12<\/strong>. Then all the multitude<\/em> ] Though the apostles and elders are alone mentioned ( Act 15:6<\/em><\/span>) as coming together, it now appears that the assembly was a large one.<\/p>\n kept silence<\/em> ] The authority with which he could speak through whom God had first opened the door of faith to the Gentiles must have silenced opposition. For he like themselves had had prejudices to overcome before his mission to Cornelius.<\/p>\n and gave audience<\/em> ] Here the imperfect tense implies the steady continuous attention to the whole narrative of that first missionary journey of St Paul.<\/p>\n what miracles<\/em> ] The word is that usually rendered signs<\/strong>; and the two nouns are the same which occur in the prayer of the disciples (Act 4:30<\/span>) ‘that signs and wonders<\/em> may be done through the name of thy holy servant Jesus.’ The prayer was now being answered abundantly. It is well that the English rendering should accord in these places.<\/p>\n by them<\/em> ] See note on Act 15:4<\/em><\/span> above.<\/p>\n Then all the multitude – <\/B>Evidently the multitude of private Christians who were assembled on this occasion. That it does not refer to a synod of ministers and elders merely is apparent:<\/P> (1) Because the church, the brethren, are represented as having been present, and as concurring in the final opinion Act 15:22-23<\/span>; and,<\/P> (2) Because the word multitude <\/SPAN><\/span> to plethos would not have been used in describing the collection of apostles and elders merely. Compare Luk 1:10-11<\/span>, Luk 1:13<\/span>; Luk 5:6<\/span>; Luk 6:17<\/span>; Luk 19:37<\/span>; Joh 5:3<\/span>; Joh 21:6<\/span>; Act 4:32<\/span>; Act 6:2<\/span>; Mat 3:7<\/span>.<\/P> Gave audience – <\/B>Heard, listened attentively to.<\/P> Barnabas and Paul – <\/B>They were deeply interested in it, and they were qualified to give a fair statement of the facts as they had occurred.<\/P> Declaring what miracles and wonders … – <\/B>The argument here evidently is, that God had approved their work by miracles; that he gave evidence that what they did had his approbation; and that as all this was done without imposing on them the rites of the Jews, so it would follow that those were not now to be commanded.<\/P> <\/p>\n Act 15:12<\/span><\/p>\n Then all the multitude kept silence and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul.<\/em><\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n Apostolic testimony<\/strong><\/p>\n 1<\/strong>. <\/em><\/strong>When Paul speaks we want to know what Paul says. But some men must be their own reporters. So we turn from the Acts to the opening verses of Galatians. Where Luke contents himself with a summary, Paul passes into detail. Some reports are too condensed, and therefore unjust. The minister called and prayed. We do not say that he walked miles, and that when he prayed his heart wept.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>Paul says he went up to Jerusalem by revelation. If he had gone up to Jerusalem awed by its position and fame, he would have picked out dainty inoffensive words that would win the ear of many. In reality, Paul went from heaven to Jerusalem, and withered its contemptibleness under the majesty of the visions from which he had just turned his eyes. We have dropped the word revelation except on the Sabbath, when we venture to say it sometimes. We have meaner words–such as impression, feeling, etc. These are inoffensive terms; an atheist might use such mock jewellery. The apostle said, I went up by revelation. I knew that the truth was with me, and I was anxious only that Christs Cross should be lifted up and seen everywhere as the one way of salvation.<\/p>\n 3. <\/strong>Was Paul then afraid of Jerusalem, and pillars, and men of reputation? Paul was anxious to let the leaders of the Church know exactly what he had been preaching, so he had a private interview with those who were of reputation. Could we have heard him then! Speaking to a sympathetic audience, to men who had seen the Lord! Paul had no fear about his gospel. He said, I have been preaching salvation by Christ; now, brethren, what say you?<\/p>\n 4. <\/strong>Paul was not ashamed of his Gentile converts. He took Titus with him, and said, This is a Gentile convert. He has begun in the Spirit; is he to be made perfect in the flesh? Always vindicate your arguments by your converts.<\/p>\n 5. <\/strong>Paul illustrates by anticipation the right of private judgment. To those who were of reputation, who seemed to be pillars, he gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour. And speaking of those who seemed to be somewhat, he said, They added nothing to me. Where, then, was submission to papal authority? Here is one man who stands up in the Church, and says, This is the gospel which I have received, which I will preach, for which I mill live, for which, and in which, I will die. I am crucified with Christ, etc. That was the true assertion of private judgment: not the expression of an individual will, but the expression of a personal loyalty to a living Christ.<\/p>\n 6. <\/strong>Paul showed the true nature of real and enduring unity. In effect, he said: We may be one without seeming to be united. There are men to whom circumcision is a hereditary rite. There are others to whom it would be an intolerable yoke. Now, let us go, the one to the circumcision, and the other to the uncircumcision; for I know that as this gospel spreads it will be seen at the last that neither circumcision availeth anything nor uncircumcision.<\/p>\n 7. <\/strong>But the council could not break up so. One thing, said the council, shall unite us–that we remember the poor. The poor have ye always with you. So they all–the circumcision and the uncircumcision–in philanthropy showed their union in the Lord, who lived to redeem the human race! Speculative theology divides men; practical philanthropy unites them. Let us unite where we can. Never inquire into the creed of a needy man. The man is hungry; the creed must be bread. When he has eaten his bread you may ask him questions. Begin where you can; wherever the heart door is ajar, go in; wherever opportunity is offered, speak the living word or do the helpful deed. Always seek for the centre of union, and always avoid the cause of division or distrust. (J. Parker, D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n Verse 12<\/span>. All the multitude kept silence<\/B><\/I>] The strong facts stated by St. Peter could not be controverted. His speech may be thus analyzed:<\/P> 1. Circumcision is a sign of the purification of the heart.<\/P> 2. That purification can only be effected by the Holy Ghost.<\/P> 3. This Holy Spirit was hitherto supposed to be the portion of those only who had received circumcision.<\/P> 4. But the Gentiles, who were never circumcised, nor kept any part of the law of Moses, have had their hearts purified by faith in Christ Jesus.<\/P> 5. As God, therefore, has given them<\/I> the thing signified<\/I>, he evidently does not intend that the sign<\/I> should be administered.<\/P> 6. Should we impose this burthensome rite, we should most evidently be provoking God, who plainly shows us that he intends no more to save in this way.<\/P> 7. Therefore it is evident that both Jews and Gentiles are to be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.<\/P> <\/P> Gave audience to Barnabas and Paul<\/B><\/I>] These apostles came forward next, to corroborate what Peter had said, by showing the miracles and wonders which God had by them wrought among the Gentiles. Peter stated facts: Paul and Barnabas confirmed the statement.<\/P><\/p>\n All the multitude; the apostles and elders themselves gave attention to what Barnabas and Paul declared, and by their silence did tacitly approve of what they had said. <\/P> Miracles and wonders; the conversion of the Gentiles in itself, and not only the signs which did attend it, is truly wonderful: the saving of any one soul is a miraculous work. <\/P> <\/p>\n 12. Then all . . . gave audience toBarnabas and Paul<\/B>On this order of the names here, see on Ac15:25<\/span>. <\/P> declaring what miracles andsigns God wrought among the Gentiles by them<\/B>This detail offacts, immediately following up those which Peter had recalled tomind, would lead all who waited only for divine teaching to see thatGod had Himself pronounced the Gentile converts to be disciples in asfull standing as the Jews, without circumcision; and the attestingmiracles<\/I> to which Paul here refers would tend, in such anassembly to silence opposition.<\/P><\/p>\n Then all the multitude kept silence<\/strong>,…. Upon this oration of Peter’s, there was a profound silence in the whole assembly, among all the brethren of the church, who were come together on this occasion; they were all satisfied with, and by their silence acquiesced in, what Peter said; and waited to hear what might be further said about this matter, by other persons in the assembly; and even those who were on the other side of the question, were confounded and nonplussed, and knew not what to say, and the more so, when they perceived that the rest of the apostles and elders were of the same mind; for Beza’s most ancient copy introduces this clause thus; “then the elders agreeing to the things that were said by Peter, the whole multitude was silent”: and this gave Paul and Barnabas an opportunity of being heard; who, perhaps, could not so well be heard before, for the clamour of the people against them, who might not have so good an opinion of them, and of their practices:<\/p>\n and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul<\/strong>; Barnabas is mentioned first, he being most known to the Jews, and of whom they might have the better opinion; and who probably gave the account of their proceedings and success among the Gentiles:<\/p>\n declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them<\/strong>; what wonders of grace were wrought in the conversion of multitudes of them, wherever they came; and what miracles in nature were wrought for the confirmation of the Gospel, such as the striking blind Elymas the sorcerer, at Paphos in Cyprus, and curing the cripple at Lystra; and which they ascribe not to themselves but to God, whose instruments they only were.<\/p>\n Kept silence <\/B> (<\/SPAN><\/span>). Ingressive first aorist active of <\/SPAN><\/span>, old verb, to hold one’s peace. All the multitude became silent after Peter’s speech and because of it.<\/P> Hearkened <\/B> (<\/SPAN><\/span>). Imperfect active of <\/SPAN><\/span>, descriptive of the rapt attention, were listening.<\/P> Unto Barnabas and Paul <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). Note placing Barnabas before Paul as in verse 25<\/span>, possibly because in Jerusalem Barnabas was still better known than Paul.<\/P> Rehearsing <\/B> (<\/SPAN><\/span>). Present middle participle of <\/SPAN><\/span>, old verb, to go through or lead out a narrative of events as in Luke 24:35<\/span>; Acts 10:8<\/span> which see. Three times (Acts 14:27<\/span>; Acts 15:4<\/span>; Acts 15:12<\/span>) Paul is described as telling the facts about their mission work, facts more eloquent than argument (Page). One of the crying needs in the churches is fuller knowledge of the facts of mission work and progress with enough detail to give life and interest. The signs and wonders which God had wrought among the Gentiles set the seal of approval on the work done through (<\/SPAN><\/span>) Barnabas and Paul. This had been Peter’s argument about Cornelius (11:17<\/span>). This same verb (<\/SPAN><\/span>) is used by James in verse 14<\/span> referring to Peter’s speech. <\/P> <\/p>\n Hearkened. The imperfect [<\/SPAN><\/span>] denotes attention to a continued narrative. <\/P> Declaring [] <\/SPAN><\/span>. Better, as Rev., rehearsing. See on Luk 24:35<\/span>. <\/P> What miracles, etc. Lit., how many [] <\/SPAN><\/span>.<\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n TESTIMONY OF PAUL AND BARNABAS V. 12<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “Then all the multitude kept silence,”<\/strong> (esigesen de pan to plethos) “Then all the multitude was silent,” the multitude of the membership of the church at Jerusalem where the circumcision-issue inter-church council conference, or association was being conducted. It appears that the brethren from Antioch and the apostles and elders of Jerusalem church met in consultation, disputed the issues, then came before the whole church, perhaps repeatedly, for days, listening to testimony and evaluating the arguments of all speakers, including those of the believing Pharisees, Act 15:5-6<\/span>.<\/p>\n 2) “And gave audience to Barnabas and Paul,”<\/strong> (kai ekouon Barnaba kai Paulou) “And they heard (gave attention to) Paul and Barnabas;” Barnabas and Paul spoke after the Pharisees had risen up, had their say, after much disputing, after Peter had spoken, rehearsing how men had been saved thru his preaching and others, among the Gentiles, without their being circumcised, some five years prior to this, Act 10:1-48<\/span>; Act 11:17-18<\/span>.<\/p>\n 3) “Declaring what,”<\/strong> (eksegoumenon hosa) “As they related, in a discourse manner, what manner or kind of;<\/p>\n 4) “Miracles and wonders,”<\/strong> (semiea kai terata) “Signs and wonders,” Holy Spirit gift manifestations. The first was blindness brought suddenly upon Elymas the Sorcerer at Paphos, Act 13:6-12<\/span>.<\/p>\n 5) “God had wrought among the Gentiles by them.”<\/strong> (en tois ethnesin di auton ho theos epoilsen) “God did among the Gentiles through them,” as they had made their first missionary journey in regions beyond Palestine, beyond Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria. Of God’s miraculous wonders done by Paul and Barnabas among the Gentiles, which they recounted, see also Act 14:2-3<\/span>, at lconium; The healing of the impotent man at Lystra, Act 14:8-10<\/span>; And they recounted how Gentile people sought to worship Paul because of God’s wonders among them, Act 14:11-18<\/span>.<\/p>\n − <\/p>\n 12. All the multitude held their peace. By these words, Luke giveth us to understand that the Spirit of God did so reign in that assembly, that they yielded forthwith to reason. The disputation was hot before; but now, after that Peter hath laid open the counsel of God, and hath handled the question according to the doctrine of the Scripture, by and by all noise being stayed, they are quiet and whist who did of late unadvisedly defend the error. This is a lively image of a lawful Council, when the truth of God alone, so soon as it is once come to light, maketh an end of all controversies; and assuredly it is effectual enough to appease all discord when the Spirit beareth the chief sway; because he is again a fit governor, as well to moderate their tongues who must speak before others as to keep the rest under obedience, that they be not too much addicted to themselves and wedded to their own wills, but that, laying away stubbornness, they may show themselves obedient to God. Neither is it to be doubted but that there was some few which would not yield, as it falleth out in a great assembly; yet the truth of God had the upper hand, so that the silence whereof Luke speaketh was a manifest testimony of common obedience. And this was no small moderation in Peter, in that having suffered every one to say for himself what he could, he deferred his judgment (lest it should be prejudicial to others) so long, until the question had been thoroughly discussed to and fro. − <\/p>\n They heard Barnabas and Paul. We may gather by these words that they were not heard with silence before.: For seeing that the more part was persuaded that they did wickedly admit the profane Gentiles into the Church, there should nothing which they should have said have been patiently received until this false opinion were corrected and reformed; but all should have been taken at the worst. We see what a poison displeasure conceived for no cause is, which doth so possess men’s minds, that it stoppeth the way, so that the truth can never have en, trance. Hereby we learn how true that saying is, All things are sound to the sound, ( Tit 1:15<\/span>,) for there is nothing so wholesome but corrupt affection do turn the same into that which is hurtful. And to this end tendeth the narration made by Paul and Barnabas, that they may show and prove that God doth allow their apostleship among the Gentiles; forasmuch as it was ratified and confirmed by miracles, which are, as it were, certain seals thereof. − <\/p>\n (12) And gave audience to Barnabas and Paul.<\/strong>The leaders of the Church had clearly reserved their part in the debate to the last, and the two Apostles of the Gentiles were now called on to repeat more publicly what they had already narrated to the Apostles and elders (Act. 15:4<\/span>). It was, perhaps, with a special view to the character of their hearers that they laid stress on the signs and wonders which had attested Gods acceptance of their work (Mat. 12:38<\/span>; Mat. 16:1<\/span>; 1Co. 1:22<\/span>). Miracles had been wrought among the Gentiles as freely as among the Jews, and those who wrought them, unless they were casting out devils by Beelzebub (and the Judaisers appear to have shrunk from that charge), must have been sent by God (Joh. 3:2<\/span>; Joh. 9:31-33<\/span>).<\/p>\n 12<\/strong>. <\/strong> Kept silence<\/strong> Hushed, <\/em> not from the tumult of debate, as some commentators think; nor by the power of Peter’s speech, as others; but hushed from eager expectation of what the Antiochian ambassadors will say, and held silent by the thrilling interest of their narrative. Barnabas here, by local propriety, takes precedence, as also in the letter of the Council, (Act 15:25<\/span>,) just as James takes precedence of Peter in Gal 2:9<\/span>. Yet it no doubt is true that Jerusalem never so expanded her soul as to take in the greatness of Paul’s apostolate. <\/p>\n Miracles and wonders<\/strong> The tale of these two hardy itinerants could not but possess all the novelty and power of romance to their listening ears. For a brief hour, at least, they stood upon the high platform of Jesus Himself, and their horizon extended into the breadth of his commission, “Go into all the world.” For a moment they realized that Christianity was to become a universal religion by shedding Judaism from its back.<\/p>\n ‘And all the gathered crowd kept silence; and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they rehearsed what signs and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles through them.’<\/p>\n Peter’s words had moved them all to silence. Living in Jerusalem they had not really been faced with the heart of matters like this before. They must mostly have recognised the truth of what Peter had said, and that, of course, he was right, but they had not previously had to face up to its implications. They had gone on living as Jews because that is what they were. They had been brought up to it. And they would go on living like it. But they had not stopped to consider whether salvation was possible without it.<\/p>\n Then they continued to listen as Barnabas and Paul (in Jerusalem it was Barnabas who had the greater status, and probably spoke first) went through in detail what God had wrought through them, and the great signs and wonders that He had done. These signs and wonders would be seen as demonstrating His full approval. And they told them all that had happened among the Gentiles, and explained how many of them had responded to Christ and were now worshippers of the living God through Him, even in places where there was no synagogue. Then they explained how they now met in their own groups under elders and worshipped God continually, with the Holy Spirit active among them. They had formed ‘churches’. The full story of God’s glorious activity was being explained so that all might know the facts for themselves.<\/p>\n Act 15:12<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>Then all the multitude kept silence,<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> St. Peter’s speech silenced all the multitude, and the zealots had nothing to reply to such clear and convincing arguments. The whole body of the assembly, therefore, were then disposed patiently to attend to what Paul and Barnabas thoughtfit to communicate to them, concerning the wonders and miracles which God had enabled them to do among the Gentiles; which was a plain confirmation that God had sent them, and approved of their attempt to convert such persons, though they were not circumcised, nor subject to the burden of the Mosaic law. <\/p>\n Act 15:12<\/span> . The result of this speech was that the whole assembled multitude ( ) was silent<\/em> , so that thus a new did not begin, and the agitation of the opponents was set at rest. A happy beginning for the happy issue. Now Barnabas and Paul could without contradiction confirm the view of Peter by the communication of their own apostolic experiences among the Gentiles,<\/p>\n Barnabas first<\/em> , on account of his older and closer relation to the church. Comp. on Act 15:25<\/span> .<\/p>\n . ] Comp. generally also Rom 15:19 ; 2Co 12:12<\/span> , hence so much the less improbable (Zeller).<\/p>\n Chapter 49<\/p>\n Prayer<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Almighty God, today we bury the year on which we entered with Christian hope. The year has run its course. As coming from thee, and giving unto us opportunities of service and growth and sacrifice, we may say, “Well done, good and faithful servant!” The year was thine, thou didst give it unto us; we have written across its face pur daily record. To-night the year goes back again to thee a blighted thing. The judgment is thine; we would the year might, in many a day, be utterly forgotten, but thou dost claim the days; thou dost turn over the leaves of our time, and peruse the record, line by line, and thou dost write upon our work the judgment that is righteousness. We will not hold up the year to thee in a spirit of defiance; we will point to it with a trembling finger because of a misgiving heart; and over every page of the writing we will say so far as our tears will permit us “God, be merciful to us sinners!” We are a year nearer to thee; mayhap we are a year farther from thee. Thou dost make us old before we know it; thou dost silently scatter the snow of old age upon our head, and we awake to behold the winter’s white. Thou art carrying out thy purposes throughout all the ages. Thou dost not live in days and moments, in years and centuries thou breathest eternity, thou dwellest in one perpetual now,<\/em> thou stretchest thy hand from everlasting to everlasting, and our duration is but as a dying cloud in thy sight. We will remember the years of the right hand of the Most High. Through Christ Jesus our living Lord, we will ask to find rest in the pavilion of God’s eternity. Spare us yet a little while, that we may recover strength to say some better prayer, and sing some sweeter hymn, before we are gathered to our fathers. Thou dost not take away the race of men as with a flood; but man by man, one by one here one, there one so that the individual taken does not seem to be so much; yet when the year’s death tale is told, behold how many empty places there are, and how many answer not when the life, roll is called ov. Thus thou dost work silently in the night-time, and in unexpected hours, so that we know not when the Lord will come: at the cock-crowing, at the fuller dawn, in the shining midday, in the deep night. Thou dost keep us in this ignorance, that we may be also kept in keen watchfulness, so that when the Lord cometh we may be ready to enter with him into his house. As for the year, the Lord pity it. The work has been clumsily done; our prayers have not all gone to heaven, because they did not all come from the heart. Some deep graves have been dug, and the stone work and the cunning masonry cannot prevent the certain corruption of the flesh. Plant thou Gospel flowers upon human graves, and they will delight and soothe us in the time of impatience and passion. Thou hast made some widows and some fatherless, and some thou hast bereaved of all; so that the year shall never be mentioned but with it there will come the moan of a hollow wind. “Oh, dreary year, worst of all, blackest of all,” some will say. Others bless thee for it; they never saw such flowers as it has grown. They never knew the mountains were so high before; they never saw the sea and the river throb with so many millions of silvery spangles; the whole year has been a breath from heaven business has been success, health has become consolidated strength, and sleep has been as a renewal of life. They will remember the year, and bless it. Now, Lord, if we may see the dawn of another year, may we this time try as we never tried before to know thy will, and to do it all. We would enter upon it in the name of Christ, Lord of all the years, Saviour of all the ages, Priest of all sinners, Alpha, Omega, first, last in him all things are gathered up in their infinite total. We lay our hand on him, by him we are saved, through him we pray, in him we live, for his sake we forgive as we would be forgiven. Amen.<\/p>\n Apostolic Testimony<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Act 15:12<\/p>\n THAT is an unsatisfactory verse. When Paul speaks we want to know what Paul says. But some men must be their own reporters, for so unusual is their method and tone that it baffles every scribe to catch the one and reproduce the other. That Paul should have made a speech, and that it should be referred to in one brief sentence such as this, considering the gravity and dignity of the subject, cannot be satisfactory. Paul himself goes into the matter; we see, therefore, under Paul’s own sign manual, what he said and what he did. So we turn for the moment from the Acts of the Apostles to the opening verses of Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians. Where Luke contents himself with a summary, Paul passes into minute and instructive detail. Some verses are too condensed; some reports are simple variations of injustice. We do not care for our life to be huddled up in one sentence. By-and-by the master of criticism and detail will take our life to pieces by a just analysis, and will award to every one according to his deeds. We briefly said, “He called and prayed.” It seems from that report as if the man did little or nothing. We do not say that he walked miles, and that when he prayed his heart wept. We deal too roughly with one another, and too summarily. We dismiss life too briefly. Thanks be unto, Heaven that judgment will be a criticism of detail, and not an off-hand pronouncement upon the tragedy of human life.<\/p>\n Paul says he went up to Jerusalem “by revelation.” Then he went up in high temper he was greater than the Jerusalem to which he went If he had gone up to Jerusalem awed by its metropolitan position and fame, he would have hesitated in his speech, and would have picked out right dainty words that could offend no one, but, by subtle flattery, might win the ear of many. In reality Paul went from heaven to Jerusalem, and, descending upon it, it withered into contemptibleness under the majesty of the visions from which he had just turned his eyes. Paul lived in a large world. It was no mere handful of dust upon which he set his foot, and within which he performed the little miracles of his power. In Paul’s view the worlds all belonged to one another. The Lord had not made a countless number of links; the Lord had made a chain of planets, a chain of worlds. Touching one link, he sent a thrill through all the band of the constellations. We have dropped the word “revelation” except on the Sabbath day, when we venture to say it sometimes. We have meaner words such as impression, conviction, feeling, unaccountable desire. These are inoffensive terms; an atheist might use such mock jewelry. The Apostle had no impression, conviction, transient feeling. He said: “I went up by revelation.” God said to him, “Go.” The angels said, “We will go with thee.” It was a great day! “I went up with angel convoys, with banners unfurled by invisible hands, for I knew that the truth was with me, and I was anxious only that Christ’s Cross should be lifted up above cloud and fog and dust, and be seen everywhere as the one way of salvation.” Was Paul then afraid of Jerusalem, and “pillars,” and “men of reputation,” and who spoke ex cathedra<\/em> ? He was twice anointed, yea, with a double unction of the Spirit, so that Jerusalem became but a village to him, and men of illustrious name became brethren and equals. Paul says he was anxious to state the Gospel he had been preaching, so that the leaders of the Church might know exactly what he had been doing. Paul preached privately to them that were of reputation. Could we have heard him then! Speaking to a sympathetic audience, to men who had seen the Lord! They must have thought they were almost looking upon Him again; they had never heard such a voice before. Paul was never so great in any other instance. Speaking from the shrine of revelations, even the mightiest men in the Church but ” seemed<\/em> to be pillars.” Paul had no fear about his Gospel. He said, “I have been preaching to the Gentiles this and that, and I learned my lesson through the Spirit. My one object has been to represent and incarnate our common Master, and to show that he alone can justify the unjust. I have seen that the Gospel is greater than the law, that by superseding it the Gospel abrogates the law, that rites and ceremonies are no longer of any account, but the one thing needful is faith in Christ.<\/em> I have been preaching salvation by Christ; now, brethren, what say you?”<\/p>\n Coming to the point which was in controversy, Paul’s attitude is one which presents many aspects. In the first place he was not ashamed of his Gentile converts. He took Titus with him. The scene that comes before our imagination is that of a man with a bright eye, a glowing face, a tongue eloquent if not in fluency, yet in passion and pointing to a young man (Titus), Paul said, “This is a Gentile convert. He has begun in the Spirit; is he to be made perfect in the flesh?” What does he want with your cuttings and ablutions and ceremonies? Always vindicate your arguments by your converts. If you can produce converts, so that we can see them, they will do more for the Christian cause than can be done upon many minds by the most elaborate and cogent Christian reasoning. Some of us might have our unexpressed wonder, amounting almost to an inexpressible doubt, as to the needfulness and usefulness of Christian missions; but when the other evening I saw in this church and conversed with the gentlemen known as the Malagasy Envoys; when I saw them, considered their history, knew that their ancestry were a degraded and debased people; when I heard their gentle voices, and listened to one of them speaking purely and pathetically our mother tongue; when I heard them say in their own speech that they could follow the preacher whenever he mentioned the words Jesus Christ; when they knew nothing that I said but those two words, and when their hearts throbbed under that music, I wanted no man to argue with me about sending the Gospel to the Gentiles, to the uncircumcised, and to the heathen away out on the sea. The missionary cause said, in effect, “This is the kind of work I want to do the whole world over.” The response to that appeal could only be of one kind instantaneous in its spontaneity, and generous in its self-sacrifice. Upon this rock we stand! We always have our Titus with us! There is he who has been converted. Behold the breadth! behold the length! behold, there is in his heart a spirit of confidence, forgiveness, and Christian hope! Does that man need to be circumcised, baptized; to have any Christian magic performed over him? No! Having begun in the Spirit, he is not to be made perfect in the flesh. Let him stand there not as a proof of the antiquity and necessity of circumcision, but as an illustration of the new creating and justifying power of Christian faith. There were men who wished to have Titus circumcised. Paul, in giving an account of the matter, becomes almost incoherent in his speech; the very ripest scholars are at a loss to put together, in a manner absolutely satisfactory, the almost broken sentences which Paul writes in the second chapter of the Galatians regarding this matter of Titus; in fact, there are not wanting men who have suggested that Titus was actually circumcised. I do not base my opinion upon the mere grammar of the text, which is so indistinct as to be disputed, but I base my conclusion upon Paul, what we have seen of his spirit, character, his whole tone of mind, and it would seem to me to contradict the man and the very purpose of his mission to acknowledge that Titus was circumcised. Who wanted to have the young man circumcised? Paul answers that they were false brethren. How did such men come to have any voice in the matter? Paul answers they crept in privily, unawares. What particular object could they have in insisting upon the young man’s circumcision? Paul answers their object was to spy out our Christian liberty, and to shut us up within the cold iron of the letter. How were such men treated? Paul says, “To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour.” He never paltered with the enemy; the spirit of compromise was not in him when such questions were under consideration. He could be pliant, accommodating, courteous; he could speak other people’s language when they could not speak his. Such was the inspiration that fell upon his spirit that he could eat with the Jew as a Jew, and with the Gentile as a Gentile, plainly declaring that his object was a concession to their want of Christian education. But when this was the question, namely, Shall the Cross of Christ have anything added to it by man’s hands? Shall anything follow the chrism of blood? his answer was the “NO” of all the thunders that ever shook the firmament. He did not refer this case. He did not say” Let the elders and superiors of the nation consider it, and decide for me.” He said, “This is not a question of expediency, but of essential life; and if the Cross of Christ requires the cutting of a knife, or a drop of water, Christ is dead in vain!” Such a man had a Gospel to preach. No wonder that he preached it so as sometimes to be accounted mad.<\/p>\n In this instance Paul illustrates by anticipation a phrase which has become a commonplace to us. We insist upon what we describe as the right of private judgment. That was exactly the doctrine which Paul asserted on this occasion. He speaks of men “who were of reputation”; he also speaks of men “who seemed to be pillars”; he mentions by name men who were in Christ whilst he himself was a persecutor and a blasphemer; he refers to persons in the Church who “seemed to be somewhat” Was he awed by their authority? Did he say, “Hear the Church”? Did he wait for some other man, or number of men, to give him the doctrine of Christ? Speaking to the false brethren, he says, “To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour.” And speaking of those” who seemed to be somewhat,” he said, “Whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man’s person.” They “added nothing to me.” That was a brusque way of adding up and estimating the value of men! Paul said, “You have taught me nothing; you have given me no new light; I see no unfamiliar aspect of the truth in your speech; I do not know that you are more than others!” Where, then, was obedience? Where was submission to the papal authority? Where was the rebuke of individual conscience; and where was the setting aside of private judgment? Here is one man who stands up in the Church, and says, “This is the Gospel which I have received, which I will preach, for which I will live, for which, and in which, I will die,” “I am crucified with Christ; nevertheless, I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.” That was the true assertion of private judgment: not the expression of an individual will, but the expression of a personal loyalty to a living Christ.<\/p>\n Paul showed the true nature of real and enduring unity. In effect, he said: We may be one without seeming to be united. Union is a question of sympathy, and not of form. I will tell you what can be done. There are in the world two distinct classes of men, Jews and Gentiles, called the circumcision and the uncircumcision. There are men to whom circumcision is a king of hereditary rite and observance. There are others to whom it would be an intolerable yoke. Now, let us go, the one to the circumcision, and the other to the uncircumcision; for I know that as this Gospel spreads it will be seen at the last that neither circumcision availeth anything nor uncircumcision. Do not let a man boast of his uncircumcision any more than the Jew should boast of his circumcision. Do not boast that you have not been baptized, no more than any man should boast that he has been plunged into the stream. Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision, neither baptism nor non-baptism, availeth anything, but a new creature. In that sublime faith the Apostles went to their death. So would I say, If your fathers are men who have been baptized, or unbaptized, or who have been accustomed to attend to this ceremony or to that, you may go on with your ministry to the circumcision only be true to the spirit of Christ; and if I have been called to the people of many languages, to odd men, eccentric thinkers, independent personalities, men who repudiate circumcision, and look upon rite and ceremony with contempt, I will also carry out my ministry. The truth will prosper in the long run in proportion as we are faithful to its statement and exposition.<\/p>\n But the counsel could not break up so. We must have something to do that is visible, and that can be assumed by all minds. “Well, then,” said the council unanimously, “one thing shall unite us that we remember the poor.” The poor have ye always with you. So they all the circumcision remembered the poor, and they of the uncircumcision also remembered the poor, and in philanthropy they showed their union in the Lord, who live to redeem the human race! This has been my doctrine, for which I have suffered not a little. I have said to contending theologians and controversialists: “Gentlemen, you will never speculatively agree the more talk the more division. But I will tell you what you can do. You can unite in practical service; you can remember the poor; you can join in carrying out moral and social reformation amongst the people.” Speculative theology divides men; practical philanthropy unites them. Let us unite where we can. A union upon these matters may prepare the way for a better understanding, for ultimate conciliation, and for enduring fellowship. Never inquire into the creed of a needy man. The man is hungry; the creed must be bread.<\/em> When he has eaten his bread you may ask him questions. Again and again I would say to Christian teachers and workers: Begin where you can; do not stand upon technicalities, or insist upon pedantic concessions; but wherever the heart-door is ajar, go in; wherever opportunity is offered, speak the living word or do the helpful deed. Always seek for the centre of union, and always avoid the cause of division or distrust. You would like theological or doctrinal union, and so should I; but where that is simply impossible, we must go in other directions for an initial<\/em> union; and that we may find in being a tongue for the dumb, eyes for the blind, and a tower of refuge for those who have no friend. When the Church is animated by this spirit, she will be surprised to find how many hitherto unknown friends she has, and how many there are who will respond to her philanthropy who cannot pronounce her Shibboleth. Let us be wise in our times, and set high above all party flags bearing mean names the blood-red banner of Calvary, the symbol of reconciliation and security.<\/p>\n 12 Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Ver. 12. Then all the multitude kept silence<\/strong> ] See here the picture of a lawful council, guided by the word and Spirit of God. It was not a Cyclopical assembly, ubi<\/em> , nor as in Alcibiades’ army, where all would be leaders, no learners, &c. Or, as the Jews of this day in their Jeshiboth, or academies, meet to dispute, but talk all together confusedly: the rabbis with their scholars, &c. <\/p>\n 12.<\/strong> ] The multitude (see above) then, and not before, on account of their mutual disputes, being tranquillized by Peter’s speech, quietly received from Paul and Barnabas an account of the seals of signs and wonders<\/em> by which God had stamped the approval of their ministry among the Gentiles. The miracles at Paphos and Lystra would be among the principal of these.<\/p>\n Act 15:12<\/span> . : may mean “became silent,” “itaque antea non tacuerant” (Blass), cf.<\/em> Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses<\/em> , 21, A. and R.V., “kept silence”. : implying a general assembly of the Church; on the word see Act 2:6<\/span> , Act 4:32<\/span> , etc. : imperfect, marking a continuous hearing; the silence and the audience both testified to the effect produced by St. Peter’s words. . ., on the order here and in Act 15:25<\/span> cf.<\/em> Ramsay, St. Paul<\/em> , p. 84. : setting forth in detail; see above on Act 15:3<\/span> , and Act 10:8<\/span> . ., cf.<\/em> Act 14:27<\/span> and Act 15:4<\/span> . In each case the appeal is made to what God had done, and to the further answer to the prayer of Act 4:30<\/span> by the miracles wrought among the Gentiles: it was an answer which a Jewish audience would understand, Joh 3:2<\/span> . The historical truthfulness of Paul and Barnabas thus recounting the facts, and leaving the actual proof of the rightfulness of their method of working to Peter and James, is to Zeller inconceivable an objection sufficiently answered by the consideration that Luke wished to represent not so much the attitude of Paul and Barnabas, but that of the original Apostles to the Gentile-question; and in Jerusalem it was only natural that Peter and James should be the spokesmen.<\/p>\n Acts<\/p>\n THE CHARTER OF GENTILE LIBERTY<\/p>\n Act 15:12 – Act 15:29 <\/strong> .<\/p>\n Much was at stake in the decision of this gathering of the Church. If the Jewish party triumphed, Christianity sank to the level of a Jewish sect. The question brought up for decision was difficult, and there was much to be said for the view that the Mosaic law was binding on Gentile converts. It must have been an uprooting of deepest beliefs for a Jewish Christian to contemplate the abrogation of that law, venerable by its divine origin, by its hoary antiquity, by its national associations. We must not be hard upon men who clung to it; but we should learn from their final complete drifting away from Christianity how perilous is the position which insists on the necessity to true discipleship of any outward observance.<\/p>\n Our passage begins in the middle of the conference. Peter has, with characteristic vehemence, dwelt upon the divine attestation of the genuine equality of the uncircumcised converts with the Jewish, given by their possession of the same divine Spirit, and has flung fiery questions at the Judaisers, which silenced them. Then, after the impressive hush following his eager words, Barnabas and Paul tell their story once more, and clinch the nail driven by Peter by asserting that God had already by ‘signs and wonders’ given His sanction to the admission of Gentiles without circumcision. Characteristically, in Jerusalem Barnabas is restored to his place above Paul, and is named first as speaking first, and regarded by the Jerusalem Church as the superior of the missionary pair.<\/p>\n The next speaker is James, not an Apostle, but the bishop of the Church in Jerusalem, of whom tradition tells that he was a zealous adherent to the Mosaic law in his own person, and that his knees were as hard as a camel’s through continual prayer. It is singular that this meeting should be so often called ‘the Apostolic council,’ when, as a fact, only one Apostle said a word, and he not as an Apostle, but as the chosen instrument to preach to the Gentiles. ‘The elders,’ of whose existence we now hear for the first time in this wholly incidental manner, were associated with the Apostles Act 15:6, and the ‘multitude’ Act 15:12 is most naturally taken to be ‘the whole Church’ Act 15:22. James represents the eldership, and as bishop in Jerusalem and an eager observer of legal prescriptions, fittingly speaks. His words practically determined the question. Like a wise man, he begins with facts. His use of the intensely Jewish form of the name Simeon is an interesting reminiscence of old days. So he had been accustomed to call Peter when they were all young together, and so he calls him still, though everybody else named him by his new name. What God had done by him seems to James to settle the whole question; for it was nothing else than to put the Gentile converts without circumcision on an equality with the Jewish part of the Church.<\/p>\n Note the significant juxtaposition of the words ‘Gentiles’ and ‘people’-the former the name for heathen, the latter the sacred designation of the chosen nation. The great paradox which, through Peter’s preaching at Caesarea, had become a fact was that the ‘people of God’ were made up of Gentiles as well as Jews-that His name was equally imparted to both. If God had made Gentiles His people, had He not thereby shown that the special observances of Israel were put aside, and that, in particular, circumcision was no longer the condition of entrance? The end of national distinction and the opening of a new way of incorporation among the people of God were clearly contained in the facts. How much Christian narrowness would be blown to atoms if its advocates would do as James did, and let God’s facts teach them the width of God’s purposes and the comprehensiveness of Christ’s Church! We do wisely when we square our theories with facts; but many of us go to work in the opposite way, and snip down facts to the dimension of our theories.<\/p>\n James’s next step is marked equally by calm wisdom and open-mindedness. He looks to God’s word, as interpreted by God’s deeds, to throw light in turn on the deeds and to confirm the interpretation of these. Two things are to be noted in considering his quotation from Amos-its bearing on the question in hand, and its divergence from the existing Hebrew text. As to the former, there seems at first sight nothing relevant to James’s purpose in the quotation, which simply declares that the Gentiles will seek the Lord when the fallen tabernacle of David is rebuilt. That period of time has at least begun, thinks James, in the work of Jesus, in whom the decayed dominion of David is again in higher form established. The return of the Gentiles does not merely synchronise with, but is the intended issue of, Christ’s reign. Lifted from the earth, He will draw all men unto Him, and they shall ‘seek the Lord,’ and on them His name will be called.<\/p>\n Now the force of this quotation lies, as it seems, first in the fact that Peter’s experience at Caesarea is to be taken as an indication of how God means the prophecy to be fulfilled, namely, without circumcision; and secondly, in the argumentum a silentio<\/em> , since the prophet says nothing about ritual or the like, but declares that moral and spiritual qualifications-on the one hand a true desire after God, and on the other receiving the proclamation of His name and calling themselves by it-are all that are needed to make Gentiles God’s people. Just because there is nothing in the prophecy about observing Jewish ceremonies, and something about longing and faith, James thinks that these are the essentials, and that the others may be dropped by the Church, as God had dropped them in the case of Cornelius, and as Amos had dropped them in his vision of the future kingdom. God knew what He meant to do when He spoke through the prophet, and what He has done has explained the words, as James says in Act 15:18 .<\/p>\n The variation from the Hebrew text requires a word of comment. The quotation is substantially from the Septuagint, with a slight alteration. Probably James quoted the version familiar to many of his hearers. It seems to have been made from a somewhat different Hebrew text in Act 15:17 , but the difference is very much slighter than an English reader would suppose. Our text has ‘Edom’ where the Septuagint has ‘men’; but the Hebrew words without vowels are identical but for the addition of one letter in the former. Our text has ‘inherit’ where the Septuagint has ‘seek after’; but there again the difference in the two Hebrew words would be one letter only, so that there may well have been a various reading as preserved in the Septuagint and Acts. James adds to the Septuagint ‘seek’ the evidently correct completion ‘the Lord.’<\/p>\n Now it is obvious that, even if we suppose his rendering of the whole verse to be a paraphrase of the same Hebrew text as we have, it is a correct representation of the meaning; for the ‘inheriting of Edom’ is no mere external victory, and Edom is always in the Old Testament the type of the godless man. The conquest of the Gentiles by the restorer of David’s tabernacle is really the seeking after the Lord, and the calling of His name upon the Gentiles.<\/p>\n The conclusion drawn by James is full of practical wisdom, and would have saved the Church from many a sad page in its history, if its spirit had been prevalent in later ‘councils.’ Note how the very designation given to the Gentile converts in Act 15:19 carries argumentative force. ‘They turn to God from among the Gentiles’-if they have done that, surely their new separation and new attachment are enough, and make insistence on circumcision infinitely ridiculous. They have the thing signified; what does it matter about the sign, which is good for us Jews, but needless for them? If Church rulers had always been as open-eyed as this bishop in Jerusalem, and had been content if people were joined to God and parted from the world, what torrents of blood, what frowning walls of division, what scandals and partings of brethren would have been spared!<\/p>\n The observances suggested are a portion of the precepts enjoined by Judaism on proselytes. The two former were necessary to the Christian life; the two latter were not, but were concessions to the Jewish feelings of the stricter party. The conclusion may be called a compromise, but it was one dictated by the desire for unity, and had nothing unworthy in it. There should be giving and taking on both sides. If the Jewish Christians made the, to them, immense concession of waiving the necessity of circumcision, the Gentile section might surely make the small one of abstinence from things strangled and from blood. Similarities in diet would daily assimilate the lives of the two parties, and would be a more visible and continuous token of their oneness than the single act of circumcision.<\/p>\n But what does the reason in Act 15:21 mean? Why should the reading of Moses every Sabbath be a reason for these concessions? Various answers are given: but the most natural is that the constant promulgation of the law made respect for the feelings even if mistaken of Jewish Christians advisable, and the course suggested the most likely to win Jews who were not yet Christians. Both classes would be flung farther apart if there were not some yielding. The general principle involved is that one cannot be too tender with old and deeply rooted convictions even if they be prejudices, and that Christian charity, which is truest wisdom, will consent to limitations of Christian liberty, if thereby any little one who believes in Him shall be saved from being offended, or any unbeliever from being repelled.<\/p>\n The letter embodying James’s wise suggestion needs little further notice. We may observe that there was no imposing and authoritative decision of the Ecclesia, but that the whole thing was threshed out in free talk, and then the unanimous judgment of the community, ‘Apostles, elders and the whole Church,’ was embodied in the epistle. Observe the accurate rendering of Act 15:25 , ‘having come<\/em> to one accord,’ which gives a lively picture of the process. Note too that James’s proposal of a letter was mended by the addition of a deputation, consisting of an unknown ‘Judas called Barsabas’ perhaps a relative of ‘Joseph called Barsabas,’ the unsuccessful nominee for Apostleship in Act 1:23, and the well-known Silas or Silvanus, of whom we hear so much in Paul’s letters. That journey was the turning-point in his life, and he henceforward, attracted by the mass and magnetism of Paul’s great personality, revolved round him, and forsook Jerusalem.<\/p>\n Probably James drew up the document, which has the same somewhat unusual ‘greeting’ as his Epistle. The sharp reference to the Judaising teachers would be difficult for their sympathisers to swallow, but charity is not broken by plain repudiation of error and its teachers. ‘Subverting your souls’ is a heavy charge. The word is only here found in the New Testament, and means to unsettle, the image in it being that of packing up baggage for removal. The disavowal of these men is more complete if we follow the Revised Version in reading Act 15:24 ‘no commandment’ instead of ‘no such commandment.’<\/p>\n These unauthorised teachers ‘went’; but, in strong contrast with them, Judas and Silas are chosen out and sent. Another thrust at the Judaising teachers is in the affectionate eulogy of Paul and Barnabas as ‘beloved,’ whatever disparaging things had been said about them, and as having ‘hazarded their lives,’ while these others had taken very good care of themselves, and had only gone to disturb converts whom Paul and Barnabas had won at the peril of their lives.<\/p>\n The calm matter-of-course assertion that the decision which commended itself to ‘us’ is the decision of ‘the Holy Ghost’ was warranted by Christ’s promises, and came from the consciousness that they had observed the conditions which He had laid down. They had brought their minds to bear upon the question, with the light of facts and of Scripture, and had come to a unanimous conclusion. If they believed their Lord’s parting words, they could not doubt that His Spirit had guided them. If we lived more fully in that Spirit, we should know more of the same peaceful assurance, which is far removed from the delusion of our own infallibility, and is the simple expression of trust in the veracious promises of our Lord.<\/p>\n The closing words of the letter are beautifully brotherly, sinking authority, and putting in the foreground the advantage to the Gentile converts of compliance with the injunctions. ‘Ye shall do well,’ rightly and conformably with the requirements of brotherly love to weaker brethren. And thus doing well, they will ‘fare well,’ and be strong. That is not the way in which ‘lords over God’s heritage’ are accustomed to end their decrees. Brotherly affection, rather than authority imposing its will, breathes here. Would that all succeeding ‘Councils’ had imitated this as well as ‘it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us’!<\/p>\n NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Act 15:12-21<\/p>\n 12All the people kept silent, and they were listening to Barnabas and Paul as they were relating what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles. 13After they had stopped speaking, James answered, saying, “Brethren, listen to me. 14Simeon has related how God first concerned Himself about taking from among the Gentiles a people for His name. 15With this the words of the Prophets agree, just as it is written, 16’After these things I will return, And I will rebuild the tabernacle of David which has fallen, And I will rebuild its ruins, And I will restore it, 17So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord, And all the Gentiles who are called by My name,’ 18Says the Lord, who makes these things known from long ago. 19Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles, 20but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood. 21For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath.”<\/p>\n Act 15:12 “All the people kept silent, and they were listening” Peter’s words had settled the group of leaders. From the context it seems that at this point the two missionaries repeated their review of the mission trip a second time. This time the leadership listened! The Jerome Biblical Commentary (vol. 2, p. 195) believes it was another meeting separate from the church council of Act 15:6-11. I think it is the same meeting.<\/p>\n “Barnabas and Paul” Notice that the names are reversed because this was Barnabas’ home church.<\/p>\n “relating the signs and wonders” The theological purpose of the Pentecostal tongues in Acts is a sign of God’s acceptance, so one wonders whether this particular sign was often repeated as a way of confirmation.<\/p>\n Signs themselves were performed by Jesus (cf. Act 2:22), the Apostles (cf. Act 2:43; Act 3:7; Act 4:16; Act 4:30; Act 5:12), the Seven (cf. Act 6:8; Act 8:6; Act 8:13), and Paul and Barnabas (cf. Act 14:3; Act 15:12). God was confirming His presence and power through the gospel by these signs and wonders. These were further evidence to the Judaizing group that God fully accepted full pagans on the basis of grace alone, through faith.<\/p>\n Act 15:13 “James” This is not the Apostle James because he was killed in Act 12:1-2. This was Jesus’ half-brother who became the leader of the Jerusalem church and author of the NT book of James. He was known as “James the Just.” He was sometimes called “camel knees” because he prayed so often, kneeling. The two main Jerusalem leaders are vocal on this issue (Peter and James). See Special Topic at Act 12:17.<\/p>\n Act 15:14 “Symeon” This is the Aramaic form of Simon, which is Peter (cf. 2Pe 1:1).<\/p>\n “about taking from among the Gentiles a people for His name” This is the universal emphasis of the OT prophets (ex. Isa 2:2-4; Isa 42:6; Isa 45:20-23; Isa 49:6; Isa 52:10). The people of God were always to include both Jews and Gentiles (cf. Gen 3:15; Gen 12:3; Exo 9:16; Eph 2:11 to Eph 3:13).<\/p>\n The phrase “for His name” may be an allusion to Jer 13:11; Jer 32:20 or Isa 63:12; Isa 63:14.<\/p>\n Act 15:15-18 “it is written” This is a free quote from Amo 9:11-12 in the Septuagint. The term “mankind” in Act 15:17 is Edom (the nation) in the Masoretic Text, but the Septuagint has anthropos (mankind). James quotes the Septuagint because in this case it uniquely fits his purpose of expressing the universal nature of God’s promise of redemption.<\/p>\n Notice the promised actions are of YHWH. This is similar to Eze 36:22-38. Notice the number of “I’s”!<\/p>\n This quote from the LXX, which is obviously at variance with the MT, shows that the real issue of faith is not a perfect text, but a perfect God and His plan for mankind. None of us like the textual variants of the OT or NT, but they do not affect believers’ faith in the trustworthiness of Scripture. God has effectively and faithfully revealed Himself to fallen humans! Hand-copied ancient texts cannot be used as an excuse to reject this revelation. See Manfred Brauch, Abusing Scripture, chapter 1, “The Nature of Scripture,” pp. 23-32.<\/p>\n Act 15:16 It is obvious from the context that James chooses and modifies this quotation from the Septuagint to assert the inclusion of the nations. Did he also choose this text because it asserts the destruction of OT Mosaic religion? The New Covenant is radically different.<\/p>\n 1. grace-based, not performance-based (gift not merit)<\/p>\n 2. Messiah-focused, not temple-focused (Jesus is the new Temple)<\/p>\n 3. world-wide in scope, not focused on the Jewish race<\/p>\n These changes would be devastating to a “circumcision party” of believers. Now the chief Apostle (Peter), the converted rabbi Apostle (Paul), and the leader of the Jerusalem church (James) all agree against them, as does the consensus (vote) of the mother church and the mission churches!<\/p>\n Act 15:17 What a wonderful universal statement. But also note the “election” phrase, “all the Gentiles who are called by My name” (cf. Dan 9:19). It denotes a worship experience of some kind (cf. LXX of Deu 28:10; also note Isa 63:19; Jer 14:9).<\/p>\n Act 15:18 The inclusion of the Gentiles has always been God’s plan (cf. Gal 3:26-29; Eph 3:3-6, see Special Topic at Act 1:8). The means of salvation will come from the lineage of King David (cf. Act 15:16; 2Ch 6:33).<\/p>\n Act 15:19 This is James’ conclusion.<\/p>\n Act 15:20 These guidelines were meant to (1) assure table fellowship in mixed churches and (2) enhance the possibility of local Jewish evangelism. These things have nothing to do with the Gentiles’ individual personal salvation! These guidelines were directed at both Jewish sensibilities and pagan worship excesses (cf. Act 15:29; Act 21:25).<\/p>\n The Levitical laws were given to accentuate a distinction (social and religious) between Jews and Canaanites. Their very purpose was disfellowship, but here the purpose is just the opposite. These “essentials” are to help maintain fellowship between believers of two cultures!<\/p>\n There are many Greek manuscript variations related to this Apostolic Decree. Some have two items, three items, or four items. For a full discussion of the options, see Bruce M. Metzger’s A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, pp. 429-434). Most English translations have the four-fold list.<\/p>\n NASB, NRSV,<\/p>\n REB”from fornication”<\/p>\n NKJV, REV,<\/p>\n NET”from sexual immorality”<\/p>\n NJB”from illicit marriages”<\/p>\n It is difficult to know for sure if this prohibition was directed towards<\/p>\n 1. pagan immoral worship practices (i.e., immorality)<\/p>\n 2. Jewish sensibilities about incest (cf. Leviticus 18; see F. F. Bruce, Answers to Questions, p. 43; NJB)<\/p>\n “what is strangled and from blood” Some commentators relate both of these to the Mosaic food laws (cf. Lev 17:8-16). It is, however, possible that “from blood” refers to murder, which is also a major issue in Moses’ writings.<\/p>\n Act 15:21 This verse means<\/p>\n 1. to assure the legalists that the Torah was being taught to Gentiles in all localities or<\/p>\n 2. since there were Jews in every locality, their scruples should be respected so that they may be effectively evangelized (cf. 2Co 3:14-15)<\/p>\n multitude. Greek. plethos. See note on Act 2:6. <\/p>\n gave audience = were listening to. <\/p>\n declaring. Greek. exegeomai. See note on Act 10:8. <\/p>\n what = how many, or how great. Compare Mar 3:8. <\/p>\n miracles = signs. Greek. semeion. App-176. <\/p>\n wonders. Greek. teras. App-176. <\/p>\n 12.] The multitude (see above) then,-and not before, on account of their mutual disputes,-being tranquillized by Peters speech, quietly received from Paul and Barnabas an account of the seals of signs and wonders by which God had stamped the approval of their ministry among the Gentiles. The miracles at Paphos and Lystra would be among the principal of these.<\/p>\n Act 15:12. , narrating) By which very narration the sentiment of Peter was confirmed.<\/p>\n a Generous Conclusion<\/p>\n Act 15:12-21<\/p>\n When their turn came to speak, Paul and Barnabas contented themselves with emphasizing the signs and wonders by which God had set His seal on their words and methods. Would He have done so if they had followed a wrong course? Notice the two prepositions that they used in describing their work. They first told of what God had done in co-operation with them and then of what He had done through or by them, Act 14:27; Act 15:4; Act 15:12. Consider also that remarkable phrase about God bearing witness, Act 15:8. See also Act 14:3 and Heb 2:1-4.<\/p>\n James had a prominent position in the Jerusalem church, because he was the Lords brother and a man of remarkable holiness and prayerfulness. He laid emphasis on the divine program, which moved forward from Jew to Gentile, from the rebuilding of the ruined Tabernacle of David to the seeking of the Lord by the residue of men. The implication was that though Jehovah dwelt in a special manner with His Chosen People, yet the Gentiles would come seeking Him directly and without becoming incorporated with the Jews.<\/p>\n declaring: Act 15:4, Act 14:27, Act 21:19 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Exo 18:1 – God Num 23:23 – What hath Jos 22:33 – the thing 1Sa 14:45 – he hath Psa 31:19 – wrought Act 4:36 – Barnabas Act 15:3 – declaring Act 19:11 – General Act 21:22 – the multitude Rom 1:13 – even Rom 15:18 – which Rom 15:19 – mighty Gal 2:2 – communicated Gal 2:7 – when Gal 2:8 – the same<\/p>\n 2<\/p>\n Act 15:12. The disturbers of verse 5 were quieted by the speech of Peter, which gave Paul and Barnabas an uninterrupted opportunity to report their work among the Gentiles. They proved the righteousness of their work by detailing the miracles God enabled them to perform among the people.<\/p>\n Act 15:12. Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul. The weighty words of Peter produced a marked effect upon the Council; his plain, simple recital disposed even the extreme Jewish party to listen with attention, if not with favour, to the case of the Gentile apostles, who now proceeded to declare how God had blessed their work with the same miraculous signs of His favour as He had done when Peter received the centurion Cornelius into the Church of Christ.<\/p>\n The second speech made in this council, was that of Barnabas and Paul, who declared what miracles God had enabled them to work among the Gentiles, which was an evidence of God’s approbation of the Gentiles, though uncircumcised, and that he was pleased with their adminstration among them. <\/p>\n Hence they conclude very well, that the miracles wrought among the Gentiles, and the Holy Ghost descending upon the Gentiles, was God’s approving testimony, in the case that the believing Gentiles, without circumcision, should find no less acceptance with God than the believing Jews, who were of the circumcision.<\/p>\n Act 15:12-18. Then all the multitude kept silence Having nothing further to object to what had been advanced; and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul Who confirmed Peters reasoning, by declaring what miracles God had wrought among the Gentiles By their ministry; of which, the chief miracle was, that he had amply conferred the gifts of the Holy Spirit on the believing Gentiles, although they were uncircumcised. After they had done speaking, James, the son of Alpheus, one of the apostles, answered those who were for subjecting the Gentiles to the law, by adding, in supplement to Peters reasoning, that the prophets had foretold the conversion of the Gentiles; so that it was always Gods purpose to make them his people. The passage he appeals to, quoting it according to the reading of the Seventy, is Amo 9:11-12; where see the notes. It may be thus paraphrased: After this After the Jewish dispensation expires; I will return To my people in mercy; and will build again the tabernacle That is, the house, or family, of David; which is fallen down Is in a low, degraded state: I will do this by raising from his seed the Christ, who shall erect, on the ruins of his fallen tabernacle, a spiritual and eternal kingdom; that the residue of men And not the Jews alone; might seek after the Lord After an acquaintance with him, and the blessings consequent thereon; and all the Gentiles upon whom my name is called Or who shall be called by my name; who shall be my people. James adds, Known unto God are all his works This the apostle infers from the prophecy itself, and the accomplishment of it. And this conversion of the Gentiles, being known to him from eternity, we ought not to think a new or strange thing. It is observable, he does not speak of Gods works in the natural world, (which would have been nothing to his present purposes) but of his dispensations toward the children of men. Now he could not know these, without knowing the characters and actions of particular persons, on a correspondence with which the wisdom and goodness of those dispensations are founded. For instance, he could not know how he would deal with heathen idolaters, (whom he was now calling into his church,) without knowing there would be heathen idolaters; and yet this was a thing purely contingent, a thing as dependant on the freedom of the human mind as any we can imagine. This text, therefore, among a thousand more, is an unanswerable proof that God foreknows future contingencies, though there are difficulties relating thereto which man cannot solve.<\/p>\n 12. This brief statement of facts had so good an effect upon the multitude, that Barnabas and Paul determined to follow it by a rehearsal of similar facts in the history of their own labors among the Gentiles. (12) “Then all the multitude kept silence, and listened to Barnabas and Paul relating what signs and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles through them.” Their remarks on this occasion were not a repetition of what they had said in the former meeting, when they had set forth “all that God had done with them,” but were confined to the “signs and wonders” by which God had indicated his approbation of their ministry. The reversal of the order in which Luke now habitually names these two brethren indicates that Barnabas, whose name is first, was the first speaker. This gave Paul the closing argument on those events. <\/p>\n 15:12 {6} Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them.<\/p>\n (6) A true pattern of a lawful council, where God’s truth alone reigns.<\/p>\n Barnabas and Paul’s testimony 15:12<\/span><\/p>\n The old order of these two names recurs here. Barnabas, as a respected member of this church (Act 4:36-37; Act 11:22), took the lead in relating the experiences he and Paul had undergone in ministering to Gentiles. Barnabas emphasized the signs and wonders God had performed because these would have persuaded the Jews that God had been at work in their ministry (cf. 1Co 1:22).<\/p>\n "It was a report not of their successes but of how God had acted, and its implication was that by his acts God had revealed his will." [Note: Longenecker, p. 445.] <\/span><\/p>\n Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them. 12. Then all the multitude ] Though the apostles and elders are alone mentioned ( Act 15:6) as coming together, it now appears that the assembly was a large … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 15:12”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-27413","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27413","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=27413"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27413\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=27413"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=27413"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=27413"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"