 16:5; 19:20; and 28:31).

 

In Acts 6:7, Dr. Luke describes the climax of the ministry in Jerusalem, for the persecution following Stephen’s death will take the Gospel to the Samaritans and then to the Gentiles. It has been estimated that there were 8,000 Jewish priests attached to the temple ministry in Jerusalem, and “a great company” of them trusted Jesus Christ as Saviour through baptism for remission of sins!

 

As already noted, the organization of the church freed the apostles to devote themselves to prayer and the Word. It also avoided a church split. Luke closes this section, as he has before, by noting the development of the church. The word of God kept on spreading from the church as a direct result of the freeing of the apostles to carry out their primary ministry, and also of the church’s unity. As the Word continued to spread, the number of the disciples continued to increase greatly in Jerusalem. Greatly, like the general reference to multitudes (5:14), shows that there were so many new converts being added that they lost count of the exact number. Astonishingly, a great many of the priests were becoming obedient to the faith. These were, of course, not the chief priests or members of the Sanhedrin, but a very large number of the rank and file priests who ministered in the temple. Perhaps this dramatic impact of the gospel on the priests accounts for the opposition that soon arose against Stephen.

 

The church today needs organization for the same reasons as the first fellowship. Ministers must be freed to focus on the preaching of the Word and prayer. Better organization can help meet the needs of all members and thus avoid conflict. And a unified, well-taught church will be a powerful witness to the lost world.

 

 

And on that day a great persecution arose against the church in Jerusalem; and they were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles. And some devout men buried Stephen, and made loud lamentation over him. But Saul began ravaging the church, entering house after house; and dragging off men and women, he would put them in prison. Therefore, those who had been scattered went about preaching the word. And Philip went down to the city of Samaria and began proclaiming Christ to them. And the multitudes with one accord were giving attention to what was said by Philip, as they heard and saw the signs which he was performing. For in the case of many who had unclean spirits, they were coming out of them shouting with a loud voice; and many who had been paralyzed and lame were healed. And there was much rejoicing in that city. (8:1b-8)

 

There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world,” wrote Victor Hugo, “and that is an idea whose time has come.”

 

The Gospel of Jesus Christ is much more than an idea. The Gospel is “the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes” (Rom. 1:16, nkjv). It is God’s “dynamite” for breaking down sin’s barriers and setting the prisoners free. Its time had come and the church was on the move. The “salt” was now leaving the “Jerusalem saltshaker” to be spread over all Judea and Samaria, just as the Lord had commanded (Acts 1:8).

 

Chapter 8 is an important chapter in the history of the Church.  The Church began by being a purely Jewish institution.  Acts 6 shows the first murmurings of the great debate about the acceptance of the Gentiles.  Stephen had had a mind far above national deliminations.  Chapter 8 shows the Church reaching out.  Persecution scattered the Church abroad and where they went they took their gospel. 

 

Into chapter 8 comes Philip who, like Stephen, was one of the Seven and who is to be distinguished from the Philip who was one of the Twelve.  First, Philip preached to the Samaritans.  The Samaritans formed a natural bridge between Jew and Gentile for they were half Jew and half Gentile in their racial descent.  Then comes the incident of the Ethiopian eunuch in which the gospel takes a step out to a still wider circle.  As yet the Church had no conception of a world mission; but when we read this chapter in the light of what was soon to happen, we see her unconsciously but irresistibly being moved towards her destiny.

 

The death of Stephen was the signal for an outbreak of persecution which compelled the Christians to scatter and to seek safety in the remoter districts of the country.  There are two specially interesting points in this short section.

 

(i)  The apostles stood fast.  Others might flee but they braved whatever perils might come; and this for two reasons.  (a)  They were men of courage.  Conrad tells that, when he was a young sailor learning to steer a sailing-ship, a gale blew up.  The older man who was teaching him gave him but one piece of advice.  "Keep her facing it," he said.  "Always keep her facing it."  The apostles were determined to face whatever dangers threatened.  (b)  They were good men.  Christians they might be, but there was something about them that won the respect of all.  It is told that once a slanderous accusation was levelled against Plato.  His answer was, "I will live in such a way that all men will know that it is a lie."  The beauty and the power of the lies of the apostles were so impressive that even in a day of persecution men hesitated to lay their hands upon them.

 

(ii)  Saul, as the Authorized Version says, "made havoc" of the church.  The word used in the Greek denotes a brutal cruelty.  It is used of a wild boar ravaging a vineyard and of a wild animal savaging a body.  The contrast between the man who was savaging the church in this chapter and the man who surrendered to Christ in the next is intensely dramatic.

 

Stephen’s message was God’s final invitation to Israel. If Israel rejected the message, God would turn elsewhere to root and ground His church. The terrible tragedy is that Israel did reject the message; in fact Israel killed Stephen and launched a savage persecution against the church, attempting to utterly destroy and stamp it out.

 

However, God overruled and used the persecution as a means to scatter the church all across the world. Just as Jesus had instructed, Judea, Samaria, and the uttermost part of the earth were now to hear the glorious message of the gospel (cp. Acts 1:8).

 

The point to note is this: Stephen (his message and martyrdom) is the flame that God used to launch the great evangelistic thrust of the gospel around the world. The believers were scattered all over the world by great persecution.

 

At first glance, Stephen’s death may also seem pointless. Here was another promising career cut short. He was a powerful, miraculous preacher, with a deep knowledge of the Old Testament. Such was the godly character of his life that he was one of the seven chosen by the church to oversee its daily affairs. Why was it necessary that one so gifted have such a brief ministry?

 

Further, his ministry seemed to have ended in failure. Not only was he killed as a heretic, but his death also triggered the first persecution against the entire church. That persecution, spearheaded by Saul of Tarsus, scattered the Jerusalem fellowship.

 

Such a skewed view of Stephen’s death, however, betrays a lack of understanding of the way the Holy Spirit works. The persecution, which seemed to be a negative, was in reality a positive factor. It led to the first great missionary outreach by the early church. Satan’s attempt to stamp out the church’s fire merely scattered the embers and started new fires around the world. In the words of Tertullian, the blood of “the martyrs became the seed of the church.”

 

The church’s first missionary effort, beginning in this chapter, was foreshadowed in chapter 5, when people from the cities near Jerusalem brought their sick for the apostles to heal (5:16). Stephen’s outreach to the Hellenistic Jews, those from foreign lands, was a step toward world evangelism. In chapter 8, the church is seen reaching out to Judea, Samaria, and even to a Gentile. They were carrying out their Lord’s mandate to “be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth” (Acts 1:8).

 

This chapter marks another turning point. Jerusalem, which has dominated the story up to this point, begins to settle into the background, illustrating the truth that opportunity ignored is opportunity lost. The church there continues, but the explosive days of apostolic miracles and exponential growth fade.

 

Paul wrote that the gospel came “to the Jew first” and then “to the Greek” (Rom. 1:16). The murder of Stephen almost surely fixed a point of the gospel’s final rejection by the Jewish leaders, and God’s design for the gospel to move out into new territory began.

 

In the opening verses of this critical chapter three progressive features describing the initial expansion stand out: persecution, which led to preaching, which led to productivity.

 

Persecution

And on that day a great persecution arose against the church in Jerusalem; and they were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles. And some devout men buried Stephen, and made loud lamentation over him. But Saul began ravaging the church, entering house after house; and dragging off men and women, he would put them in prison. (8:1b–3)

 

The persecution the church had faced up to this point had been directed at the apostles and their associates who were proclaiming the risen Jesus. Peter and John had encountered opposition from the Jewish authorities, and Stephen had died a martyr’s death. As of yet, however, no persecution had been aimed at the
members of the church. That was to change quickly.

 

On the very day of Stephen’s death, a great persecution arose against the church in Jerusalem. That persecution, detonated by the murder of Stephen, was led by a Hellenist Jew named Saul of Tarsus. He was a brilliant student of the revered rabbi Gamaliel, “advancing in Judaism beyond many of [his] contemporaries among [his] countrymen, being more extremely zealous for [his] ancestral traditions” (Gal. 1:14). His own testimony was that he was “a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the Law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless” (Phil. 3:5–6). His commitment and zeal were turned toward the elimination of the church.

 

The Book of Acts and the epistles give sufficient data for a sketch of Saul’s early life. He was born in Tarsus in Cilicia (Acts 22:3), a “Hebrew of the Hebrews” (see 2 Cor. 11:22; Phil. 3:5), the “son of a Pharisee” (Acts 23:6), and a Roman citizen (Acts 16:37; 22:25-28). He was educated in Jerusalem by Gamaliel (Acts 22:3) and became a devoted Pharisee (Acts 26:4-5; Phil. 3:5). Measured by the Law, his life was blameless (Phil. 3:6). He was one of the most promising young Pharisees in Jerusalem, well on his way to becoming a great leader for the Jewish faith (Gal. 1:14).

 

Saul’s zeal for the Law was displayed most vividly in his persecution of the church (Gal. 1:13-14; Phil. 3:6). He really thought that persecuting the believers was one way of serving God, so he did it with a clear conscience (2 Tim. 1:3). He obeyed the light that he had and, when God gave him more light, he obeyed that and became a Christian!

 

In what ways did Saul persecute the church? He “made havoc of the church,” and the verb here describes a wild animal mangling its prey. When Christ spoke to Saul on the Damascus road, He compared him to a beast! (Acts 9:5) The stoning of Stephen, which Saul approved, shows the lengths to which he would go to achieve his purpose. He persecuted both men and women “unto the death” (Acts 22:4), entering both houses and synagogues (Acts 22:19). He had the believers imprisoned and beaten (Acts 22:19; 26:9-11). If they renounced their faith in Jesus Christ (“compelling them to blaspheme”—Acts 26:11), they were set free; if they did not recant, they could be killed.

 

In later years, Paul described himself as “exceedingly mad against them” (Acts 26:11), “a blasphemer [he denounced Jesus Christ], and a persecutor, and injurious [violent]” (1 Tim. 1:13). He was a man with great authority whose devotion to Moses completely controlled his life, and almost destroyed his life. He did it “ignorantly in unbelief” (1 Tim. 1:13), and God showed him mercy and saved him. Saul of Tarsus is the last person in Jerusalem you would have chosen to be the great apostle to the Gentiles!

 

Ironically, this same Saul who consented to Stephen’s death would later suffer far more for the cause of Christ than did Stephen. The very first physical persecution Stephen encountered killed him, while Paul was repeatedly battered (cf. 2 Cor. 11:23ff.) until finally killed. As the Lord Jesus Christ said about him, “I will show him how much he must suffer for My name’s sake” (Acts 9:16). He endured the emotion of facing death many times (2 Cor. 4:8–12).

 

The church father Augustine wrote that the church owes Paul to the prayer of Stephen. Saul, who later became the apostle Paul, never forgot the way Stephen died—he also did not conceal that he was in full agreement with the killing (22:20). God promises in Rom. 8:28 that all things work together for good. Even though Paul was struggling against the work of the early church and the church was experiencing its worst persecution up to that time, it was this struggle that would eventually lead Paul, the man who wrote at least half of the NT, to eternal life.^[1]

 

Paul’s ministry was in many ways to parallel that of Stephen. Stephen preached Christ in the synagogues, so did Paul (Acts 17:1–2). The Jewish people rejected Stephen’s message, as they did Paul’s (Acts 18:5–6). Stephen was accused of speaking against Moses, the law, and the temple, so was Paul (Acts 21:28; 24:6; 25:8; 28:17). Stephen was stoned, so was Paul (although he did not die) (Acts 14:19–20). Both were tried before the Sanhedrin (Acts 6:12ff.; 22:30ff.). Finally, both died as martyrs.

 

Stephen’s death, then, was the catalyst for the storm of persecution, led by Saul, that broke on the church. The predictions of the Lord Jesus Christ were coming true: “If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you” (John 15:20); “they will make you outcasts from the synagogue, but an hour is coming for everyone who kills you to think that he is offering service to God” (John 16:2).

 

Because of the persecution, the believers were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles. “All” does not mean every individual Christian, except the apostles, left Jerusalem. That the Jerusalem church continued to exist is clear from Acts 9:26; 11:2, 22; 15:4; and 21:17.
What it does mean is that the church was broken up, and many of its members forced to flee. Acts 11:19–20 suggests that those who fled were primarily Hellenists. Further, “from this time onward the Jerusalem church appears to have consisted almost entirely of ‘Hebrews’” (F. F. Bruce, The Book of the Acts [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971], 174). It was only natural that the Hellenists of which Stephen was likely one would bear the brunt of the persecution.

 

Like faithful watchmen, the apostles remained at their posts. They remained in the city out of devotion to their Lord and the desire to shepherd the flock in Jerusalem. An additional reason appears in verse 2: Jerusalem was still a mission field. The devout men who buried Stephen, and made loud lamentation over him, may not have been believers. Luke uses the term devout elsewhere to speak of pious Jews (cf. Luke 2:25; Acts 2:5). Perhaps they were friends of Stephen’s from the Hellenist synagogue he attended. Their loud lamentation—forbidden by the Mishna in the case of an executed criminal—amounted to a public protest of Stephen’s death. Despite its rejection by the leaders, there were still people like these whose hearts might be open to the gospel. The apostles remained behind in part to continue their evangelistic efforts.

 

Meanwhile, the storm of persecution continued unabated, as Saul began ravaging the church. Armed with “authority from the chief priests” (Acts 26:10), he began entering house after house in search of Christians. Dragging off men and women alike, he would put them in prison. Not content to harass the saints in Jerusalem, he “persecuted this Way to the death, binding and putting both men and women into prisons” (Acts 22:4). He “kept pursuing them even to foreign cities” (Acts 26:11) with the permission of the Jewish leaders (Acts 22:5). Ironically, it was on one of those missions that he was converted (Acts 9:1ff.). In his zeal for his beliefs (cf. Gal. 1:13), he fulfilled the Lord’s prediction recorded in John 16:2. He sincerely thought he was serving God by incarcerating and executing believers. And only a direct confrontation with the Lord Jesus Christ would persuade him otherwise.

 

The effects of Saul’s persecution were devastating. Lumainomai (ravaging) appears only here in the New Testament. It means “to destroy,” “to ruin,” or “to damage.” In extrabiblical writings, it was used to describe the destruction of a city (Walter Bauer, William Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature [Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1979], 481) and mangling by a wild beast (Fritz Rienecker and Cleon L. Rogers, Jr., Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982], 278). Saul literally tore the church apart—an act that would haunt him for the rest of his life so that he felt utterly unworthy to be called an apostle (cf. Acts 22:3–5, 19–20; 26:9ff.; Gal. 1:13; 1 Cor. 15:9; 1 Tim. 1:13).

 

The persecution resulted in the scattering of the church. But God used the wrath of men for His gospel purposes.

 

Preaching

Therefore, those who had been scattered went about preaching the word. And Philip went down to the city of Samaria and began proclaiming Christ to them. And the multitudes with one accord were giving attention to what was said by Philip, as they heard and saw the signs which he was performing. For in the case of many who had unclean spirits, they were coming out of them shouting with a loud voice; and many who had been
paralyzed and lame were healed. (8:4–7)

 

Therefore, in spite of the persecution, those believers who had been scattered were not cowering somewhere in fear but went about preaching the word. They had been doing so before the outbreak of the persecution, and after being scattered they continued to preach. Went about is from dierchomai, a word used frequently in Acts of missionary endeavors (8:40; 9:32; 13:6; 14:24; 15:3, 41; 16:6; 18:23; 19:1, 21; 20:2).

 

Preaching is from euangelizoô, which refers to proclaiming the gospel. All the scattered believers were involved in evangelism. Although some are specially gifted as evangelists (Acts 21:8; Eph. 4:11; 2 Tim. 4:5), all Christians are called to proclaim Christ. Satan’s persecution promoted the very thing it was designed to destroy. It fired the believers with new zeal to proclaim the gospel in new areas.

 

In verse 5, the Holy Spirit focuses on one man as an example of faithful evangelism. Philip, the first missionary named in Scripture, becomes the key figure for the rest of the chapter. This is not the apostle Philip, who would have stayed in Jerusalem, but one of the seven chosen to serve the needs of the Hellenist widows (Acts 6:5). Like Stephen, his faithfulness to that task led God to use him in a wider ministry (cf. Matt. 25:23). Although Paul later instructed Timothy to “do the work of an evangelist” (2 Tim. 4:5), Philip is the only man in Scripture actually given the title “evangelist” (Acts 21:8). That is a fitting honor in light of his pioneering work in spreading the gospel.

 

Beginning his evangelistic work, Philip went down from the high plateau of Jerusalem to the city of Samaria, located some forty miles north of Jerusalem. It was the ancient capital of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, founded by Omri (1 Kings 16:24), who moved the capital there from Tirzah. After nearly a century
and a half of idolatry and rebellion against God, the city fell to the Assyrians under Shalmaneser V in 722 B.C. (2 Kings 17:1–6; 18:9–12). Samaria’s downfall marked the end of the Northern Kingdom. Many of its people were resettled in other lands by the Assyrians (2 Kings 17:6), who also located people from other
nations in that region (2 Kings 17:24ff.). The resulting mix of Jews and Gentile peoples became known as the Samaritans. Second Kings 17:33 records their religious syncretism: “They feared the Lord and served their own gods according to the custom of the nations from among whom they had been carried away into
exile.”

 

Friction soon developed between the Samaritans and the Israelites. When some Samaritans offered to help rebuild the temple, they were contemptuously rejected—despite their claims to be worshipers of the true God (Ezra 4:1–3). Hostility between Jews and Samaritans grew during the intertestamental period and was evident during New Testament times (cf. Luke 9:52–53; John 4:9; 8:48).

 

The Lord had defied conventional opinion by announcing his messiahship to a Samaritan woman, setting an example of His commitment to the world and to sinners (cf. John 4:4ff.). His express command in Acts 1:8 was initially fulfilled by Philip, who began proclaiming Christ to the Samaritans. Proclaiming is from keôrussoô, which means “to proclaim publicly,” or “herald.” By New Testament times, the Samaritans had shed their idolatry. They now worshiped the true God—although after their own confused fashion, which Jesus described as “worshiping that which you do not know” (cf. John 4:20–24). The Samaritans, like the Jews, looked for the coming of the Messiah (John 4:25). Given that foundation of belief, Stephen could simply proclaim Jesus as the long-awaited Messiah. With some we need to spend time in pre-evangelism, tearing down their false system of belief and proving the truth of Christianity. Only then will they be
prepared to understand the gospel message. Others, like these Samaritans, already have that background. They are ready to hear the gospel.

 

The Holy Spirit had prepared their hearts to respond to Philip’s message. As a result, his preaching resulted in a wholesale spiritual awakening, as the multitudes with one accord were giving attention to what was said by him. The signs which Philip was performing authenticated him as a true messenger of God (cf. Acts 2:43; 4:30; 5:12–16; 6:8; 14:3; 15:12, and the discussion in chapter 13 of this volume).

 

Verse 7 gives some samples of the miracles performed by Philip: In the case of many who had unclean spirits, they were coming out of them shouting with a loud voice; and many who had been paralyzed and lame were healed. Luke notes that those possessed by unclean spirits, or demons, were freed from their bondage. Jesus had frequently encountered and healed demon-possessed individuals (cf. Matt. 4:24; 8:16, 28; 9:32–34; 12:22–28; etc.), as Satan mustered all his forces in a futile effort to oppose Him. Jesus was still healing the demon-possessed through this associate of the apostles.

 

Such demon-indwelt people exist in our own day, although they may not be as commonly manifest in Western culture as in third-world cultures. As C. S. Lewis notes, Satan and his demons adapt themselves to whatever world view prevails in a given society. They are equally at home with Western materialists
and third-world magicians (The Screwtape Letters [New York: Macmillan, 1961], 3). Many are controlled by demons who give no outward sign of it. That is especially true of those involved in promoting false religion. (For a discussion of  whether Christians can be demon-possessed, see my book How to Meet the Enemy [Wheaton, Ill.: Victor, 1992].)

 

Despite the claims of those in the so-called “spiritual warfare” movement, believers today do not have the authority or ability to command or to directly cast out demons. I have elsewhere noted that the temporary sign gift of miracles was the power (dunamis) to cast out demons (1 Corinthians, MacArthur New Testament Commentary [Chicago: Moody, 1984], 302). Like the other sign gifts, that gift no longer operates today. As with physical healing, however, we can pray for God to intercede.

 

Nowhere in Scripture are believers told to “bind Satan” or exercise authority over demons. Satan will not be bound until a holy angel does so in the future (Rev. 20:1–3). And those who attempt to assert their authority over demons risk winding up like the Jewish exorcists, the sons of Sceva, of Acts 19:13–16. It is dangerous to claim for ourselves authority God has not granted us. The biblical instruction for conducting spiritual warfare is laid out in Ephesians 6:10–18.

 

Unable to resist Philip’s God-given power, the unclean spirits were coming out of their victims, shouting with a loud voice. Demons often cried out when they were cast out of an individual (cf. Mark 1:23, 26; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:33, 41), perhaps in rage and protestation.

 

Besides casting out demons, Philip also healed many who had been paralyzed and lame. Such healings of serious physical ailments made the power of God evident. It is no wonder, then, that the people paid close attention to the truth in Philip’s preaching.

 

Productivity

And there was much rejoicing in that city. (8:8)

 

The powerful miracles and preaching of Philip resulted, as it had in Jerusalem, in the salvation of many Samaritans. But as true biblical preaching inevitably does, it produced another vastly different response. Some accepted the gospel, believing and reacting with much rejoicing. They were the true believers, the wheat. Their joy came not just from physical deliverance from diseases, or spiritual deliverance from demons, but from complete deliverance from sin through the Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ. Others, however, were false believers, or tares.

 

The Jerusalem Council: Is Salvation by Law or Grace? Acts 15:1-35

(15:1-5) Introduction: this is the story of the great Jerusalem council. It is called great because...

·    all the apostles were involved in its discussion and decision.

·    the council declared forever that a man is saved apart from ritual, saved by the grace of God through faith alone.

 

Two questions arose about salvation.

1.  The basic question about salvation: Is circumcision necessary to be saved? (v.1-3).

2.  The enlarged question about salvation: Does a man have to accept the whole law before he can be saved? (v.4-5).

 

The progress of the Gospel has often been hindered by people with closed minds who stand in front of open doors and block the way for others.

 

The Council of Jerusalem is one of the great turning points of the Book of Acts, as are the conversions of Paul and Cornelius. The relation between the Jewish and Gentile believers in terms of admission to membership in the church was the issue of this discussion. In the beginning, the church consisted almost entirely of converted Jews who had automatically been circumcised as OT believers.

 

Even Peter, earlier, had great difficulty making the transition to full fellowship with the Gentiles. The establishment of a predominantly Gentile church in Antioch and now the success of the Gentile mission in Galatia refocused attention upon fellowship with these growing churches. Church growth certainly underlies the basic themes represented by Luke in the Book of Acts. The power of the message of the gospel is demonstrated by the fact that it gains reception and response almost everywhere.

 

When the Jewish converts from Judea arrived in Antioch, they insisted that believers must be circumcised in order to be saved (v. 1). The text later (v. 5) indicates that these converts were from among the Pharisees, the strictest of the sects of the Jews. The disputations would also seem to indicate that some of the early believers still looked upon Christianity as a movement within Judaism at this point.^[1]

 

The influx of Gentiles into the Church produced a problem which had to be solved.  The mental background of the Jew was founded on the fact that he belonged to the chosen people.  In effect they believed that not only were the Jews the peculiar possession of God but also that God was the peculiar possession of the Jews.  The problem was this.  Before a Gentile became a member of the Christian Church was it necessary that he should be circumcised and take upon himself the Law of Moses?  In other words-must the Gentile, before he became a Christian, first become a Jew?  Or, could a Gentile be received into the Church as such?

 

Even were that question settled there arose another problem.  The strict Jew could have no intercourse with a Gentile.  He could not have him as guest nor be his guest.  He would not, as far as possible, even do business with him.  So then, even if Gentiles were allowed into the Church, how far could Jews and Gentiles associate in the ordinary social life of the Church?

 

These were the problems which had to be solved.  The solution was not easy.  But in the end the Church took the decision that there should be no difference between Jew and Gentile at all.  The 15th chapter of Acts tells of the Council of Jerusalem whose decisions were the charter of freedom for the Gentiles.

 

The Jerusalem Council was the first and the most significant of all meetings of the first century church to discuss important issues for it fixed the most momentous doctrinal question of all: What must a person do to be saved? The apostles and elders successfully resisted the pressure to impose Jewish legalism and ritualism on the Gentile believers. In other words, they forbade the inclusion of works as a part of salvation. They affirmed for all time the truth that salvation is wholly by God’s grace through faith alone, apart from any human efforts.

 

The wholesale entrance of Gentiles into the church was very disturbing and threatening to some of the Jewish believers. Many believed that Gentiles who wanted to become Christians had to first become Jewish proselytes. They saw Christianity as the culmination of Judaism. That Gentiles were short-circuiting the process and becoming Christians without first becoming Jewish proselytes shocked and overwhelmed them.

 

They could not conceive that pagans could simply enter the church and immediately be on an equal basis with Jewish believers. That seemed unfair to those who had devoted their lives to keeping God’s law. They feared, too, that in an increasingly Gentile church, Jewish culture, traditions, and influence would be lost.

 

Given those concerns, conflict was inevitable. As long as the Gentile converts were few and were already Jewish proselytes (like the Ethiopian eunuch and Cornelius), the issue could be avoided. But by the time of the Jerusalem Council, matters had come to a head. The issue was not whether God wanted to save Gentiles, but how they were to be saved. Could they enter the kingdom of God directly, without coming through the vestibule of Judaism? That was the question the Jerusalem Council convened to decide. From the inspired record emerge four features: the dissension, the discussion, the decision, and the development.

 

The Dissension

And some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” And when Paul and Barnabas had great dissension and debate with them, the brethren determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders concerning this issue. Therefore, being sent on their way by the church, they were passing through both Phoenicia and Samaria, describing in detail the conversion of the Gentiles, and were bringing great joy to all the brethren. And when they arrived at Jerusalem, they were received by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they reported all that God had done with them. But certain ones of the sect of the Pharisees who had believed, stood up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them, and to direct them to observe the Law of Moses.” (15:1-5)

 

(15:1-3) Salvation vs. Ritual: the basic question arising about salvation. Is a ritual or ceremony necessary to be saved? Note five significant points.

 

1.  The dissenters from the Judean churches were a powerful force, so powerful that their argument and emphasis have continued down through the centuries. Note that the visitors from Jerusalem moved among the Antioch believers and taught their own ideas. The dissenters were...

· teachers and leaders.

· well-versed in the Scripture.

· some of the very first believers, considered mature.

· elder statesmen.

· esteemed highly.

 

Therefore, what they said was considered very important. The problem was this: if the dissenters were allowed to continue, the believers of Antioch were bound to become upset and confused. The result would have been explosive and devastating: the Antioch church would have been split and its ministry and witness made ineffective.

 

2.  Scripture clearly declares what the dissension was; there can be no mistake about what was being said: “Except ye be circumcised [undergo this ritual]...ye cannot be saved.” Note three critical facts.

a. A person’s eternal fate was at stake. The dissenters did not say you should undergo the ritual...

· to be obedient to Scripture

· to please God

· to please the church

· to demonstrate your love

· to identify with believers

· to keep from being a stumbling block

 

The dissenters were saying believers must undergo the ritual and be circumcised to be saved. They were saying it was the ritual, the circumcision that saved them; a believer was just not saved unless he was ritualized. They were claiming salvation was...

·  God’s grace plus a ritual.

· God’s grace plus man’s own hand.

· God’s grace plus man’s own work.

· a spiritual thing (God) plus a physical thing (circumcision).

 

b. The issue was not whether a believer should be circumcised.  Before Christ, circumcision had been the physical sign that a man was a follower of the true God. It was the sign that a man believed the promises that God had made to Abraham and Israel (cp. Genesis 17:10-14; Romans 4:11). God never intended circum -cision to have any value other than being a sign. It was not meant to bring righteousness to any man—not even to Abraham (Romans 4:9-10). It was given only as a sign, a sign of the faith that a man already had in God’s promises. Righteousness was imputed to the man because he believed God’s promises; then the man was circumcised as a sign of his faith in God (Romans 4:11-12).

 

However, many abused God’s purpose for circumcision.

1.  Some made circumcision a substitute for true righteousness. A man was thought to be safe and secure in the arms of God if he was circumcised. Believing God and loving men had little to do with being a child of God. Many forgot the circumcision of a pure heart and became Jews of the circumcision in name only. Circumcision became merely a handmade, external, physical sign.

 

2.  Some used circumcision as a way to divide and categorize people. A great wall of division was thrown up around the uncircumcised (cp. 1 Samuel 17:26, 36; 2 Samuel 1:20). Any man who was uncircumcised was thought to be cut off and far off, not only from those thought to be the people of God (the Jews and the circumcised), but from God Himself. An uncircumcised man was looked upon with bitter contempt. In the mind of the Jew, God was thought to love only Israel, despising and rejecting the Gentile nations.

 

3.  God has done away with circumcision as a sign of righteousness since Christ has come (Galatians 5:6; Galatians 6:15; Col. 2:11). Righteousness is now of the heart and in the spirit, not in the letter of rules and regulations (cp. Romans 2:25-29; Romans 4:8-12, 23-25). The truly righteous man is the man who is God’s inwardly—the man whose spirit has been recreated into the very nature of God. God’s very own righteous nature is implanted into the very nature of man when he is born again. A man born again by the Spirit of God is God’s new creation (John 3:3f; 2 Cor. 5:17; 1 Peter 1:20; 2 Peter 1:4).

 

 Paul never said that circumcision was wrong. He maintained that since Christ had come, circumcision was a personal matter and a matter of conscience. If a person wished to be circumcised, let him be. Down through the centuries a host of Gentile believers (even two thousand years after Christ) have been circumcised and not become Jews. The physical act of circumcision does not make a person a Jew any more than any other physical ritual makes a person a member of any other race. It is the nature and commitment of one’s body, mind, and soul that makes a person a true member of a race or of anything else.

 

c. Paul and Barnabas argued time and again against this teaching, declaring that ritual (circumcision) is not necessary for salvation. Note the words, “no small dissension and disputation [questioning].” The arguments...

· were frequent and long.

· involved the questioning and challenging of each other as well as dissension.

· were unyielding, with neither side giving an inch.

 

The issue was bound to be critical to Paul or else he would not have gone to such limits in arguing the point. Paul’s great commitment to the Lord would not allow him to waste time in useless argument (cp. 2 Tim. 2:16, 23-26). This fact alone should speak to the hearts of any who stand on the other side.

 

3.  There was the decision of the Antioch church to seek counsel from the Jerusalem church. The Antioch church had no doubt about its position. Note that the Antioch church was not seeking for the Jerusalem church to enlighten them on the doctrine of salvation. The church sent Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem for three reasons.

 

a. God told Paul to go: “I went up by revelation” (Galatians 2:2). God willed a great church council (one that would include the earliest apostles)—a council that would issue a great verdict proclaiming the truth to every generation.

 

b. A declaration by the apostles would carry great weight and help tremendously in silencing those who would add a ritual to the requirements for salvation.

 

c. A declaration by the Jerusalem church would provide a great weapon to use in the struggle against “ritual salvation.” The Jerusalem church was the ritual center, the home base of those preaching the error. Therefore, if the Jerusalem church would issue a strong verdict denying the necessity of ritual for salvation, the position of “salvation by grace” alone would be greatly strengthened.

 

4.  There was the triumphant and glorious march of a great church, encouraging and loving God’s servants. Note the revealing words, “And being brought on their way by the church.” As Paul and Barnabas began their journey to Jerusalem, a great company from the Antioch church escorted them as a mark of great affection and honor. Despite the ever present opposition to Paul that seemed to be in practically every church, there were some believers who loved and respected him deeply.

 

5.  The servants utilized every opportunity to preach. As Paul and Barnabas travelled toward Jerusalem, they proclaimed Christ to the believers where churches had been founded. They also proclaimed the great movement of God that had taken place among the Gentiles. Note the “great joy” of the Christian brothers.

Þ  The Phenician churches were founded by laymen over a decade before (cp. Acts 11:19).

Þ  The Samaritan churches had been founded by Philip and Peter and John (cp. Acts 8:5, 25).

 

(15:4-5) Salvation: the enlarged question arising about salvation. Does a man have to accept the whole law before he can be saved? Note three points:

 

1.  Paul and his company were received and welcomed by the Jerusalem church, including the apostles and elders. They all seemed to be present; the council was a critical session. The word “received” (paredechthesan) has the idea of a formal meeting of the church. Paul was reporting to “the church...the apostles and elders” in a called meeting. Apparently there were two days of meetings (Acts 15:4, 6).

 

Note that Paul declared “all things that God had done.” The saving of men “by grace through faith” was not his doing. God was the One who was accepting people through faith alone.

 

2.  The Jerusalem dissenters were “of the sect of Pharisees which believed”

 

False teachers have plagued the church throughout its history. They are emissaries of Satan, sent to destroy the church’s power and corrupt its proclamation. Two of the apostles at the Jerusalem Council, Peter and Paul, warned of the false teachers’ pernicious influence, already being felt in the church. Peter wrote, “But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves” (2 Pet. 2:1).

 

“I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock,” Paul warned the leaders of the church at Ephesus, “and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them” (Acts 20:29-30).

 

It all started when some legalistic Jewish teachers came to Antioch and taught that the Gentiles, in order to be saved, had to be circumcised and obey the Law of Moses. These men were associated with the Jerusalem congregation but not authorized by it (Acts 15:24). Identified with the Pharisees (Acts 15:5), these teachers were “false brethren” who wanted to rob both Jewish and Gentile believers of their liberty in Christ (Gal. 2:1-10; 5:1ff).

 

It is not surprising that there were people in the Jerusalem church who were strong advocates of the Law of Moses but ignorant of the relationship between Law and grace. These people were Jews who had been trained to respect and obey the Law of Moses; and, after all, Romans, Galatians, and Hebrews had not yet been written! There was a large group of priests in the Jerusalem assembly (Acts 6:7), as well as people who still followed some of the Old Testament practices (see Acts 21:20-26). It was a time of transition, and such times are always difficult.

 

What were these legalists actually doing and why were they so dangerous? They were attempting to mix Law and grace and to pour the new wine into the ancient brittle wineskins (Luke 5:36-39). They were stitching up the rent veil (Luke 23:45) and blocking the new and living way to God that Jesus had opened when He died on the cross (Heb. 10:19-25). They were rebuilding the wall between Jews and Gentiles that Jesus had torn down on the cross (Eph. 2:14-16). They were putting the heavy Jewish yoke on Gentile shoulders (Acts 15:10; Gal. 5:1) and asking the church to move out of the sunlight into the shadows (Col. 2:16-17; Heb. 10:1). They were saying, “A Gentile must first become a Jew before he can become a Christian! It is not sufficient for them simply to trust Jesus Christ. They must also obey Moses!”

 

Several important issues are involved here, not the least of which is the work of Christ on the cross as declared in the message of the Gospel (1 Cor. 15:1-8; Heb. 10:1-18). God pronounces a solemn anathema on anyone who preaches any other Gospel than the Gospel of the grace of God found in Jesus Christ His Son (Gal. 1:1-9). When any religious leader says, “Unless you belong to our group, you cannot be saved!” or, “Unless you participate in our ceremonies and keep our rules, you cannot be saved!” he is adding to the Gospel and denying the finished work of Jesus Christ. Paul wrote his Epistle to the Galatians to make it clear that salvation is wholly by God’s grace, through faith in Christ, plus nothing!

 

Another issue involved was the nature of the church’s missionary program. If these legalists (we call them “the Judaizers”) were correct, then Paul and Barnabas had been all wrong in their ministry. Along with preaching the Gospel, they should have been teaching the Gentiles how to live as good Jews. No wonder Paul and Barnabas debated and disputed with these false teachers! (Acts 15:2, 7) The Antioch believers were being “troubled” and “subverted” (Acts 15:24), and this same confusion and disruption would soon spread to the Gentile churches Paul and Barnabas had founded. This was a declaration of war that Paul and Barnabas could not ignore.

 

God gave Paul a revelation instructing him to take the whole matter to the Jerusalem church leaders (Gal. 2:2), and to this the Antioch assembly agreed (“they” in Acts 15:2). The gathering was not a “church council” in the denominational sense, but rather a meeting of the leaders who heard the various groups and then made their decision. Though the “mother church” in Jerusalem did have great influence, each local church was autonomous.

 

The most destructive of the “destructive heresies,” since it damns men, is the teaching that salvation is by human works, which Peter warned against. That doctrine is the credo of all false religion and the longest-running heresy in the history of the church. The men who came down from Judea carried this deadly spiritual plague to Antioch, where they began teaching the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.”

 

Without the authorization of the Jerusalem church (v. 24), these self-appointed guardians of legalism arrived to straighten out the Antioch believers’ theology. They no doubt also refused to eat with the Gentiles (cf. Gal. 2:11ff.) and therefore would not fellowship with them in the Lord’s Supper. Their teaching and actions posed a grave threat to the truth of the gospel (cf. Gal. 5:2-6), as well as to the unity of the church. The danger of a split between Gentiles and Jews was real.

 

The Judaizers’ pronouncement to the Gentiles, “unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved,” understandably created an uproar in the Antioch church. Gentiles who thought themselves to have been saved already through faith alone in Christ were now informed that their salvation was invalid. Like the good shepherds that they were, Paul and Barnabas rallied to the defense of their flock and had great dissension and debate with the legalists. They fought furiously for the truth and against the wedge being driven between Jew and Gentile in the church.

 

Recognizing the far-reaching implications of this issue, the brethren determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others (including Titus, Gal. 2:1, 3) of them should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders concerning this issue. The vital issue of how Gentiles were to be saved could not be settled in one local congregation. The decision would have to be made in Jerusalem by the God-ordained leaders of the church, the apostles and elders (cf. Eph. 2:20).

 

The delegation of trustworthy men set off for Jerusalem, being sent on their way by the church at Antioch. Along the way they were passing through both Phoenicia and Samaria, describing in detail the conversion of the Gentiles, and were bringing great joy to all the brethren. Those regions were populated largely by Hellenistic Jews and Samaritans, who were more open to the salvation of Gentiles than the Palestinian Jews were. The news of the conversion of the Gentiles brought great joy to all these brethren. As the spiritual children of Stephen, Philip, Peter, and John, they did not share the views of the legalists troubling the Antioch church. Paul and Barnabas were building support as they went. Not only the Antioch church but also the brethren from Phoenicia and Samaria supported the apostolic doctrine of salvation by faith alone for both Jews and Gentiles.

 

At length, the delegation from Antioch arrived at Jerusalem, where they were received by the church and the apostles and the elders. They then reported all that God had done with them, acknowledging Him as the source of their accomplishments (cf. 14:27). It must have been a moving scene as the veteran warriors of the cross related their struggles and triumphs for the cause of Christ.

 

Not all, however, were pleased by Paul and Barnabas’s account. Some were appalled at the report that Gentiles were not observing the law of Moses. These certain ones of the sect of the Pharisees who had believed protested, “It is necessary to circumcise them, and to direct them to observe the Law of Moses.”

 

Although both groups manifested legalism, these believing Pharisees were different from the Judaizers of verse 1. Clearly, the latter were not true Christians, since they taught that circumcision was required for salvation. By thus mixing human works with faith they nullified grace (Rom. 11:6). Lenski writes:

 

To add anything to Christ as being necessary to salvation, say circumcision or any human work of any kind, is to deny that Christ is the complete Savior, is to put something human on a par with him, yea to make it the crowning point. That is fatal. A bridge to heaven that is built of 99/100 of Christ and even only 1/100 of anything human breaks down at the joint and ceases to be a bridge. Even if Christ be thought of as carrying us 999 miles of the way, and something merely human be required for the last mile, this would leave us hanging in the air with heaven being still far away. (R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of the Acts of the Apostles [Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1961], 593). Those who believe that ceremony or ritual plays a part in salvation have denied the truth that “a man is justified by faith apart from works of the law”—including circumcision (Rom. 3:28; cf. Gal. 2:16).

 

The Pharisees of verse 5 are different, however, since the text describes them as having believed. They did not argue that circumcision was necessary for salvation, but that believers were still obligated to keep the law. To them, circumcision and keeping the law were not a means of salvation, but obedience required after salvation. They were still committed to the ceremonial law, which had been set aside in Christ. They were much like the weaker brothers of Romans 14:1-10, who held to dietary laws, rituals, and sabbath codes for conscience’s sake. They were convinced that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah who died for their sins and rose from the dead. That, however, did not immediately cause them to forsake keeping the Mosaic law as a way of life. They were genuine Christians but had not yet realized the liberating truth that the ceremonial and ritual shadows of the Old Covenant had passed away (Col. 2:16-17; Heb. 8:13).

 

Pharisees, unlike their arch rivals the Sadducees, could become Christians and retain many of their distinctive beliefs. They believed in the literal interpretation of Scripture, a literal resurrection, life after death, and the existence of angels (cf. Acts 23:8). Thus they shared the basic convictions of the Christians. Because of this they are sometimes in Acts found defending the Christians against the Sadducees, who had much less in common with Christian views (cf. 5:17; 23:8f.). A major barrier between Christians and Pharisees was the extensive use of oral tradition by the Pharisees, which Jesus and Paul both rejected as human tradition. It is not surprising that some Pharisees came to embrace Christ as the Messiah in whom they had hoped. For all their emphasis on law, it is also not surprising that they would be reticent to receive anyone into the fellowship in a manner not in accordance with tradition. That tradition was well-established for proselytes—circumcision and the whole yoke of the law. (John B. Polhill, The New American Commentary: Acts [Nashville: Broadman, 1992], 324-25)

 

New Covenant believers are freed from the unbearable burden (Acts 10:13-15; 15:10) of keeping all the Old Covenant ritual. Yet they are not “without the law of God but under the law of Christ” (1 Cor. 9:21). There is no license to sin in Christian liberty.

 

The Discussion

(15:6-22) Introduction: this passage covers one of the most important church council meetings ever held. It is the great declaration on salvation.

1.  The council met a second time (v.6).

2.  Peter’s great statement: all are saved by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ (v.7-11).

3.  Paul and Barnabas’ great declaration: God alone wrought miracles and wonders to verify the message—salvation by grace (v.12).

4.  James’ great declaration: all men must be able to turn to God apart from the burden of ritual and the law (v.13-21).

5.  The council’s decision: agreement (v.22).

 

(15:6) Church, Council Meeting: the great Jerusalem council met a second time. The whole church was meeting—the apostles, the elders, and the people (Acts 15:12, 22). Once again, the scene is that of an extremely important council meeting, the importance of which cannot be overstressed. Note the sensitive consideration being shown by the leaders. The apostles were not lording it over the elders, nor the elders over the people. The issue being considered was of such great magnitude that the leaders were demonstrating humility and sensitivity to the needs of all. Note also there was “much disputing.” No one was ignored or silenced. All were allowed to say what they thought.

 

(15:7-11) Salvation: Peter’s great declaration—all people are saved by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. Peter drove home three points.

 

1.  Peter recalled that it was God and God alone who saved the Gentiles, that is, Cornelius and his house. The event had taken place some ten years before, but it was given and established by God to be the example and the pattern which the church was to follow (Acts 15:10. Note this is important, a critical point for every church to heed in every generation.) The event had been planned, initiated, and executed from beginning to end by God and God alone.

a. Cornelius and his house had believed the Word while Peter was in the process of preaching the Word. They believed while they were listening and hearing the Word.

 

b. God had given the Holy Spirit while they were believing the Word. Note how Peter stressed that salvation is the act of God.

Þ God “knew their hearts,” that they were believing within their hearts. God and God alone knows the heart.

Þ God bore witness to the belief of their hearts.

Þ God bore witness by giving the Holy Spirit to them.

Þ God gave the Holy Spirit by His act alone (not by baptism nor by laying on of men’s hands).

Þ God gave the Holy Spirit just as He did to the Jews.

 

c. God cleansed their hearts by faith. The stress is upon the word faith, not upon ritual or ceremony. Again, the stress is upon God. God knows the heart, when a man believes, when a man’s heart is moved toward the Lord Jesus, grasping and believing what Jesus has done for him. When God sees that, He cleanses the man’s heart.

 

2.  Peter confessed the yoke of the law; he confessed man’s inability to keep the law. This was a question, but note it was also a serious charge: “Why tempt ye God?” Peter said that God had already demonstrated the truth about salvation. The matter was made known clearly and unmistakably in the experience of Cornelius. If a person declares that a man is saved by God’s grace plus a ritual or the law, he tempts God; he prescribes and dictates to God. He questions...

· what God has already done.

· if God knew what he was doing.

· if what God had done was best.

 

Questioning God is, of course, walking upon sinking sand. It is very dangerous. Note what Peter said about the law.

a. The law is a “yoke,” a burden. The picture is that of the oxen yoke (cp. Matthew 11:29-30; Matthew 23:4; Galatians 5:1).

b. No man can keep the law; the Jews had proven the fact.

 

3.  Peter reminded the church of their basic belief: all men are saved by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. Peter declared the doctrine of salvation. It was the very same as Paul’s (cp. Ephes. 2:8-9). All men are saved in the same way: “though the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.”

 

15:11 we shall be saved in the same manner as they: These are the last words of Peter in the Book of Acts. He leaves us with the eternal truth that we are saved through faith by grace alone. The emphasis in the Book of Acts now moves from Peter to Paul, from the presentation of the gospel message among the Jews to its presentation to the Gentiles.^[2]

 

(15:12) Salvation, Source: Paul and Barnabas’ great declaration—God and God alone has wrought miracles and wonders to verify the message of salvation by grace. Note the stress is “miracles and wonders,” not points and arguments. Why? God’s miracles show clearly that He approves the preaching of Paul and Barnabas. The message, “By grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves,” is verified and proven by God’s stamp of approval.

 

(15:13-21) Salvation, Source: The council listened to James because he was the first of the three pillars of the church (Gal. 2:9). He was the leader of the church in Jerusalem until he was stoned to death at the insistence of the high priest in a.d. 62. James was the Lord’s half brother, the one who did not believe until the Lord appeared to him privately after the Resurrection (1 Cor. 15:7). He is probably the author of the Book of James, which explains to Jewish believers the true essence of genuine faith.^[3] James’ great declaration—all men must be able to turn to God apart from the burden of ritual and law. James was the Lord’s brother. Apparently, he was a leading elder of the church at Jerusalem.

 

Note four points.

1.  James supported Peter’s great declaration. The way James worded his support is significant.

Þ “God...did visit the Gentiles” (epeskepsato): looked upon, oversaw, cared for, looked after, provided for the Gentiles.

Þ “to take out of them a people”: to choose; to appoint; to remove them from the Gentile nations and select a chosen people. The word “people” (laon) is the same word used of the Jewish people (cp. Acts 10:2). The point is that God was calling a new people out—a new body, a new nation, a new race—to be His chosen people, just as He had done with Abraham and the Jews.

Þ “For His name”: two verses clearly show what God means by choosing a people “for His name.”

 

2.  While the testimony of Peter, Barnabas, and Paul was important for the council in making their decision, something more than the experience of the Gentiles had to be taken into consideration. The council needed to know what the Word of God said. James pointed out that what was happening among the Gentiles was in full agreement with the OT (Amos 9:11, 12).^[4] James declared that Scripture supported the truth. God calls out people from both the Jews and the Gentiles. He quoted Amos 9:11-12 and applied it to Jesus Christ and believers. God promised three things.

a. “I will return.” This is referring to the first coming of Jesus Christ. And He had come—no one present would deny that.

 

b. There will be Jewish believers: “The tabernacle of David” refers to believing Jews, the true tabernacle or true body of Jews. James was applying the prophecy to the present situation. The people of David, the true indestructible tabernacle of David, the true body of David (believing Jews) will be “built up again...I [God] will set it [them] up.”

 

c. There will be Gentile believers, believers who...

· seek the Lord.

· are called and known by God’s name.

 

3.  James declared that God foreknew and destined from the beginning of the world...

· salvation by faith.

· salvation to all men who seek the Lord and become identified with Him.

 

This is and always has been the purpose of God (cp. Romans 16:25-27; Ephes. 3:8-9). And He is now bringing His purpose to pass.

 

4.  James recommended a written exhortation instead of burdening rules. He did this for three reasons.

a. That no man be troubled or hindered from turning to God by rituals and law. All men cannot keep a ritual. All who can should, but some are just not able to keep a ritual due to such things as birth defects, injury, disease, or paralysis. And although everyone should obey God, no one is capable of keeping the law, not perfectly. Therefore, no one is saved by the law. The only hope of salvation is for man to turn to God and trust God to accept him simply because God loves that much.

 

b. That all men live as they should. Note the great significance of the sins which James listed...

· idolatry: following and sacrificing to the gods of man’s imaginations and desires; partaking of things that pertain to idols (Acts 15:29).

· fornication: all forms of immorality.

· “things strangled”: the sin of indulgence, of going against God’s law and fulfilling one’s own desire. Specifically, it refers to eating forbidden meats, to the dietary laws of the Jews.

· “blood”: may refer to murder or to the blood of animals. It probably refers to murder.

 

Note: these four sins are the sins so common to mankind as a whole.

 

c. That no man offend or be a stumbling block to another. The sins listed by James were very offensive to the believing Jews. They were often preached against by Jewish rabbis. James stressed this fact, pointing out that keeping these four simple exhortations would please the body of Jewish believers, the strict religionists.

 

(15:21) For Moses has had … those who preach him: James may have been saying that since there were Jewish communities in every city, it would be wise to remain sensitive to Jewish convictions. He may also have been saying that since the Gentile believers would learn more and more about the Scriptures, the Spirit of God would cultivate godly convictions in their hearts.^[5]

 

(15:22) Church: the church council’s decision was agreement. It is interesting to note the process the council followed in resolving this conflict. First, the problem was clearly stated: Each side was presented in a debate. Second, the facts were presented by those who were acquainted with them. Third, the counsel was given by a person who was trusted for his objectivity and wisdom. Fourth, unanimity was sought in the decision. Fifth, the attitude of preserving the unity of the Spirit remained utmost on the council’s mind. This same formula would be helpful in resolving conflicts found within the church today. chosen men of their own company: The apostles and elders sent a representative from both sides of the dispute—a Judean (Judas) and a Hellenist (Silas)—along with Paul and Barnabas to bolster and confirm the ruling of the council.^[6]

 

Note two points.

1.  The whole church agreed with what had been proclaimed, at least officially.

 

2.  The church went beyond the decision, reaching out to settle whatever disturbance and doubt existed. It reached out by sending two chief ministers back to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. The two men would...

· reinforce the message of the decision: salvation is by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and nothing else (Acts 15:11).

·  exhort the new believers in the faith, and assure them that the message of the Judaizers was error.

 

The Formal Decree of the Council: The Great Decree on Salvation, 15:23-35

(15:23-35) Introduction: the great decree of salvation issued by the early church should have settled the issue forever. There is no question: salvation is “through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 15:11). But some people still insist on adding to the plan of salvation. For this reason, the great decree of salvation needs to be proclaimed and taught time and again.

1.  There was the attitude that brought about the decree: humility (v.23).

2.  There was the declaration of the decree: ritual and law are not necessary to salvation; the dissenters were rebuked (v.24).

3.  There were the men chosen to proclaim the truth (v.25-27).

4.  There were the few rules that were necessary (v.28-29).

5.  There were the glorious results (v.30-35).

 

(15:23) Humility: there was the attitude that brought about the decree—humility. The leaders, the apostles and elders, placed themselves on an equal level with the brothers of the church. There was no sign of exaltation or superiority or of exalting one’s position; no claim that they had the authority to speak for the church. They humbly declared that the decision was a decision of all the brothers. The oldest and best manuscripts read “the apostles and elders, brothers send greetings to the brothers which are of the Gentiles....” In this reading the apostles and elders were writing as brothers to brothers, placing themselves on the same level as the brothers among the Gentiles.

 

In either case, the point is well made. The great decree of salvation is based upon humility. Everyone involved, and in particular the leaders, including the apostles themselves, realized that they were humble recipients of salvation just as all other men were. They were all “brothers in the Lord.” They all stood on an equal footing, no one above another, not in the great decree of salvation. No one had the authority to lord it over another person, not in the area of salvation. Before the Lord, all men are brothers. All are saved alike, “through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 15:11).

 

(15:24) Salvation—Ritual—Law—Grace: there was the declaration of the decree—ritual and law are not necessary to salvation. No matter what anyone teaches, no matter who they are or how influential they are, salvation is...

·    “by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ” and by Him alone. Ritual and law are not necessary (Acts 15:11).

·    “by the miracles and wonders of God” and by Him alone (Acts 15:12).

·    by turning to God and turning to Him alone (Acts 15:19).

 

The persons who taught otherwise, the false teachers, were strongly rebuked.

 

1.  They troubled believers with their words. The picture is that of words heaped upon words, false words that “trouble” (etaraxan), agitate, disturb, and shake violently. But note: the false teachers proclaimed mere words, empty words, and the believers must always remember this. Salvation is by grace alone and nothing is to be added to it. God and God alone saves. A man either accepts God’s salvation or rejects it. It is that simple. Man can do nothing to earn salvation.

 

2.  They “subverted” (anaskeuazontes) the believers’ souls. The word means to devastate, to plunder, to dismantle, to ravage, to wreck, to cause havoc.

 

3.  They were never commissioned by the church. The message of the early church was declared:

“And great fear came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard these things” (Acts 5:11).

 

“Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” (Romans 3:24).

 

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God” (Ephes. 2:8-9).

 

“For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men” (Titus 2:11).

 

“But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; that being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life” (Titus 3:4-7).

 

Anyone who adds, “Ye must be circumcised [undergo a ritual] and keep the law: to [them] we gave no such commandment.”

 

Note how strong the rebuke was. The Judaizers or legalists (then and now, through all generations) were strongly rebuked. Paul went even further and warned:

“I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed” (Galatians 1:6-9).

 

“Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron” (1 Tim. 4:1-2).

 

“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables” (2 Tim. 4:3-4).

 

“But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction” (2 Peter 2:1).

 

(15:25-27) Ministers: there were the men chosen to proclaim the truth. Note what the church council did.

1.  The church sent forth Barnabas and Saul as men who had proclaimed the truth. The Judaizers (legalists) had accused them of halving the gospel, but they had not. They had declared the truth: salvation is “by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ,” and they had risked their lives to declare the truth. Therefore, the church called the men beloved.

 

2.  The churchs sent forth two chosen exponents and prophets, Judas and Silas. These men were prophets (Acts 15:32), worthy men, men gifted by the Holy Spirit; therefore, they were chosen by the church to go forth and declare the great decree of salvation. Note that the decree was so important that the written message was not enough. It must have exponents...

· who knew the “same things,” the truth of salvation.

· who could proclaim and tell the “same things,” the truth by word of mouth.

 

(15:28-29) Holy Spirit—Purity: there were the few rules that were necessary. Note two significant points.

1.  The Holy Spirit and the church were both involved in the decision. The Holy Spirit led and guided the church to declare salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 15:11).

 

2.  The necessary rules were not given for the purpose of saving men, but for the believers’ welfare. By doing these things the believers “do well” (en praxete), that is, fare well and experience good—love, joy, peace—both within their own hearts and lives and between themselves and other believers.

 

(15:30-35) Salvation: there were the glorious results of free salvation. When the four men arrived in Antioch, the whole church was called together and the great decree on salvation was read. When it was read, four great results occurred. Note how God took the dissension and its subsequent events and worked it all out for the good of the Antioch church and for the cause of Christ.

 

The results were fourfold.

1.  There was great “rejoicing” (echaresan): joy, gladness, rejoicing over the consolation (paraklesei), that is, over the encouragement and help given by the Jerusalem church.

 

2.  There was great “exhortation.” Note that it was Silas and Judas who were exhorting and confirming the faith of the Antioch believers. Note also the phrase “many words.” They exhorted for a long time, building the believers up more and more, assuring them of their faith in the Lord Jesus. They were saved by the grace of God and His grace alone, and the two visiting preachers wanted the believers to know that the apostles and elders of the great Jerusalem church confirmed the glorious truth.

 

3.  There was the discovery of the great missionary, Silas. The oldest Greek manuscripts do not include this verse (note the word “they” in Acts 15:33). Some scholars feel it was added at a later date because Silas appears with Paul in Acts 15:40. There was, of course, plenty of time for Silas to travel to Jerusalem and report back to the church, and then to return to Antioch before Paul left on his second missionary journey. Other scholars believe the verse was in the original manuscript. No matter who is accurate, Silas and his great gift from God were discovered by Paul at Antioch, and apparently Paul invited him to join the great mission thrust.

 

4.  A great teaching ministry grew within the church. Note three striking points.

a. Paul and Barnabas were busy teaching and preaching. They were not idle.

b. There were many teachers and preachers in the church, and none of them were idle. They were all teaching and preaching.

c. The message they taught and preached was “the Word of the Lord,” not their own theories and ideas.