24<\/strong>. which went out<\/em> ] These words are not represented in the Greek of some MSS., but they seem to give force to the history. The disturbing teachers had come from Jerusalem, but their want of any authority is contrasted strongly with the commission of Judas and Silas ( Act 15:27<\/em><\/span>). The first men went<\/em> of themselves, the new messengers were the choice of the church.<\/p>\n subverting your souls<\/em> ] In N. T. the verb occurs only here and is not found in the LXX. In classical Greek, it is applied mostly to an entire removal of goods and chattels either by the owners or by a plundering enemy. The devastation wrought in the minds of the Gentile converts through the new teaching is compared to an utter overthrow.<\/p>\n saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law<\/em> ] The oldest authorities omit the Greek of these words, which look somewhat like a marginal explanation that has crept into the text, especially as “to keep the law” is an expansion, though of course a correct one, of the statement made in Act 15:1<\/em><\/span>, about the teaching that was given. There circumcision alone is mentioned as the point on which disturbance was created.<\/p>\n to whom we gave no such commandment<\/em> ] The insertion of the italic such<\/em> was made necessary by the presence of the clause “saying, &c.” but if that be omitted, the sentence becomes a more complete disavowal of any connexion with the Judaizing disturbers. ‘To whom we gave no commandment at all.’ So the R. V.<\/p>\n Forasmuch – <\/B>Since we have heard.<\/P> That certain – <\/B>That some, Act 15:1<\/span>.<\/P> Have troubled you with words – <\/B>With doctrines. They have disturbed your minds, and produced contentions.<\/P> Subverting your souls – <\/B>The word used here occurs nowhere else in the New Testament <\/SPAN><\/span> anaskeuazontes. It properly means to collect together the vessels used in a house the household furniture – for the purpose of removing it. It is applied to marauders, robbers, and enemies who remove and bear off property, thus producing distress, confusion, and disorder. It is thus used in the sense of disturbing or destroying, and here denotes that they unsettled their minds – that they produced anxiety, disturbance, and distress by these doctrines about Moses.<\/P> To whom we gave no such commandment – <\/B>They went, therefore, without authority. Self-constituted and self-sent teachers not infrequently produce disturbance and distress. Had the apostles been consulted on this subject, the difficulty would have been avoided. By thus saying that they had not given them a command to teach these things, they practically assured the Gentile converts that they did not approve of the course which those who went from Judea had taken.<\/P> <\/p>\n Verse 24<\/span>. Certain which went out from us<\/B><\/I>] So the persons who produced these doubtful disputations at Antioch, c., had gone out from the apostles at Jerusalem, and were of that Church: persons zealous for the law, and yet, strange to tell, so conscientiously attached to the Gospel that they risked their personal safety by professing it.<\/P> <\/P> To whom we gave no such commandment<\/B><\/I>] As, therefore, they went out from that Church, they should have taught nothing which was not owned and taught by it much less should they have taught in opposition to it.<\/P> <\/p>\n Certain which went out from us; for these false apostles were such as came from Judea, Act 15:1<\/span>, that is, from the church there. It is Satans great policy to divide, that he may rule; he will have at least one share where there is more than one. No such sad divisions as church divisions, when that some of ourselves preach perverse things, as Act 20:30<\/span>. <\/P> Have troubled you with words; as if in the professing of Christianity there would be no salvation unless Judaism be embraced, and circumcision admitted. No greater trouble to a considerate mind, than about the concern of salvation, when they say, Where is thy God? <\/P> Saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law; these they did well put together; for by circumcision they engaged to the observance of the whole law of Moses; and by the decreeing the omission, that whole law of ceremonies is declared void, and of no effect. What truth and unity build up, discord and error pull down. <\/P> <\/p>\n 24-27. Forasmuch as we have heardthat certain which went out from us have troubled you withwords<\/B>without authority or even knowledge of the church atJerusalem, though they belonged to it, and probably pretended torepresent its views. <\/P> subverting your souls<\/B>Suchstrong language is evidently designed to express indignation at thisattempt, by an unauthorized party, to bring the whole ChristianChurch under judicial and legal bondage.<\/P><\/p>\n Forasmuch as we have heard<\/strong>,…. By the report of Paul and Barnabas, who were sent by the church at Antioch to Jerusalem, to acquaint them with the state of their case:<\/p>\n that certain which went out from us<\/strong>; Ac 15:1<\/span><\/p>\n have troubled you with words<\/strong>, or doctrines:<\/p>\n subverting your souls<\/strong>; removing them from the doctrine of grace to another Gospel, and which deserved not the name of a Gospel; and was very destructive to their souls, at least to the peace and com fort of them: this shows what an opinion the apostles, and elders, and members of the church at Jerusalem had of these “judaizing” preachers, and their tenets; they looked upon them as troublers of God’s Israel, and upon their doctrines as subversive of spiritual joy and comfort.<\/p>\n Saying, ye must be circumcised and keep the law<\/strong>; the ceremonial law; the Alexandrian copy, and the Vulgate Latin and Ethiopic versions leave out this clause; [See comments on Ac 15:1]<\/span>,<\/p>\n [See comments on Ac 15:5]<\/span>.<\/p>\n to whom we gave no such commandment<\/strong>: it looks as if these “judaizing preachers” not only pretended to be sent out by the apostles, to preach; but that they had particularly this in their instructions from them, that they should insist upon it, that the Gentiles that were received into the churches, should be circumcised, and be obliged to keep the other parts of the ceremonial law, when they had no such orders from them.<\/p>\n Certain which went from us <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>, Aleph B omit <\/SPAN><\/span>). A direct blow at the Judaizers, put in delicate language (we heard <\/SPAN><\/span>) as if only at Antioch (15:1<\/span>), and not also in Jerusalem in open meeting (15:5<\/span>).<\/P> Have troubled you with words <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). What a picture of turmoil in the church in Antioch, words, words, words. Aorist tense of the common verb <\/SPAN><\/span>, to agitate, to make the heart palpitate (John 14:1<\/span>; John 14:27<\/span>) and instrumental case of <\/SPAN><\/span>.<\/P> Subverting your souls <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). Present active participle of <\/SPAN><\/span>, old verb (<\/SPAN><\/span> and <\/SPAN><\/span>, baggage) to pack up baggage, to plunder, to ravage. Powerful picture of the havoc wrought by the Judaizers among the simple-minded Greek Christians in Antioch.<\/P> To whom we gave no commandment <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). First aorist middle indicative of <\/SPAN><\/span>, old verb to draw asunder, to distinguish, to set forth distinctly, to command. This is a flat disclaimer of the whole conduct of the Judaizers in Antioch and in Jerusalem, a complete repudiation of their effort to impose the Mosaic ceremonial law upon the Gentile Christians. <\/P><\/p>\n Subverting [] <\/SPAN><\/span>. Only here in New Testament, and not found either in the Septuagint or in the Apocrypha. Originally, it means to pack up baggage, and so to carry away; hence, to dismantle or disfurnish. So Thucydides (4, 116) relates that Brasidas captured Lecythus, and then pulled it down and dismantled it [] <\/SPAN><\/span>. From this comes the more general meaning to lay waste, or ravage. The idea here is that of turning the minds of the Gentile converts upside down; throwing them into confusion like a dismantled house. <\/P> We gave no commandment [ ] <\/SPAN><\/span>. The word originally means to put asunder; hence, to distinguish, and so of a commandment or injunction, to distinguish and emphasize it. Therefore implying express orders, and so always in the New Testament, where it is almost uniformly rendered charge. The idea here is, then, “we gave no express injunction on the points which these Judaizers have raised.”<\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “Forasmuch as we have heard,”<\/strong> (epeide ekousamen) “Since we have heard,” or because it has been reliably reported to us at Jerusalem, by Paul, Barnabas, and certain brethren from Antioch in Syria, Act 15:2<\/span>.<\/p>\n 2) “That certain which went out from us,”<\/strong> (hoti tines eks hemon) “That some (certain ones) who went out of our assembly,” of their own accord, without sanction from the church, who went out on their own as freelancers, self-called and self-appointed would-be leaders and teachers, independent isolationists, Act 15:1<\/span>; Act 15:5<\/span>.<\/p>\n 3) “Have troubled you with words,”<\/strong> (etaraksan humas logois) “Have troubled or frustrated you all,” caused division among you all at Antioch, with clever cunning, in contrast with and conflict with sound doctrine, similar to what later occurred in Galatia, Gal 1:6-8<\/span>; 2Co 2:17<\/span>.<\/p>\n 4) “Subverting your souls,”<\/strong> (anaskeuazontes tas psuches humon) “Unsettling your souls,” causing doubts in your minds, 2Co 11:4<\/span>; 2Co 11:13<\/span>, as to pack up, dismantle, and carry away.<\/p>\n 5) “Saying, ye must be circumcised, and keep the law,” <\/strong>in order to be saved or stay saved, Act 15:2<\/span>; Rom 16:17-18<\/span>.<\/p>\n 6) “To whom we gave no such commandment:”<\/strong> (ois ou diesteilametha) “To whom we (the Jerusalem church) did not give a commission, mandate, or commandment at all: They apparently used the name of the Jerusalem church to advance their own name and prominence while outside of Judea, in Antioch of Syria and other areas, Gal 2:4<\/span>; Gal 5:11<\/span>; Tit 1:11-13<\/span>.<\/p>\n − <\/p>\n 24. Certain which went out from us. We see that there was no respect of persons among these holy men, which doth always corrupt sound and right judgments. They confess that there were knaves of their own company; and yet they do no whit flatter them, or, through corrupt favor, incline to cover their error; yea, rather in condemning them freely, they spare not even themselves. And, first, they pluck from their faces that visure [mask] which they had abused, to deceive withal. They boasted that they were privy to the meaning of the apostles. − (144) The apostles reprove them, and condemn them of and for lying in that false pretense, when they utterly deny that they did command any such thing. Again, they accuse them far more sharply, that they troubled the Church and subverted souls. For by this means they bring them in contempt and detestation with the godly, because they cannot be admitted but to their destruction. But false teachers are said to subvert souls, because the truth of God doth edify or build them up, and so this speech containeth a [this] general doctrine, Unless we will willingly have our souls drawn headlong from being any longer temples of the Holy Ghost, and unless we desire their ruin, we must beware of those which go about to lead us away from the pure gospel. That which they say touching the keeping of the law doth only appertain unto ceremonies, though we must always remember, that they did so intreat of ceremonies; that [as if] both the salvation and also the righteousness of men did therein consist. For the false apostles did command that they should be kept, as if righteousness came by the law and salvation did depend upon works. − <\/p>\n (144) − <\/p>\n “<\/p>\n Se apostolorum mentem tenere,” that they knew the mind of the apostles. <\/p>\n (24) Certain which went out from us.<\/strong>The reference is obviously to the teachers (their names are wisely and charitably suppressed) who had appeared at Antioch, as in Act. 15:1<\/span>. St. John, who was present at the Council (Gal. 2:9<\/span>), and who, though he took no part in the debate, may well have had a share in drawing up the letter, uses a like mode of speech, They went out from us, but they were not of us (1Jn. 2:19<\/span>).<\/p>\n Subverting your souls.<\/strong>The Greek verb, literally, turning upside down, <\/em>implies throwing into a state of excitement and agitation. The Gentiles had been unsettled by the teaching of the Judaisers.<\/p>\n And keep the law.<\/strong>Assuming the Epistle of St. James to have been already written, there is something almost like a touch of irony in his repeating the phrase of Jas. 2:10<\/span>. The teachers who bade the Gentiles keep the Law were reminded in that Epistle that they, in their servile respect of persons, were breaking the Law deliberately in one point, and were therefore guilty of all. Putting the two passages together, they bring St. James before us as speaking in the very accents of St. Paul, Thou, therefore, which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? (Rom. 2:21<\/span>.)<\/p>\n To whom we gave no such commandment.<\/strong>The word such is a needless interpolation. What St. James declares is that the teachers had had no commission of any kind from him. The passage is important as throwing light on the nature of a later claim set up by the same party (Gal. 2:12<\/span>).<\/p>\n 24<\/strong>. <\/strong> No such commandment<\/strong> They went out from us <\/em> carrying the weight of their Jerusalemite origin, but with no authority from Jerusalem. So, subsequently, Judaists pretended to be followers of Peter, but with no authority from Peter, (1Co 1:12<\/span>.)<\/p>\n ‘Forasmuch as we have heard that certain who went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, to whom we gave no commandment, it seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose out men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.’<\/p>\n They first of all made clear that those men who had come among them in Antioch and had troubled them had not been sent with any authority from them. They were those ‘to whom we gave no commandment’. They had received no authority or command from the church in Jerusalem and Judaea. They had simply been acting independently on their own authority. Thus anything that they had taught could be disregarded, for it was contrary to the views of the Apostles and the Jerusalem church.<\/p>\n They then expressed their deep regret that those at Antioch had been ‘troubled (stirred up) with words’ and that their ‘souls had been subverted (plundered)’. The expressions are strong. It was a recognition of how deeply affected they knew those at Antioch to have been, and the unnecessary searching of soul that it had unnecessarily caused, and they regretted it.<\/p>\n They then stressed that their message was a united one from the whole body of the church. They assured them that they had ‘come to one accord’. They were all agreed. Sadly it would prove not to be fully true, for there would still be those who through the coming years would fight against the decision, and go round denying it, but it was true of the church as whole. And it was certainly the Apostolic position.<\/p>\n And finally they stressed their total oneness with, and admiration for, ‘Barnabas and Paul’, whom they could call ‘beloved’, and whom they pointed out were men who had ‘hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.’ They were greatly concerned that all should recognise the standing that the two had in the eyes of all the leaders in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n Act 15:24<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>Subverting your souls,<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> Unsettling your minds, <\/em>The word is primarily and properly applied to the removing a vessel from one place to another. <\/em>In a secondary sense, it implies the moving of the mind from one object to another, or unsettling it. When the apostles positively declare that they gave no such commandment <\/em>to the persons who had troubled the converts, this was directly fixing the lie upon them, if they had pretended to use the apostles’ name in imposing their tenets; and, as the matter of fact was known, would be a proper means of weakening their credit, and so render them less capable of doing mischief. <\/p>\n 24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must<\/em> be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such<\/em> commandment: <\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Ver. 24. Subverting your souls<\/strong> ] . Pulling down that which had been set up, unravelling that which had been well knit before. The word signifies unvesselling them, unpacking them (as wares packed up in a vat to be sent beyond sea), scattering them, and bringing all into a confusion. <\/p>\n 24.<\/strong> ] Neander remarks (Pfl. u. L. p. 223, note) that <\/strong> . is a presumption in favour of the reading above: for that these men could hardly have gone out from among the Apostles and elders. But such a supposition is not necessary: implies the church, the of whom they were the , whether be inserted or not.<\/p>\n <\/strong> .<\/strong> ] See ref. Thucyd., where it will be seen that it implies turning up the foundations<\/em> : for Brasidas cleared the ground and consecrated it. Cf. Passow, sub voc.<\/p>\n The words . , inserted in rec. after , are manifestly<\/em> , in my view, an interpolation, from the desire to specify in what particulars these persons had sought to unsettle the souls of the Gentile brethren. The defence of the clause set up by Meyer and De Wette, that if interpolated it must be from Act 15:5<\/span> , not from Act 15:1<\/span> , and that this is improbable, is best answered by observing that in E, one of the principal authorities for the insertion, the <\/strong> after betrays in very fact that the interpolation was<\/em> from Act 15:5<\/span> , as also, but in a less degree, does the . The reasons given by Meyer and De W. why the words should have been omitted<\/em> , the similarity of ending in – and – , or to square it with Act 15:1<\/span> , seem to me nugatory. The former is very improbable, and the latter would have required the preservation of . . The variations<\/em> also in the clause are strong presumptions against it. The persons to whom the epistle was addressed would very well know what<\/em> it was that had disturbed their minds, and the omission of formal mention of it would be natural, to avoid prominent cause of offence to the Jewish converts by an apparent depreciation of circumcision and the observance of the law.<\/p>\n Act 15:24<\/span> . On the similarity of this verse in phraseology to St. Luke’s preface, Luk 1:1<\/span> , Schwegler, Zeller, Weiss, Friedrich, Hilgenfeld, and others have commented. But, after all, in what does the likeness consist? Simply in the fact that here as there we have introducing the antecedent clause, and the subsequent clause. Friedrich (p. 46) considers this as too striking to be a matter of chance, but strangely he writes each of the two passages as if they commenced with the same word, see below on Act 15:28<\/span> . This word is a curious one, and is only found in Luk 1:1<\/span> (not in LXX), but there is no authority for reading it in the passage before us in Acts. Nsgen, Apostelgeschichte<\/em> , p. 45, refers to instances of a similar formula and phraseology as in use in Jewish writings, cf.<\/em> Jost, Jd. Gesch.<\/em> , i., 284. , cf.<\/em> for the expression Gal 2:12<\/span> . ., see critical notes. cf.<\/em> Gal 1:7<\/span> ; Gal 5:10<\/span> . may mean with words only, words without true doctrine. , “subverting,” A. and R.V.; not in LXX, and only here in N.T., in classical Greek, primarily colligere vasa<\/em> , to pack up, and so to carry away: or to dismantle a place; to destroy, overthrow, and so trop. as in text of breaking treaties (Polyb.), of destroying an opponent’s arguments (Arist.). Nsgen and Felten note it amongst the non-Lucan words in the decree, so , , , , , , . : “to whom we gave no commandment,” R.V., omitting “such,” not in text, and weakens; in Tyndale, Cramner, and Genevan Version; cf.<\/em> Gal 2:12<\/span> , and Act 21:20<\/span> ; only used once in passive in N.T., Heb 12:20<\/span> , often in LXX in middle voice, meaning to warn, cf.<\/em> also its meaning in Jdt 11:12 with Mar 5:43<\/span> , etc.<\/p>\n have. Omit. <\/p>\n subverting = unsettling. Greek. anaskeuazo. Only here, and not in Septuagint <\/p>\n your souls = you (emph.) Greek. psuche. App-110. <\/p>\n saying . . . law. The texts omit. <\/p>\n gave no such commandment = commanded it not. <\/p>\n 24.] Neander remarks (Pfl. u. L. p. 223, note) that . is a presumption in favour of the reading above: for that these men could hardly have gone out from among the Apostles and elders. But such a supposition is not necessary: implies the church, the of whom they were the , whether be inserted or not.<\/p>\n .] See ref. Thucyd., where it will be seen that it implies turning up the foundations:-for Brasidas cleared the ground and consecrated it. Cf. Passow, sub voc.<\/p>\n The words . , inserted in rec. after , are manifestly, in my view, an interpolation, from the desire to specify in what particulars these persons had sought to unsettle the souls of the Gentile brethren. The defence of the clause set up by Meyer and De Wette,-that if interpolated it must be from Act 15:5, not from Act 15:1, and that this is improbable,-is best answered by observing that in E, one of the principal authorities for the insertion, the after betrays in very fact that the interpolation was from Act 15:5, as also, but in a less degree, does the . The reasons given by Meyer and De W. why the words should have been omitted,-the similarity of ending in – and -,-or to square it with Act 15:1, seem to me nugatory. The former is very improbable,-and the latter would have required the preservation of . . The variations also in the clause are strong presumptions against it. The persons to whom the epistle was addressed would very well know what it was that had disturbed their minds, and the omission of formal mention of it would be natural, to avoid prominent cause of offence to the Jewish converts by an apparent depreciation of circumcision and the observance of the law.<\/p>\n Act 15:24. , have troubled) They do not spare those who had introduced the doubts. The same verb occurs, Gal 5:10, He that troubleth you, and concerning the same subject. We ought to observe the simplicity, gravity, and brevity of the epistle.-) A verb never occurring in the LXX., and in the New Testament employed in this passage alone. The Glossary in Pricus explains it, destroys, , . Hesychius explains , as . Comp. therefore , ye are removed, Gal 1:6. [This is a thing which causes immense mischiefs.-V. g.]<\/p>\n that certain: Jer 23:16, Gal 2:4, Gal 5:4, Gal 5:12, 2Ti 2:14, Tit 1:10, Tit 1:11, 1Jo 2:19 <\/p>\n Ye must: Act 15:1, Act 15:9, Act 15:10, Gal 2:3, Gal 2:4, Gal 6:12, Gal 6:13 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Act 15:5 – That it Act 15:19 – that Act 21:20 – and they Rom 16:17 – cause 1Co 7:18 – being 2Co 11:13 – false Gal 1:7 – but Gal 2:14 – why Gal 5:2 – that Gal 5:10 – but Gal 6:17 – let 2Ti 3:8 – resist Tit 3:11 – is subverted<\/p>\n 4<\/p>\n Act 15:24. We have heard . . . went out from us. This shows that the disturbers were acting without the knowledge and consent of the church in. Jerusalem. The original word for subverting is defined by Thayer, “to unsettle.” The agitation of these Juda-izers confused the minds of the Gentile Christians.<\/p>\n Act 15:24. Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls. These zealots for the old law and the Jewish rites came evidently from Jerusalem, the headquarters of the new faith, and had given out that they were commissioned by the leaders of the Church there. Now the assembled Council, in their authoritative decree which they sent round, openly disavowed these disturbers of the Gentile churches.<\/p>\n Saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law. These words are omitted in most of the older MSS. They are doubtless an interpolation by some early scribe, who desired to specify in detail the points especially selected by these Jerusalem Jews in their endeavour to unsettle the minds of these Gentile Christians. They are taken, of course, from Act 15:5 of this chapter; their omission, however, in no way detracts from the force of the present passage.<\/p>\n Act 15:24-27. Forasmuch as we have heard, &c. The simplicity, weightiness, and conciseness of this letter, are highly observable; that certain which went out from us That is, pretending to be sent out by us; have troubled you with words By requiring you to be circumcised and to keep the law; subverting your souls That is, unsettling your minds; to whom we gave no such commandment No commission to make use of our names, or teach any such doctrine. It seemed good unto us After duly considering the matter in a general assembly, called for the purpose; to send chosen men unto you Men of our own body; with our beloved Barnabas and Paul Whom we greatly respect, as men that have hazarded their lives In repeated instances, and with great courage; for the name of our Lord Jesus Such a testimony as this to the reputation of Paul and Barnabas was by no means a mere compliment, but exceedingly prudent, as it might tend to remove the prejudices conceived against them by the Jewish converts or teachers, who, as appears from many passages of the epistles, endeavoured as much as possible to lessen the character of these apostles. It would also be an evidence of the harmony subsisting between them and those of the circumcision. We have sent therefore Judas and Silas Men that have heard our debates, and are perfectly acquainted with our judgment and decision. This precaution of sending approved witnesses along with the copy of the decree, which was delivered to Barnabas and Paul, was intended to prevent the zealous and bigoted Judaizers from affirming that the letter did not contain a just account of what was determined by the church. For these chosen men, having assisted at the council, would not only tell the brethren of Antioch the same things by mouth, but attest that it was the unanimous opinion of the whole assembly.<\/p>\n See notes on verse 22<\/p>\n Verse 24 <\/p>\n Certain which went out from us; as is related Acts 15:1.<\/p>\n 15:24 {10} Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which {k} went out from us have troubled you with words, {l} subverting your souls, saying, [Ye must] be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no [such] commandment:<\/p>\n (10) The council of Jerusalem concludes that the ones who trouble men’s consciences are they who teach us to seek salvation in any other means than in Christ alone, apprehended by faith, no matter where they come from, and whoever they pretend to be the author of their calling.<\/p>\n (k) From our congregation.<\/p>\n (l) A borrowed type of speech taken of those who pull down that which was built up: and it is a very common metaphor in the scriptures, to say “the Church is built”, for “the Church is planted and established”.<\/p>\n The men who had come to Antioch from Jerusalem advocating circumcision (Act 15:1) had no authorization to do so from the Jerusalem church (Act 15:24). They spoke on their own authority. The church in Jerusalem had reached a unified opinion on the issue at hand (Act 15:25). The apostles presented Barnabas and Paul as men the saints in Jerusalem held in the highest regard (Act 15:25-26). The church leaders had sensed the Holy Spirit’s control in the decision they had reached (Act 15:28). [Note: On the differences between the Old Uncial and the Western textual readings of <\/span>Act 15:29, see C. K. Barrett, "The Apostolic Decree of Acts 15:29," Austrialian Biblical Review 35 (1987):50-59.] <\/span><\/p>\n "It should be noted that the letter traced the unanimity of the decision to the action of the Holy Spirit (Act 15:28), even though the Spirit was not mentioned previously as intervening in the proceedings. This is the way in which the Spirit usually works in the church. There need not be miraculous displays to indicate his direction. Spirit-filled people can detect his presence through the harmony which prevails when men are responsive to his will." [Note: Kent, p. 128.] <\/span><\/p>\n Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, [Ye must] be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no [such] commandment: 24. which went out ] These words are not represented in the Greek of some MSS., but they seem … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 15:24”<\/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-27425","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27425","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=27425"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27425\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=27425"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=27425"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=27425"}],"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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: Abbott’s Illustrated 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":"