Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 15:10
Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
10. Now therefore ] When you have this evidence of how God has already accepted the Gentiles.
why tempt ye God ] Men are said “to tempt God” when they distrust his guidance, and in consequence disobey his revealed will (cp. Psa 95:9). So the Jews tempted God in the wilderness (Heb 3:9) when they saw His mighty works and yet murmured at His leaders: so they are said to have tempted Christ (1Co 10:9) when they were punished by the fiery serpents; and Ananias and Sapphira are said to “have agreed to tempt the Spirit of the Lord,” by acting as though they thought they could deceive God in their offering. From these instances the force of the question in the text will be seen. Those who should act as the Pharisaic party would recommend, would be distrusting God’s knowledge of the hearts of men, and refusing to be guided by what His Spirit had made known in the conversion of Cornelius.
a yoke ] So St Paul (Gal 5:1) calls the ceremonial law “a yoke of bondage.” Christ uses the word “yoke” for his own precepts, knowing that a yoke was needed for men’s guidance, but He calls it “easy” (Mat 11:30).
able to bear ] How this was felt is shewn by the Rabbinic injunction to “make a hedge about the law,” i.e. so to fence in its precepts by additional regulations of their own, that there should be no chance of infringing the commandment. These additions, commandments of men, as our Lord styles them, had made the ceremonial observances into a killing load.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Why tempt ye God? – Why provoke him to displeasure? Why, since he has shown his determination to accept them without such rites, do you provoke him by attempting to impose on his own people rites without his authority, and a against his manifest will? The argument is, that God had already accepted them. To attempt to impose these rites would be to provoke him to anger; to introduce observances which he had shown it was his purpose should now be abolished.
To put a yoke – That which would be burdensome and oppressive, or which would infringe on their just freedom as the children of God. It is called in Gal 5:1, a yoke of bondage. Compare the notes on Mat 23:4. A yoke is an emblem of slavery or bondage 1Ti 6:1; or of affliction Lam 3:27; or of punishment Lam 1:14; or of oppressive and burdensome ceremonies, as in this place, or of the restraints of Christianity, Mat 11:29-30. In this place those rites are called a yoke, because:
(1) They were burdensome and oppressive; and,
(2) Because they would be an infringement of Christian freedom. One design of the gospel was to set people free from such rites and ceremonies.
Which neither our fathers … – Which have been found burdensome at all times. They were expensive, and painful, and oppressive; and as they had been found to be so, it was not proper to impose them on the Gentile converts, but should rather rejoice at any evidence that the people of God might be delivered from them.
Were able to bear – Which are found to be oppressive and burdensome. They were attended with great inconvenience and many transgressions, as the consequence.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 10. Now therefore why tempt ye God] A God, by giving the Holy Spirit to the Gentiles, evidently shows he does not design them to be circumcised, in order to become debtors to the law, to fulfill all its precepts, c., why will ye provoke him to displeasure by doing what he evidently designs shall not be done?
A yoke – which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?] This does not refer to the moral law-that was of eternal obligation-but to the ritual law, which, through the multitude of its sacrifices, ordinances, c., was exceedingly burthensome to the Jewish people. And had not God, by an especial providence, rendered both their fields and their flocks very fruitful, they could not possibly have borne so painful a ritual.
There is a curious story in Midrash Shochar, told in Yalkut Simeoni, part i. fol. 229, where Korah is represented as showing the oppressive nature of the law, and avarice of its priests, in justification of his rebellion. “There was,” said he, “a widow in our neighbourbood who had two orphan children: she had one field and, when she began to plough it, one came and said, Thou shalt not plough with an ox and an ass together. when she went to sow it, he said, Thou shalt not sow thy field with divers seeds. When she began to reap, and to gather the sheaves together, he said, Leave a handful and the corners of the field for the poor. When she prepared to thresh it, be said, Give me the wave-offering, and the first and second tithes. She did as she was commanded, and then went and sold her field, and bought two ewes, that she might clothe herself and family with the wool, and get profit by the lambs. When they brought forth their lambs, Aaron came and said, Give me the firstlings, for the holy blessed God hath said, All the first born, whatsoever openeth the womb, shall be thine. She yielded to his demands, and gave him two lambs. When shearing time came, he said, Give me the first fruits of the wool. When the widow had done this, she said, I cannot stand before this man I will kill my sheep and eat them. When she had killed the sheep, Aaron came and said, Give me the shoulder, and the jaws, and the ventricle. The widow said, Though I have killed my sheep, I am not delivered from this man; I therefore consecrate the whole to God. Then Aaron said, ALL belongs to me, for the holy blessed God hath said, Every thing that is consecrated in Israel shall be his, i.e. the priest’s. He therefore took the whole carcasses, and marched off, leaving the widow and her orphan daughters over whelmed with affliction.” This is a terrible picture of the requisitions of the Mosaic ritual; and, though exaggerated, it contains so many true features that it may well be said, This is a yoke which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear. See Schoettgen. In the same vexatious way may the tithes of the national Church in this country be exacted, and in this very way is the exaction frequently exercised. It is high time that these abuses should be corrected.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Why tempt ye God? Why would you make a doubt of, and put it to a trial, whether God did in good earnest admit the Gentiles to his favour, and whether he remains firm and constant in such his kindness towards them? They did tempt God also, by disliking the calling of the Gentiles, and would have brought Gods will, were it possible, unto theirs; not submitting their wills, as they ought, unto Gods: for he that sins in any kind, does tempt God; that is, he tries Gods patience, power, and righteousness.
A yoke; so the law of ceremonies is called. Gal 5:1, and was a yoke indeed, if we consider:
1. Their variety;
2. Their difficulty;
3. Their chargeableness;
4. Their inefficacy, being only shadows of good things to come, Col 2:17.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
10. why tempt“try,””provoke”
ye Godby standing inthe way of His declared purpose.
to put a yoke upon the neckof the disciples, c.He that was circumcised became therebybound to keep the whole law. (See Ga5:1-6). It was not then the mere yoke of burdensome ceremonies,but of an obligation which the more earnest and spiritual men became,the more impossible they felt it to fulfil. (See Rom 3:5Gal 2:4, &c.).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Now therefore why tempt ye God,…. By hesitating about this matter, by disputing upon this point, and by seeking for further proof and evidence of the will of God in this affair; when it is so plain a case, that it has been his will that the Gospel should be preached to Gentiles, without obliging them to circumcision; that he has given his Spirit both in his extraordinary gifts, and special grace, to uncircumcised persons; particularly he has bestowed faith in Christ upon them, whereby they have been led to the blood of Christ, typified in circumcision, and are thereby purged from all their filth and pollution, and so are the true circumcision: wherefore it is no other than tempting God, a manifest opposition to him, and what must give him offence, to debate about a point so clear; and especially to attempt
to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear. It is common with the Jews to call the law a yoke; frequent mention is made of and
, “the yoke of the commandments” o, and , “the yoke of the law” p: and by it here is meant, not circumcision only and barely, for that the Jewish fathers had been able to bear, and had bore it; nor the whole ceremonial law only, which consisted of a multitude of commands and ordinances very heavy and hard; but even the whole moral law, which circumcision obliged those who submitted to it to keep it perfectly; see Ga 5:3, which neither the apostles, nor their fathers, were ever able to do, nor any mere man whatever; and therefore this yoke was intolerable and insupportable, and not to be put upon the necks of the Gentile believers; who here are called disciples, being taught the doctrine of the Gospel, and the way of salvation; which was not by circumcision, nor by any works of the law, but by the grace of Christ, as in the following verse.
o Targum in Cant. i. 10. & in Lam. iii. 27. Misn. Beracot, c. 2. sect. 2. p Echa Rabbati, fol. 56. 3. Pirke Abot, c. 3. sect. 5. Tzeror Hammor, fol. 39. 3.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Why tempt ye God? ( ;). By implying that God had made a mistake this time, though right about Cornelius. It is a home-thrust. They were refusing to follow the guidance of God like the Israelites at Massah and Meribah (Exod 17:7; Deut 6:16; 1Cor 10:9).
That ye should put (). Second aorist active infinitive of , epexegetic, explaining the tempting.
A yoke upon the neck ( ). Familiar image of oxen with yokes upon the necks. Paul’s very image for the yoke of bondage of the Mosaic law in Ga 5:1. It had probably been used in the private interview. Cf. the words of Jesus about the Pharisees (Mt 23:4) and how easy and light his own yoke is (Mt 11:30).
Were able to bear ( ). Neither our fathers nor we had strength () to carry this yoke which the Judaizers wish to put on the necks of the Gentiles. Peter speaks as the spiritual emancipator. He had been slow to see the meaning of God’s dealings with him at Joppa and Caesarea, but he has seen clearly by now. He takes his stand boldly with Paul and Barnabas for Gentile freedom.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Were able [] . See on Luk 14:30; Luk 16:3.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Now therefore why tempt ye God,” (nun oun ti peirazete ton theon) “Now therefore and hereafter forever, why test, try or challenge ye the true and living God;” to try His power, patience, wisdom, Word, and judgement, Act 10:43; Joh 14:6, as the Pharisees and Sadducees, pious and popular Jewish religionists, repeatedly did toward Jesus and the testimony of early New Testament believers and witnesses, Joh 8:24; Joh 20:31; Act 4:12; Rom 1:16; The “why tempt ye God?” question was directed to those believing Pharisees who were in doctrinal error. This reflects sharpness of the debate.
2) “To put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples,” (epitheinai zugon epi ton trachelon ton matheton) “To (try) to put, place, fix or set a yoke upon the neck of the disciples,” of the church of the Lord. A yoke denotes bondage, subjection, or servitude, and here specifically refers to both the ceremony of circumcision, the whole of the ceremonial forms of the Law of Moses, and the tradition of the elders. In contrast with the law “yoke,” the yoke of Christ is declared “easy to bear;” For it is a voluntary commitment to Christian witnessing, not to repeated forms, rites, and ceremonies, Mat 5:19; Mat 11:28-30; Mar 7:1-13.
3) “Which neither our fathers no we,” (hon outi hoi pateres hemon oute hemeis) “Which kind of yoke (of the law) neither our fathers (of Israel) nor we,” Mat 23:1-12; Luk 11:46-50.
4) “Were able to bear?” (ischusamen bastasai) “Were strong enough (able, morally or ethically) to bear or to carry out?” Gal 3:13-14; Gal 5:11-13; Act 7:52-53; Act 13:38-39; Jas 2:10.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
−
10. Now, therefore, why tempt ye? This is the other part of the sermon wherein Peter showeth how deadly that doctrine is which Paul’s enemies sought to bring in; to wit, which might drown godly souls in despair. He inferreth and gathereth out of the former member, that God is tempted if the Gentiles be enforced to keep the law of necessity; − (104) he riseth higher, and pierceth even unto the very fountain. For he reasoneth hitherto, that the Gentiles should have injury done them if there be more required at their hands than God will; and seeing that he made them equal with the holy people, and did vouchsafe them the honor of adoption, it was. an unmeet and inconvenient [absurd] matter that they should be rejected, and so his liberality should be restrained. For he saith last of all, that this faith is sufficient for them, though they want ceremonies. And now he taketh an higher principle, that those who tie men’s salvation to the works of the law leave them no good hope; but rather throw the whole world headlong into horrible destruction, if it can obtain salvation by no other means but by keeping the law. With what arguments he proveth this we shall see in their place. As touching the words, seeing the Scripture saith, that God is tempted diverse ways, Peter’s meaning is, in this place, that God is provoked as it were of set purpose, when there is an heavier burden laid upon men than they be able to bear; and that his power is brought within bounds − (105) when that yoke is bound which he doth loose, which is nothing else but by striving against nature to match ourselves with giants, as they say. −
That the yoke should be laid upon their necks. The meaning of the words is plain, that God is tempted when there is laid upon men’s consciences a sorer burden than they are able to bear, and by this means the salvation of men’s souls is sore shaken; seeing that they must needs by this means be drowned in despair, which cannot be without their destruction. But that injury which is done to God is no whit more tolerable, when as he is robbed of his right that he may not have liberty to deliver us. But we may easily gather out of the thing itself that he doth not speak of the ceremonies only. The servitude of the old training up under the law was hard and laborious; but yet it were too absurd to call it a yoke that cannot be borne; and we know that not only holy men, but also even most hypocrites, did well and exactly accomplish the outward observation of the rites. −
Moreover, it were not any hard matter to satisfy the moral law, if it were content with corporeal obedience only, and did not require spiritual righteousness; for it is granted to many to bridle their hands and feet; but to moderate all the affections so that there may reign perfect abstinence and purity, as well in the soul as in the body, this is too hard a matter. −
Therefore, those be too foolish who restrain unto ceremonies Peter’s words, whereby the weakness of men to perform the righteousness of the heart is expressed; which doth not only far pass their strength, but is altogether contrary to nature. These men were, I warrant you, deceived by one reason, because the question was moved concerning ceremonies only; but they do remember that Peter did more attentively and more wisely consider as became him, what a labyrinth this error (to look to, but light) did bring with it. The false apostles did avouch, that no man could attain unto salvation unless he did keep the ceremonies. If man’s salvation be tied to works, it shall be no longer grounded in the grace of Christ, and so, by this means, free reconciliation shall fall flat to the ground. Now, seeing that man’s strength is unable to keep the law, all men are subject to the curse which the Lord there denounceth against the transgressors; and so, by this means, all men shall come in danger of despair, seeing that they see themselves guilty of eternal death by the law. Peradventure the false apostles understood these things craftily. But Peter pierceth the very fountain, that he may bring to light the deadly poison of that doctrine; and thus must we do, so often as Satan doth craftily thrust in wicked errors. −
At this day we seem to some to be too contentious, when as we do so stoutly stand in this, that men must not pray for the dead; for it is both a most ancient custom, neither is it a thing to look to very dangerous, though men pour out superfluous prayer; yet [nay] it is a plausible opinion, because it carrieth some color of human godliness. −
Furthermore, unskillful men judge thus, because they seek. not out the head spring. For, if we grant that men may pray for the dead, we must also admit this, that they are now punished by the judgment of God, because they made not satisfaction in this life for their sins. And so, by this means the force of Christ’s satisfaction is translated unto the works of men. Secondly, the rule of praying aright is overthrown, if men may pray at all adventure, without the word of God. This is also a greater absurdity than that we ought lightly to pass over it. In sum, we can never give true judgment of any question, unless, having thoroughly ripped up the fountain of that doctrine which is called in question, we deduct all consequences which it bringeth with it. Therefore, it is no marvel if Peter, to the end he may pull the false apostles out (by the ears,) as it were out of their lurking dens, do generally dispute touching the whole law; because he doth nothing else but open the matter itself, whereof the simple were ignorant; that they may all see what a deadly doctrine it is, which doth both extinguish the grace of Christ, and drown souls in the horrible dungeon of despair. − (106) −
Neither we nor our fathers. Peter doth not only dispute what men have done indeed, but what they were able to do; neither doth he speak only of the common riff-raff, − (107) but of the holy fathers. Seeing that he denieth that they were able to bear the yoke of the law, it is manifest that the law cannot possibly be kept. I know that Jerome’s saying is so generally received, that it is, as it were, an undoubted and most certain maxim, If any man say that it is a thing impossible to keep the law, let him be accursed; but we must not hearken to any voice of man which is contrary to the judgment of the Spirit of God. We hear what the Spirit pronounceth in this place by the mouth of Peter, not concerning the will and works of men, but touching their ability and power. And hereunto agreeth Paul, affirming that it was an impossible thing that the law should give us life, forasmuch as it was weak through the flesh. Indeed, if any man were able to fulfill the law, he should find the life which is there promised; but forasmuch as Paul denieth that life can be gotten by the law, it followeth that there is farther and higher righteousness required there than man is able to perform. I confess, indeed, that Jerome doth not wholly grant to the strength of nature power to fulfill the law, but partly also to the grace of God, as he doth afterward expound himself, that a faithful man, holpen by the grace of the Spirit, may be said to be able to fulfill the law. But even that mitigation is not true. For, if we do weigh the strength of nature only, men shall not only be unable to bear the yoke of the law, but they shall not be able to move so much as a finger to perform the least jot of the law. And surely if that be true, that all the cogitations of man’s mind are wicked from his childhood, ( Gen 8:21😉 that all the understandings of flesh − (108) are enemies to God, ( Rom 8:7😉 that there is none which seeketh after God, ( Psa 14:3😉 and other such places, which are common in the Scripture, tending to the same end, but especially which are cited by Paul in the third to the Romans, ( Rom 3:11,) man’s power and ability to fulfill the law shall not only be weak and lame, but altogether none to begin. − (109) −
Therefore, we must thus think, that even the very faithful, after they being regenerate by the Spirit of God, do study to attain unto the righteousness of the law, do perform, notwithstanding, but the half, and far less than half, not the whole. For doubtless Peter speaketh not in this place of the epicure − (110) or profane men; but of Abraham, of Moses, and of other holy fathers which were the most perfect in the world; and yet he saith that these fainted under the burden of the law, because it did pass their strength. It is hatefully objected that the Spirit of God is blasphemed when as ability to fulfill the law is taken away from his grace and help; but we may readily answer, because the question is not what the grace of the Spirit is able to do, but what that measure of grace is able to do which God doth divide to every one in this life. For we must always consider what God doth promise to do; neither let us unadvisedly ask this question, whether that can be done which he himself doth testify shall never be, and which he will not have done? He promiseth the grace and aid of the Spirit to the faithful, whereby they may be able to resist the lusts of the flesh, and to subdue them; yet shall they not quite abolish and drive them away. He promiseth them grace, whereby they may walk in newness of life; yet shall they not be able to run so swiftly as the law requireth. For he will have them kept under during their whole life, that they may fly to beg pardon. If it be unlawful to separate from the power of God’s counsel, and the order by him set down, it is a foolish and vain cavil, whereby the adversaries go about to burden us, when as they say that we diminish the power of God; nay rather, they transform God, when they hold that his counsel and purpose can be altered. −
The Pelagians did in times past, in like sort, burden − (111) Augustine. He answereth, that though it be a thing possible that the law should be fulfilled, yet is that sufficient for him, that no man did ever fulfill it, and that the Scripture doth not testify that it shall be fulfilled until the end of the world. By which words he delivereth himself from their importunate subtlety. But there was no cause why he should doubt, but freely and flatly grant that it might be fulfilled, the Holy Ghost being the author. For we must limit the grace of the Spirit, that it may agree with the promises. Furthermore, we have already declared how far the promises reach. There is no man which moveth any question concerning this, whether God be not able if he will to make men perfect; but they dote foolish which separate his power from his counsel, whereof they have an evident and plain testimony in the Scripture. God doth plainly declare a hundred times what he will, and what he hath determined to do: to go any farther is sacrilege. −
Jerome was enforced by reason of philosophy to hurl out the thunderbolt of his curse against Peter and Paul; − (112) because the laws must be applied unto their hability for whom they be appointed; which, as I confess to take place in man’s laws, so I utterly deny that it is good as touching the law of God, which, in exacting righteousness, doth not respect what man is able to do, but what he ought to do. −
Though here ariseth a harder question, “Whether the law were not given to this end, that it might enforce men to obey God? And this should be in vain, unless the Spirit of God should direct the faithful to keep it; and that the solemn protestation of Moses seemeth to put the matter out of doubt, when he saith that he giveth precepts to the Jews, not such as they may read, but indeed fulfill, ( Deu 30:12😉 whence we gather that the yoke was laid upon the neck of the Jews when the law was given, that it might make them subject to God, that they might not live as them lusted.” I answer, that the law is counted a yoke two ways. For, inasmuch as it bridleth the lusts of the flesh and delivereth a rule of godly and holy life, it is meet that the children of God take this yoke upon them; but, inasmuch as it doth exactly prescribe what we owe to God, and doth not promise life without adding the condition of perfect obedience, and doth again denounce a curse if we shall in any point offend, it is a yoke which no man is able to bear. I will show this more plainly. −
The plain doctrine of good life, wherein God doth invite us unto himself, is a yoke which we must all of us willingly take up; for there is nothing more absurd than that God should not govern man’s life, but that he should wander at pleasure without any bridle. Therefore, we must not refuse the yoke of the law, if the simple doctrine thereof be considered. But these sayings do otherwise qualify (that I may so term it) the law. −
“
He which shall do these things shall live in theme” etc. ( Lev 18:5.)
Again, −
“
Cursed is he which continueth not in all things which are written,” ( Deu 27:26,) −
that it may begin to be a yoke which no man can bear. −
For, so long as salvation is promised to the perfect keeping of the law alone, and every transgression is called into judgment, mankind is utterly undone. In this respect doth Peter affirm that God is tempted, when man’s arrogance doth burden the consciences of men with the law; for it is not his purpose to deny but that men must be governed by the doctrine of the law, and so he granteth that they be under the law − (113) not simply − (114) to teach, but also to humble men with the guilt of eternal death. Considering that that quality was annexed unto doctrine, he affirmeth that the souls of the godly must not be tied with the yoke of the law, because by this means it should of necessity come to pass that they should be drowned in eternal destruction. But, when as not only the grace of the Holy Spirit is present to govern us, but also free forgiveness of sins to deliver and acquit us from the curse of the law; then is that of Moses fulfilled, that the commandment is not above us, ( Deu 30:11😉 and then do we also perceive how sweet the yoke of Christ is, and how light his burden is, ( Mat 11:30.) For, because we know that through the mercy of God that is forgiven us, which is wanting through the infirmity of the flesh, we do cheerfully, and without any grief, − (115) take upon us that which he enjoineth us. Wherefore, so that the rigor of the law be taken away, the doctrine of the law shall not only be tolerable, but also joyful and pleasant; neither must we refuse the bridle which doth govern us mildly, and cloth not urge us sorer than is expedient. −
(104) −
“
Ad necessitatem servandae logis,” to a necessity of observing the law.
(105) −
“
Circumscribi,” is circumscribed.
(106) −
“
In horrendae desperationis abyssum,” in the abyss of horrible despair.
(107) −
“
Vulgo hominum.” of the vulgar.
(108) −
“
Carnis sensus,” carnal propensities.
(109) −
“
Sed ad inchoandum prorsus nulla,” but that he shall have no power at all to begin.
(110) −
“
Do Epicuro,” of Epicurus.
(111) −
“
Premebant,” pressed.
(112) −
“−
Ut sui anathematis fulmen Petro et Paulo infligeret ,” to thunder out an anathema against Peter and Paul.
(113) −
“
Jugo,” yoke.
(114) −
“
Verum quia legis officium est.” but because it is the office of the law. Omitted.
(115) −
“
Sine molestia,” without trouble,repugnance.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(10) Why tempt ye God.To tempt God was to make the experiment whether His will, manifested in the acceptance of the Gentiles, or mans will, resenting and resisting it, was the stronger of the two. Nothing but defeat and condemnation could be the issue of such a trial.
To put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples.No words of St. Pauls, in relation to the Law, could be stronger or clearer than these. They reproduced our Lords own language as to the heavy burdens of the Pharisaic traditions (Mat. 23:4) and His own easy yoke (Mat. 11:30). They were echoed by St. Paul when he warned the Galatians not to be entangled again in the yoke of bondage (Gal. 5:1). The words that follow, on the one hand, speak out the experience of the Apostle himself in terms that are hardly less striking than those of St. Paul in Rom. 7:7-8, though they deal with the Law in its positive rather than its moral aspects, and contain an implied appeal to the experience of his hearers. Was it worth while to tempt God by resisting His teaching in history in order to bring the Gentiles down to the level from which they themselves, Jews as they were, were thankful to have risen?
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
10. Tempt ye God Putting his forbearance to the test by requiring what he does not require, namely, circumcision as a condition to the grace of the Holy Spirit.
Able to bear The Jews could not so sustain the burdens of the law as to attain salvation by the perfection of their obedience. Ever was there that shortcoming that required the ritual atonement, and that failure even in attaining the efficacy of the ritual atonement which left the Jew in sorrowful condemnation, savable by grace alone. Herein, however, the ritual law was but a type and illustration of the absolute moral law, which humanity cannot keep, and, therefore, must be saved by grace. Peter would, therefore, now leave man, without the ritual, to the moral law and Christ’s grace.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
“Now therefore why do you test out God, that you should put a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?”
Now if God had done this freely for these Gentiles without demanding circumcision, who were they to demand otherwise? What right had they to test out God by putting the yoke of the Law on the necks of new disciples, a yoke which had proved too much even for the Jews? In view of the fact that proselytes were seen in Judaism as having ‘the yoke of the Law’ put on them this was significant.
By speaking of ‘the yoke of the law’ the Jews were not, of course, intending to indicate something too heavy to bear. To them it was a yoke of guidance as they marched in step with the law, and therefore a blessing from God, although many did within their hearts in fact find it too heavy. It is typical of Peter’s forthrightness, which we may be certain was not appreciated by all, that he brought out openly what others felt in their hearts.
‘Why do you test out God?’ The idea here may be:
1) To ask them who they thought that they were to put God on trial?
2) To ask them who they were to put God to the test by requiring the Gentiles to walk under the whole yoke of the Law with its many added requirements according to the traditions of the elders, when they were not all necessary. He was saying that to make such demands on them, when Israel themselves had failed to maintain these demands satisfactorily and indeed found them in many cases too heavy a burden, even though they had been brought up to them, was surely testing God beyond reasonable limits. It was forcing God to follow their dictates. It was making God’s salvation depend on their ability to keep the Law as interpreted by man, thus challenging God to give them the extra that would enable them to achieve what were unnecessary requirements, and making Him responsible if they failed.
3) It includes the danger of distrusting His guidance and going against His revealed will, with a view to seeing what He would do about it (compareExo 17:7; Psa 95:9-11 ; 1Co 10:9; Heb 3:9).
‘Taking on the yoke’ was in fact precisely what Jewish proselytes were described as doing when they ritually bathed themselves and were circumcised.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Act 15:10. To put a yoke upon the neck, &c. “A grievous and heavy burden, which neither our fathers nor we have been able cheerfully and regularly to bear, without being exposed to great inconveniences, and many transgressions in consequence of it.” The rabbinical writers apply this phrase to any practical doctrine or precept. See Jer 28:14. Mat 23:4. The force of the argument is, “Why tempt ye God, distrusting and disbelieving him, by imposing this yoke upon the Gentile converts, after he has declared his acceptance of them, by pouring forth the gift of the Holy Spirit upon them without their being circumcised?”
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
DISCOURSE: 1783
THE QUESTION ABOUT THE OBLIGATION OF THE CEREMONIAL LAW DECIDED
Act 15:10-11. Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.
IT is a favourite idea with many, that the Gospels contain all that is needful for us to know, and that it would have been better for the Church if they only had been transmitted to us. But this is indeed to make ourselves wiser than God: for if God had not judged that the other parts of the New Testament would be useful to his Church, he would not have inspired men to write them, nor would he have preserved them for us with such peculiar care. We acknowledge that in the Gospels there are intimations of every thing which we need to know: but will any one say, that in the other parts of the New Testament there are not clearer explanations of them, or that the Gospels are not rendered far more intelligible by the light reflected upon them in the Epistles? Will any one say, that the purposes of God towards his Church, in the call of the Gentiles, the rejection of the Jews, and the future union of both Jews and Gentiles under one Head, are not more fully understood, than they would have been if the Acts of the Apostles had not been recorded? or that the correspondence between the law and the Gospel would have been so manifest, if it had not been pointed out to us in the Epistle to the Hebrews? We have now the advantage of knowing what objections were urged against the Gospel, and how those objections were obviated. To go no further than the passage before us: There was a controversy which agitated the whole Christian Church, insomuch that not all the authority of Barnabas or Paul were able to settle it: and a reference was made to the whole college of Apostles at Jerusalem for their decision of the point. That we may have a just view of it, we shall consider,
I.
The subject in dispute
The question was, Whether the Jewish law was obligatory on the Gentiles?
[This I say, was the original question; but it involved much more, even the whole plan of the Gospel salvation.
Many insisted that circumcision [Note: ver. 1.], and the observance of the whole Mosaic law [Note: ver. 5.], were necessary to salvation. They contended that these were of Divine institution; that the observance of them constituted the grand line of distinction between the Lords people, and all the rest of mankind; and that the severest judgments were threatened for a wilful neglect of them: and consequently, that they must be obligatory on the Lords people to the end of time. (It must be remembered, that the advocates of these opinions were not Jews, but Jewish Christians.)
On the other hand, it was maintained, that these laws were never imposed with a view to mens justification by them; (for that Abraham was justified before even circumcision itself was ordained [Note: Rom 4:10-11.]:)that to require the observance of them from the Gentiles was contrary to Gods avowed design; (since he had manifested his acceptance of them in their uncircumcised state, precisely in the same way as he had of the Jews who were circumcised [Note: Act 11:15-18.]:)that it was impossible for any man to be justified by the observance of them; (since one single deviation from them would utterly condemn him [Note: Jam 2:10.]:)and that to blend the observance of them with the merits of Christ as a joint ground of our hope, was to invalidate the whole Gospel, and to make Christ himself of no effect to us [Note: Rom 9:30-32.]]
A question precisely similar is agitated amongst us at this day
[Circumcision and the Jewish law are indeed, by common consent, rejected by us. But many amongst us proceed on the very same principle as those Judaizing Christians did, and make works, either ceremonial or moral, the ground of their hope before God.
Some, and some of no mean name, have gone so far as to assert, that the very act of baptism saves us. Verily, if such sentiments were not expressed in terms which cannot be mistaken, we should think it a libel to impute them to any man who calls himself a Christian, and much more to any one who would make his sentiments in theology a standard for the Church of Christ. It seems incredible that such Jewish blindness should exist at this day in the Christian Church.
Others, even the great mass of nominal Christians, imagine that the attending of the house of God and the Lords supper, together with common honesty, is sufficient to procure us acceptance with God; or that, if a little more be wanting, the merits of Christ will turn the scale.
Others, who come nearer to the Judaizing Christians of old, maintain, that though our hope is certainly in the Lord Jesus Christ, yet some works of ours are necessary to make his merits effectual for our salvation. This is a principle so generally avowed, that to controvert it would be called by many an unchristian heresy.
But (not to notice the two former opinions, which need only to be stated, and they will carry their own condemnation along with them,) this more specious principle is in reality founded on an ignorance of both Law and Gospel. For,
1.
The moral law was not, any more than the ceremonial, given with a view to justify men: it was given rather to condemn them, and, as a ministration of death, to shut them up that they might receive life by the Gospel [Note: 2Co 3:7; 2Co 3:9. Gal 3:21-24.].
2.
It is impossible that any man can be saved by his obedience to the law, because the law requires perfect obedience; which never has been, nor ever can be, rendered to it by fallen man [Note: Gal 3:10.].
3.
To blend our obedience to the law with the merits of Christ, is to establish a ground for boasting; which it is the main scope and tendency of the Gospel to destroy [Note: Rom 3:27. Eph 2:8-9.].
4.
Such an union of our works with the faith of Christ is declared to be an utter subversion of mens souls [Note: ver 24.], and a superseding of all that Christ has done or suffered for us [Note: Gal 5:2-4.].
Here then the question, whether as debated formerly, or as existing at this hour, is fairly stated.]
We now come to,
II.
The apostolic decision of it
And here we will view,
1.
The Apostle Peters judgment respecting it
[After the point had been long debated, St. Peter rose to give his opinion. His argument was extremely plain and simple. He reminded the Church, that the Lord Jesus had given to him the keys of the Gospel kingdom, and had commissioned him to open that kingdom both to Jews and Gentiles. To the Jews he had opened it on the day of Pentecost; and to the Gentiles about six years afterwards, when he preached to Cornelius and his friends: and on both occasions God had given the same testimony of his acceptance to the people, pouring out upon the uncircumcised Gentiles, precisely as he had done on the circumcised Jews, his Holy Spirit, both in his miraculous and sanctifying operations [Note: Compare Act 11:15-18. with ver. 79.]. From hence he inferred, that God had unequivocally declared his mind and will, and had shewn, beyond all controversy, that in his eyes neither circumcision was any thing, nor uncircumcision was any thing; but faith, that worketh by love, was all that he required. To require therefore from the Gentiles an observance of the Mosaic law was to tempt God, and to put on their necks a yoke, which God had never intended to impose.
Having stated thus the grounds of his judgment, he proceeded to give, what we may call, his confession of faith. He viewed salvation as a free gift of God to man, for the sake, and through the merits, of the Lord Jesus Christ. This salvation he regarded as wholly gratuitous in all its parts, and as equally so both to Jews and Gentiles: to the Jews it was not given because they were circumcised: nor should it be withheld from the Gentiles because they were uncircumcised: both to the one and the other it would be freely given, the very instant they believed in the Lord Jesus Christ [Note: Compare the text with Rom 3:29-30.]. No good works were required to merit it; nor was any thing required to make the merits of Christ more effectual: it was given freely, without money and without price; and from first to last must be wholly of grace.]
2.
The sentence of the whole College of Apostles at Jerusalem
[After Peters sentiments were delivered, Paul and Barnabas confirmed his argument, by stating what God had done among the Gentiles by them; and, by thus uniting their testimony to his, they convinced at once the whole assembly. James, who appears to have presided in the council, drew up the sentence in which the whole Church concurred. He appealed to Simeons, that is, Simon Peters, testimony, as exactly according with the words of prophecy: and then declared that no such yoke was to be imposed on the converted Gentiles. There were indeed some things which, under existing circumstances, it would be necessary for the Gentiles to forbear. They in their unconverted state had not merely regarded fornication as lawful, but had actually practised it in their idolatrous worship: they must therefore be especially on their guard against this, not only because it was sinful in itself, and therefore to be shunned by all, but because any approaches towards it would appear like a return to their former idolatry. On the other hand, there were some things forbidden to the Jews, such as eating of things offered to idols, or things strangled, or the blood of any animal; and it was necessary that the Gentiles should abstain from these things, lest they should put a stumbling-block in the way of the Jews, or cause disunion in the Church. But, as to their submitting to any rites, or their performing of any works, in order to obtain justification by them, no such thing was required, nor ought any such thing to be required: for, in fact, the requiring of them would only subvert their souls, and ruin them for ever.
Now this decision goes to the whole question as it now exists: for, if the performing of any act in order to obtain salvation by it, either in whole or in part, was unlawful then, it is unlawful now; and if it would subvert their souls, it will equally subvert and destroy ours [Note: Rom 11:6. Gal 2:16.].]
We shall conclude with,
1.
Some cautions respecting yourselves
[In maintaining this doctrine, there are two cautions especially to be attended to: the one is, that you do not abuse it; and the other, that you do not ever lose sight of it.
Do not abuse it. If, by an indiscreet statement of it, you give reason to think that you despise morality, you will do incalculable injury to the souls of men. On the one hand, we must never be afraid to assert the doctrine of salvation by faith alone: but, on the other hand, we must shew the necessity of good works as fruits and evidences of our faith, and must declare in the strongest terms, that an unproductive faith is no better than the faith of devils [Note: Jam 2:19-20.]. We have only to distinguish between the foundation and the superstructure of a building. Every one can see that they are both necessary, though not necessary for the same ends: so they may see that both faith and works are necessary, though for different ends: both are good in their proper place: but they are good only for the ends and purposes for which they are required [Note: 1Co 3:11.].
Again: Do not ever lose sight of it. We see how even Peter himself was, not long after this, turned from the principles he had so firmly maintained [Note: Gal 2:11-14.]. So there is in us a wonderful tendency to lean to legal views, and self-righteous principles. Remember how jealous St. Paul was on this subject [Note: Gal 1:8-9.]; and stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ has made you free [Note: Gal 5:1.].]
2.
Some directions respecting others
[As the oppugners of our principles are apt to be intolerant towards us, so it sometimes is found that we speak too contemptuously of them. Now it is certain, that many who have an unfeigned zeal for God, have very imperfect views of this subject [Note: Rom 10:2-3.]: and they ought to be regarded by us with love, and be treated by us with the greatest tenderness. See how the whole Church met together to deliberate on this point for the satisfaction of their weaker brethren: and should not we exercise forbearance towards them, and labour with patience to lead them to clearer views of the subject? If God has given you a more just conception of this great mystery, be thankful for it; but make use of your knowledge, not for the indulgence of vain conceit, but for the edification of men, and the glory of God.
And whilst you seek the benefit of your fellow-Christians, do not forget your elder brethren, the Jews. They have been broken off from their own stock on account of their unbelief; and we have been graffed in upon it: remember them with pity, and strive by all possible means to promote their welfare. You see that the blending of their law with the Gospel was destructive to those amongst them who embraced Christianity: What then must be the state of those who reject Christianity altogether, and have no hope but in their law, which yet it is impossible for them, under their present circumstances, to obey? It is a shame to the Christian world, that we take so little pains to enlighten their minds, and to bring them to the knowledge of the truth. Consider then with yourselves what can be done for them, and how you yourselves in your respective stations may contribute to their good. And pray to God, that he will bring them back to his fold, and unite them with us under one Head, that through the whole world there may be but one Lord, and his name one [Note: Zec 14:9.].]
Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
Ver. 10. Now, therefore, why tempt ye God ] Or (as Jerome in a certain epistle to Augustine reads this text, and so it runs more smoothly), “Why attempt ye to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples,” &c. Ceremonies were abolished by Christ, and had no use after his death, but by accident; as he who buildeth a vault, letteth the centrals stand till he put in the keystone, and then pulleth them away: so here.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
10. ] . (as , ch. Act 11:17 ), tempt , by putting obstacles in the way of His evidently determined course.
, infin., marking the intended result of : cf. , , , &c. See Bernhardy, Syntax, p. 365.
] See ref. Gal. Peter could not be so much referring to the mere outward observance of ceremonies, which he himself and the Jewish converts thought it expedient to retain, but to the imposition of the law, as a condition of salvation, on the consciences of the disciples. So Neander (Pfl. u. L. p. 214). This being so, will refer, not to the burdensomeness of ceremonies, but to the far more grievous burden of legal death, of which Paul cries out so bitterly in Rom 7:24 , and says, Gal 5:3 , , .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Act 15:10 . : in Acts four times, nowhere else in N.T.; cf. Act 10:35 , nunc igitur: LXX, Gen 27:8 , etc.; 1Ma 10:71 . ., cf. Act 5:9 , they put God to the proof, as to whether He had not admitted unworthy persons into the Church. . : on the infinitive see Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses , p. 151; Blass, Gram. , p. 221: metaphor common among the Rabbis, and also in classical literature, cf. Jer 5:5 , Lam 3:27 , Sir 51:26 (Zep 3:9 ), and Mat 11:29 (Luk 11:46 ), Gal 5:1 . Possibly in Jer 5:5 reference is made to the yoke of the law, but Psalms of Solomon , Act 7:8 , cf. Act 17:32 , present undoubted instances of the metaphorical use of the term “the yoke” for the service of Jehovah. In Sayings of the Jewish Fathers , iii., 8 (Taylor, second edition, p. 46), we have a definite and twice repeated reference to the yoke of Thorah, cf . Apocalypse of Baruch , xli., 3 (Charles’ edition, p. 66 and note), and also Psalms of Solomon , Ryle and James, p. 72, note. It would seem therefore that St. Peter uses an almost technical word in his warning to the first Christians. , i.e. , of those who had learnt of Christ and knew the meaning of His yoke, Mat 11:29 . . : cf. Act 13:39 . St. Peter no less than St. Paul endorses the charge made by St. Stephen, Act 7:53 . : a remarkable confession on St. Peter’s lips: the conversations with Paul and Barnabas, Gal 2:7 , may well have confirmed the attitude which he had taken after the baptism of Cornelius (Zckler).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
tempt. Greek. peira, try, put to the test. Always transl “tempt” up to this verse, except Joh 6:6 (prove). Compare Act 5:9.
put = lay.
yoke. Not circumcision only, but obligation to keep the whole law.
neither . . . nor. Greek. oute . . . oute.
were able = had strength. Greek. ischuo. Compare App-172.
bear = carry. Greek. bastazo. Compare Mat 3:11.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
10.] . (as , ch. Act 11:17), tempt, by putting obstacles in the way of His evidently determined course.
, infin., marking the intended result of : cf. , , , &c. See Bernhardy, Syntax, p. 365.
] See ref. Gal. Peter could not be so much referring to the mere outward observance of ceremonies, which he himself and the Jewish converts thought it expedient to retain,-but to the imposition of the law, as a condition of salvation, on the consciences of the disciples. So Neander (Pfl. u. L. p. 214). This being so, will refer, not to the burdensomeness of ceremonies, but to the far more grievous burden of legal death, of which Paul cries out so bitterly in Rom 7:24,-and says, Gal 5:3, , .
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Act 15:10. ) now in particular (now at last), as if , those ancient things [that good while ago, when God made choice that the Gentiles by me should hear the Gospel], Act 15:7, saith Peter, are of no weight. An apostrophe to the Pharisees, and a severe reproof.- , …, why do ye try to impose a yoke?) After most editions insert , according to the very frequent phraseology of Scripture. But the shorter reading, ; gives a mode of expression and a sense very free from difficulty. Comp. App. Crit., Ed. ii., on this passage.[85]-, a yoke) Comp. Isa 10:27, His (the Assyrians) burden () shall be taken away from off thy shoulder, and his yoke from off thy neck: see Act 15:28, below. Peter does not call circumcision in itself a yoke, but the whole law, of which circumcision formed a leading feature; and when the latter was abrogated, the Pharisees were apprehensive for the whole law. Therefore he connects the consequence (which is expressed in the form of a Metonymy of the consequent for the antecedent, as in ch. Act 5:9; Gal 2:14, at the end) in this way: Whilst ye establish the principle, that salvation cannot be obtained without circumcision, ye impose the yoke of the whole law on the necks of the disciples. Comp. Gal 5:1, note. [Circumcision was regarded by the Jews more as a part of the law of Moses, than as a sign of the promise given to Abraham. In itself it was not a yoke; but the law, of which it is used as the sign, was the yoke, to which Christ and grace are opposed.] And since they were not averse from this imposition of the whole yoke (which afterwards was the very root of the Galatian error), Peter cut off this also, and opposes to circumcision, and still more to the yoke of the whole law, the saving grace of Christ, which was not altogether perceived by them: premising also the example of the Csareans, who obtained justification both without circumcision and without the law.- , of the disciples) They are already disciples; they need not now at last (by the receiving of circumcision) to become so.- , which neither) The cause of the abrogation of the law.- , nor our fathers) upon whom notwithstanding the law was imposed; the reason for which Paul everywhere shows. Unless it had been imposed at some time or other, no one would have been sensible that it is a yoke which cannot be borne. He does not mean in this place Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to whom circumcision was the seal of the promise, not a yoke; but the Israelites under Moses.- , neither we) especially after having once tasted liberty.
[85] ABCDEde Vulg. Rec. Text and Iren. all have : Hilary, Dominum. Jerome, and a few MSS. of the Vulg., are the only good authorities for omitting these words.-E. and T.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Why: Exo 17:2, Isa 7:12, Mat 4:7, Heb 3:9
put: Mat 11:28-30, Mat 23:4, Gal 5:1
which: Gal 4:1-5, Gal 4:9, Heb 9:9
Reciprocal: Neh 3:5 – put not Lam 5:5 – Our necks are under persecution Mat 11:30 – my yoke Act 15:19 – that Act 15:24 – Ye must Act 15:31 – they rejoiced 1Co 8:1 – touching Gal 2:14 – why Gal 4:3 – in 1Ti 6:1 – servants
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
0
Act 15:10. Nor we were able to bear. The last word is defined in the lexicon by “endure,” and the term able does not refer to physical strength, but that it was more than they felt prepared to endure. God never intended the ritualistic yoke of the law to be perpetual, but these Judaizers would have made it permanent.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Act 15:10. Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples? To impose new obligations upon these Gentile churches founded by Paul and Barnabas would be nothing else than tempting or trying God by demanding new proofs of His will,God, who in the case of the uncircumcised Cornelius had clearly signified His intention that the Gentiles who believed should be partakers with the Jews of all the blessings which, through the Redeemer, flowed into the Church. Now to determine that these Gentile believers must, before they could be admitted into the Church, submit to the burdensome Mosaic law, would be to throw a doubt upon Gods former decision, and the miraculous signs which accompanied it as the seal of Divine approval; which miraculous signs had again, in no small measure, been repeated during the Gentile mission of Barnabas and Paul.
Which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear. These words do not refer to circumcision only, but to the whole Mosaic law viewed as a condition of salvationan insupportable burden. Peters words here are not a complaint against God as a severe Master, but are a touching confession of mans weakness. His appeal here has been well paraphrased: Men and brethren, speak the truth, and candidly tell me, have you kept the law? When oxen, wrote Luther, have long borne the yoke, and dragged heavy weights, all that they earn by their work beyond their daily food is to be struck on the head and be butchered: such is the experience of those who hope to be justified by the law. They are taken captive and burdened by a heavy yoke, and then, after they have long and painfully laboured to do the works of the law, all that they finally earn is to remain eternally poor and wretched servants.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
See notes on verse 7
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
10, 11. Here Peter pleads with them to put no yoke on the necks of the disciples, whether Gentiles or Jews, assuring them that all are saved by the free grace of God through faith, without works, legal obedience or ritual ceremonies. Of course, true saving faith is in its very nature always obedient, yet the faith is the only condition of salvation, and not the obedience, which would involve the popish heresy of salvation by works.
We constantly have this trouble with the holiness people. After the Omnipotent Savior has broken from our necks every yoke sin and Satan ever put on us, oh! how we are tempted to let good people put yokes on us, or even with our own hands to put them on our necks again. If the Son shall make you free you shall be free indeed (Joh 8:34). Jesus wants to make you free as angels and keep you free forever. Beware that you do not take a yoke of bondage.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
15:10 {5} Now therefore why {f} tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
(5) Peter, passing from the ceremonies to the Law itself in general, shows that no one could be saved, if salvation were to be sought for by the Law, and not by grace alone in Jesus Christ; and this is because no man could ever fulfil the Law, neither the patriarch nor the apostle.
(f) Why do you tempt God, as though he could not save by faith?
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Requiring that Gentiles become Jews before God would save them would test God in that it would question the rightness of His action in giving the Spirit to Cornelius. When a Gentile became a Jewish proselyte, the Jew in charge of the ceremony said the Gentile now took up the yoke of the kingdom of heaven (cf. Mat 23:4; Gal 5:1). [Note: Bruce, Commentary on . . ., p. 307.] Peter said this yoke, the Mosaic Covenant, was an obligation that was both unbearable and unnecessary (cf. Mat 11:29-30).