Acts 15:1-21
15:1 The Jewish law contained not only basic moral provisions but many aspects of a more “ceremonial” nature, such as circumcision, the kosher food laws, and many requirements involving external purity and various kinds of sacrifices and festivals. These laws presented a problem for Gentiles: to live by them would make it virtually impossible to continue in their Gentile communities. But according to the OT, one had to be circumcised to belong to the people of God (Gen. 17:9–14), and it seemed to many of the Jewish Christians that the church should also require this of male believers. Paul addresses the issue of circumcision in Rom. 2:25–29; 4:9–16; Gal. 2:3–5; 5:2–12; 6:12–15.
15:5. Among the Pharisees, the stricter school of Shammai may have prevailed at this time; the school of Hillel, which predominated later, was much more generous toward Gentiles. Other Jews respected Pharisees for their piety, and the Jerusalem church no doubt accorded them high status for their knowledge of the law.
Peter’s Response
Having the backing of the leading minister to the traditional constituency (Gal 2:7) on one’s side (Acts 10–11) is certainly strategic in granting credibility to the very different ministry of the Antioch church.
15:7 and after there had been much debate. This important theological issue in the early history of the church was not decided by a sudden decree spoken by a prophet but by careful reasoning and thoughtful argumentation based on Scripture. Peter’s reference to the Gentiles hearing the gospel … by my mouth … in the early days refers to his witness at the house of Cornelius (10:34–43), c. A.D. 38, as many as 10 years before the Jerusalem council
15:8–9. Gentiles were continually impure by virtue of their state as Gentiles; for this reason, they were expected to undergo proselyte baptism when they converted to Judaism. Here, however, Peter says that God enacts that “cleansing” (NASB, NRSV) or “purifying” (NIV, KJV; cf. 10:15) simply through their faith.
Rather, he was arguing that Israel was unable to fulfill it perfectly and that salvation could not be obtained through the law (cf. Rom. 2:17–24). Only one means of salvation exists for both Jew and Gentile: God’s “grace” (Acts 15:11) in Jesus Christ.
James’s Response
15:13–14. In the Old Testament “a people for his name” (KJV, NASB, NRSV, literally; or “a people for himself”—NIV) normally meant Israel; James derives this title for Gentile Christians from Amos, whom he cites in verse 17.
15:15–16. James refers to “the Prophets” (plural) in this case because he is speaking of the scroll containing the twelve smaller books of the prophets, including Amos.
“Tabernacle of David” (Amos 9:11) probably means the “house [line] of David,” fallen into such pitiable disrepair that it is called merely a tabernacle (KJV, NASB), or tent (NIV). Rebuilding David’s house would mean raising up a Messiah after the Davidic line’s rule had been cut off. The Dead Sea Scrolls also cited this text as messianic, along with 2 Samuel 7:10b–14. (Since the Old Testament rarely explicitly associates the tabernacle with the prophetic worship David instituted in 1 Chron 25, the interpretation that reads this passage as a restoration of Davidic worship is less likely. Amos and Acts refer to the restoration of the splendor of David’s kingdom, and the charismatic worship of 1 Chron 25 presumably was already occurring around the time of Acts 15; cf. 1 Cor 14.)
15:19–20. The few requirements James suggests they impose are representative of the handful of laws Jewish tradition declared that God gave Noah. According to the more lenient Jewish position, any righteous Gentiles who kept those basic laws would have a share in the world to come. Because even stricter Pharisees had to get along with the majority of more lenient people, these teachers did not try to invalidate other teachers’ rulings if they had majority consent.
15:21. James’s statement here could mean that Moses already has enough observers of his law; but more likely it means that believers are to abstain from the practices in verse 20 lest they offend the many people of verse 21.
He offered a proposal by which Gentile Christians could have fellowship with Jewish Christians and avoid giving unnecessary offense. The word for (Gk. gar) at the beginning of v. 21 gives the reason for James’s proposal: the Gentile Christians should abstain from certain things because “in every city” there are still Jews who observe these ceremonial laws and think them to be important. The first three requirements seem to be contextually sensitive and designed for these specific circumstances: abstention from food offered to idols, from blood (meat with the blood in it), and from strangled meat (which would also have blood in it). (But Paul in other circumstances permitted believers to eat food offered to idols; see 1 Cor. 8:1–11:1.) The fourth requirement, dealing with sexual immorality, was of course not a contextual or optional standard of obedience like the other three. It may have needed special emphasis and clarification because many Gentiles’ consciences were so corrupted that they did not hold to a high standard of sexual purity. This reaffirmation of the believer’s need to maintain sexual purity also serves as a reminder that the moral standards of the OT still need to be obeyed. James concludes his appeal (v. 21) by noting the widespread (in every city) teaching and affirmation of the Mosaic law, thus suggesting that there is no need to give unnecessary offense either to Jewish believers or to unbelieving Jews who might otherwise consider becoming Christians in the future