(7)
Scripture Reading: Acts 15:1-34
Chapter fifteen of Acts is very crucial in relation to God’s dispensation, God’s economy. As we consider this chapter, we shall not pay attention to minor points, as many others have done. Rather, we shall concentrate on the important points concerning dispensational matters.
Acts 15:1-33 records trouble that arose concerning circumcision. In verses 1 through 21 we have an account of a conference of the apostles and elders held in Jerusalem. Then in verses 22-33 we have a description of the solution. In this message we shall begin to consider 15:1-33.
Acts 15:1 says, “And certain men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” The men who came down from Judea had a strong purpose to exercise Judaic influence on the Gentile believers.
The claim that unless one is circumcised according to the custom of Moses he cannot be saved is an annulling of the faith in God’s New Testament economy, and it is a real heresy. Hence, the “certain men” who taught the Christian brothers this heresy might have been those who were considered by Paul false brothers in Galatians 2:4.
Circumcision was an outward ordinance inherited by the Jews from their forefathers, beginning from Abraham (Gen. 17:9-14). This ordinance made the Jews distinct and separate from the Gentiles. Circumcision became a dead traditional formality, a mere mark on the flesh without any spiritual significance, and it became a great obstacle to the spread of God’s gospel according to His New Testament economy (Gal. 2:3-4; 6:12-13; Phil. 3:2).
Circumcision, Sabbath-keeping, and a particular diet are the three strongest ordinances according to the law of Moses that caused the Jews to be distinct and separate from the Gentiles, who are regarded by them as unclean. All these scriptural ordinances of the Old Testament dispensation became an obstacle to the spreading of the gospel to the Gentiles according to God’s New Testament dispensation (Col. 2:16). To be circumcised in God’s New Testament economy is to make Christ of no profit to the believers (Gal. 5:2).
Acts 15:1 speaks of the custom of Moses. To keep the custom of Moses, that is, to practice the outward ordinances of the law, is not only to nullify the grace of God and make Christ’s death of no effect (Gal. 2:21), but also to bring the believers, whom Christ has set free, back to the slavery of law (Gal. 5:1; 2:4).
The teaching that one must be circumcised in order to be saved annuls Christ’s redemption, God’s grace, and the entire New Testament economy of God. Therefore, Paul and Barnabas could not tolerate this heresy, and they “had no little dissension and discussion” (Acts 15:2) with those who had come down from Judea and taught it to the Christian brothers. In verse 2 Paul and Barnabas were contending for the faith (Jude 1:3) against one of the greatest heresies so that the truth of the gospel might remain with the believers (Gal. 2:5).
Actually, the problem of this heretical teaching should have been solved by Peter and James in Jerusalem. That heresy should never have reached Antioch. Before those heretical teachers went to Antioch, they must have spread their teaching in Jerusalem. But there is no indication that Peter and James did anything to deal with that heresy.
The source of the trouble described in Acts 15 was Jerusalem. The first group of apostles and elders in Jerusalem should have taken care of this heretical teaching before it had the opportunity to spread to the Gentile churches. The fact that it was not dealt with in Jerusalem indicates that there were certain shortcomings with Peter and James. They must be held responsible for the situation. By the time this heresy spread to Antioch, it was too late for Paul and Barnabas to deal with it. This made it necessary for them to go up to Jerusalem in order to touch the source of the problem.
As we read the book of Acts, we may not have an accurate concept concerning Peter and James. We may regard Peter and James too highly. We may uplift Peter too much, and consider James very godly and pious. If we have such a concept of Peter and James, we shall not have the proper view of the situation recorded in chapter fifteen. In other words, because of our inaccurate concept and understanding, we shall not have the proper insight into the heart of the problem in Acts 15. Actually, the heart of the problem is not with the heretical Judaizers that went down to Antioch; it is with Peter and James. To say this is fair.
Peter was present in Acts 1 when the Lord Jesus gave the apostles further preparation for their ministry. As part of that preparation, He said to them, “You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and unto the remotest part of the earth” (1:8). Here the Lord appointed them to be His witnesses not only to those in Jerusalem and Judea and to the people of mixed blood in Samaria, but also to the remotest part of the earth, indicating all the lands of the Gentiles. The Lord’s word is very clear. If James, a flesh brother of the Lord Jesus, was not present when this word was spoken, he certainly must have been familiar with it. Luke, the writer of the book of Acts, came to know this word. Surely James knew about it before Luke did. Peter and James should have taken the Lord’s word concerning being witnesses to the remotest part of the earth as the basis to deal with the heretical teaching that the Gentiles must be circumcised in order to be saved. Since the Lord had spoken this word, there was no need for discussion or argument. Peter and James should have done a thorough job to eliminate the heretical teaching, killing it at the source in Jerusalem.
If we are fair-minded and have the proper insight as we read chapter fifteen, we shall realize that the trouble was due to the negligence of Peter and James. They did not do their duty; they did not carry out their responsibility. As a result, this heretical teaching existed in Jerusalem and was even prevailing there. If it had not been prevailing in Jerusalem, how could it have spread to Antioch? In ancient times communication to a faraway city was very slow. Hence, it was a great matter for something to spread from Jerusalem to Antioch.
The Judaizers were so zealous that, in spite of the difficulty in traveling, they went down to Antioch for the purpose of spreading their heretical teaching. They boldly taught the people, saying, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved” (15:1). As we have pointed out, this kind of teaching nullifies the entire New Testament. It nullifies Christ’s redeeming death, His resurrection, His ascension, and everything He taught.
It is very difficult to understand how Peter and James could have tolerated such a heresy in Jerusalem. If we read Galatians 2 along with Acts 15, we shall be helped to understand what the situation was at that time. Peter and James deserve to be blamed for the problem, for they did not guard the truth and contend for it adequately. Because of this shortage, the problem of heresy existed in Jerusalem and then spread to the Gentile churches.
According to 15:2, “Paul and Barnabas had no little dissension and discussion” with the Judaizers. We should not think that Paul was too strong in having dissension as well as discussion. The situation made dissension necessary. How could Paul agree with the heretical teaching that the Gentiles could not be saved unless they were circumcised? He had to raise up dissension with those who taught this heresy.
Because of the dissension with the heretical teachers, Paul and Barnabas and certain others were appointed “to go up to the apostles and elders in Jerusalem concerning this question” (15:2). According to verse 26, Paul and Barnabas were regarded as those who had “given up their lives for the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.” The church in Antioch decided to send them to Jerusalem.
It was not because Jerusalem was the headquarters of God’s move, nor because the church in Jerusalem was the head church controlling other churches, that Paul, Barnabas, and certain others went to the apostles and elders in Jerusalem. It was because Jerusalem was the source from which the heretical teaching concerning circumcision came. In order to solve the problem and uproot the trouble, they needed to go to the source. According to God’s New Testament economy, there is no headquarters for His move on earth and no head church, like the Church in Rome, that controls other churches. The headquarters of God’s move in His New Testament economy is in the heavens (Rev. 4:2-3; 5:1), and the One who rules over all the churches is Christ the Head of the church (Col. 1:18; Rev. 2:1).
Acts 15:3 and 4 say, “They therefore, having been sent forward by the church, passed through both Phoenicia and Samaria, telling in detail the conversion of the Gentiles; and they caused great joy to all the brothers. And when they arrived in Jerusalem, they were received by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they declared all that God had done with them.” The going up to Jerusalem of Paul, Barnabas, and certain others was the move of the church, not the move of themselves as individuals. They did not act individualistically apart from the church, but corporately in and with the church. This was the move of the Body of Christ.
Acts 15:5 says, “But certain men from the sect of the Pharisees who had believed rose up from among them, saying, It is necessary to circumcise them and to charge them to keep the law of Moses.” The Pharisees were the strictest religious sect of the Jews (26:5), formed about 200 B.C. They were proud of their superior sanctity of life, devotion to God, and knowledge of the Scriptures. As we have pointed out, the teaching of the Pharisees in 15:5 nullified God’s New Testament economy.
Suppose you were an elder in the church in Jerusalem at the time of Acts 15. What would you have done with those who taught that believers in Christ must be circumcised and keep the law of Moses? Would you have risen up and said boldly that such heretical teaching is not allowed in the church? This is what the elders in Jerusalem should have done.
The most influential elder in the church in Jerusalem was James. There is a hint concerning this in 12:17, where Peter says, “Report these things to James and the brothers.” This indicates that James was a leader among the apostles and elders in Jerusalem. Furthermore, in Galatians 2:12 Paul speaks of certain ones coming from James. Instead of saying that they came from Jerusalem, Paul said that they came from James. This shows that James was very prominent in Jerusalem, that he was the leading elder.
At this point, I would like to ask a question of those who are elders in the churches today. Suppose certain ones in the church begin to teach that the believers today should be circumcised and keep the law of Moses. What would you do? In a proper way you should say, “We ask you not to speak in the church meetings and not to spread this teaching among the saints. You are teaching heresy. If you continue to spread this heresy, we will not allow you to remain in the church.”
To tell believers to be circumcised and to keep the law of Moses nullifies God’s New Testament economy. It also nullifies the death of Christ. It makes both Christ and His death of no effect. This is exactly what Paul says concerning such teaching in Galatians 2:21. In this verse Paul tells us that he does not nullify the grace of God.
Any who teach the heresy that believers must be circumcised and keep the law of Moses should be told to have a change in their understanding. Otherwise, the church cannot receive them. The church can receive only those who believe in our Savior Jesus Christ, in His redeeming death, in His resurrection and ascension, and in God’s New Testament economy. The law of Moses is dispensationally over.
Acts 15:6 says, “And the apostles and the elders were gathered together to see about this matter.” This verse mentions the apostles and the elders. The apostles are universal, and the elders are local.
Why were Paul and Barnabas sent from Antioch to Jerusalem, when the problem they were facing was in Antioch? They went to Jerusalem because the source of the problem was there. We may say that the “flow” of the problem reached Antioch, but the source was in Jerusalem. It would not have been right to deal with the flow without dealing with the source. Even if the flow had been dealt with, the source would still have remained. Therefore, they went to Jerusalem to deal with the source; they did not go there because the church in Antioch regarded the church in Jerusalem as the head church.
Likewise, Paul and Barnabas did not regard Peter and James as high officials. If such had been the case, then a hierarchy would have been in existence. But there was not any hierarchy, and Peter in particular was not a “pope,” as Catholicism falsely claims.
Here in Acts 15 we have the unique conference held by the apostles of the universal church and the elders of the local church in Jerusalem. Both were the leading ones in the Lord’s New Testament move on earth. There was no chairman. This conference was under the presiding of the Spirit (v. 28), the pneumatic Christ, the Head of the church (Col. 1:18) and the Lord of all (Acts 10:36). Acts 15:7 says, “Much discussion had taken place.” This indicated that everyone in the conference had the freedom to speak. The decision made was based on the testimony shared by Peter (vv. 7-11), the facts related by Barnabas and Paul (v. 12), and the concluding word given by James, who was the leading one among the apostles and elders in Jerusalem (12:7; 21:18; Gal. 1:19; 2:9) because of the influence he exercised over the believers through his piety.
Some think that the conference in Acts 15 was the first church council. This is a mistaken understanding. Here we do not have a council but a gathering for fellowship, with the Holy Spirit as the One presiding. Later, it was said, “It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us...” (v. 28). There was no voting, and there was neither autocracy nor democracy. Autocracy and democracy should not exist in the church life. Instead, in the church life there should simply be fellowship in the Spirit. Acts 15 is a record of this kind of fellowship.
