You're right. There are many verses and contexts that sometimes challenge readers, and also expose lapses in memory and sometimes for properly understanding what is being said. Even the best of intentions can go astray without properly applied forethought.
[Act 15:1, 5-10 KJV] 1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, [and said], Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. ... 5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command [them] to keep the law of Moses. 6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. 7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men [and] brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. 8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as [he did] unto us; 9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
Now, there are those who have tried to argue that Peter was talking about man-made traditions. The context NOWHERE said anything about man-made traditions in relation to Peter's declaration. The focus of the context of that sections of scripture CLEARLY is addressing circumcision AND THE LAW OF MOSES. This is without a doubt, in my mind, an attempt to turn the context on its head, and inset into the text what is not there to try and deflect attention away from the Law of Moses by those who have chosen to venerate it as something that it is not. They choose to ignore the fact that Peter clearly viewed the Law of Moses as a YOKE that neither their fathers nor they could bare.
It seems that the idea of those sectarian pharisees being wrong is an unbearable thought to some; so much so that it drives them to irrational ends of manic denial of what can clearly be gleaned from the text by a Greek 101 student.
Why do you suppose that is....that they would think to present what they think is a scholarly sounding rendition of what simply is not there after having done the age old switcheroo, assuming that they can brow beat all others into a false belief about that section of scripture?
In Acts 15:1, they were wanting to require all Gentiles to becoming circumcised in order to become saved, however, that was never the purpose for which God commanded circumcision, so the problem was that circumcision was being used for a man-made purpose that went above and beyond the purpose for which God commanded it. This means that the Jerusalem Council upheld the Mosaic Law by correctly ruling against that requirement, and a ruling against requiring something that God never commanded should not be mistaken as being a ruling against obeying what God has commanded as if the Jerusalem Council had the authority to countermand God.
In Deuteronomy 30:11-14, it says that the Mosaic Law is not too difficult to obey, so take your pick:
1.) God was right in Deuteronomy 30:11-14 and the Jerusalem Council was wrong in Acts 15:10.
2.) God was wrong in Deuteronomy 30:11-14 and then Jerusalem Council was right in Acts 15:10.
3.) They are not speaking about the same law.
My pick is with 3.) because I've already established that the topic they were discussing was in regard to something that above and beyond what the Mosaic Law required. The Psalms contain extremely high praise, such as with David repeatedly saying that he loved God's law and delighted in obeying it, so if we consider the Psalms to be Scripture and to therefore express a correct view of God's law, then we will share it, as did Paul (Romans 7:22), and will consider the view that the Mosaic Law is a burden that no one can bear to be incompatible with the view that the Psalms are Scripture. Likewise, in 1 John 5:3, to love God is to obey His commandments, which are not burdensome, so interpreting Acts 15:10 as referring to the Mosaic Law is contradicting that verse and would be essentially ruling that Gentiles shouldn't love God.
[Act 15:19-21 KJV] 19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: 20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and [from] fornication, and [from] things strangled, and [from] blood. 21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.
One may ask, "Is that ALL that they were expecting of the Gentile followers? I would say, no, for it only said that they will have done "well." There is indeed still Law that is binding upon us all who are in Christ. What gets some people's britches in a wad is when one dares to point at the Law of Moses in its entirety as something that is no longer binding upon the followers of Christ Jesus. This really is a kick in the shins of some who have chosen to appoint themselves as allegedly upholding the Law of Moses, which they don't. Some have even told me that attempting to live by those laws, they are showing their greater love of Christ, never minding that they, like the scribes and teachers of the Law whom Jesus described as white washed sepulchers, or tombs, filled with dead men's bones, fail miserably, and are even living within intentional disregard of certain of those laws that simply don't work for today, and routinely ignore the Spirit within who is our qualified and ONLY teachers who will never lead us astray.
What a powerful Spirit He is to be able to write upon our hearts His Law, and thus stating that we have no need for any man to teach us. The apostles brought the Gospel to the world, along with many men who since have spoken the word in the hearing of many who were raised up in faith, for faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
I respect their right to believe as they wish, but they will not corrupt what the Lord has shown to so many of us who are not dried up and bitter old men and women seeking whom they may drag down to their level.
Glory to God for His rich mercy and grace toward us, especially me, a fallible man. The Lord is true, and all the rest of us are liars by comparison.
Jr
The four laws listed in Acts 15:19-21 are either an exhaustive list of everything that would ever be required of a mature Gentile believer or they are not. The moment you try to make an exception for other laws is the moment that the moment that these verses no longer make the argument that you want them to make. On the contrary, they excused those four laws in Acts 15:21 by saying that Gentiles would continue to learn about how to obey Moses every Sabbath in the synagogues.
In 1 John 2:6, those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked, and he walked in obedience to the Mosaic Law. Jesus never criticized the Pharisees for obeying the Mosaic Law, but he did criticize them for not obeying it correctly. For example, in Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that tithing was something that they ought to be doing while not neglecting weightier matters of the law of justice, mercy, and faith, so he was not coming against the Mosaic Law, but rather he was calling them to a fuller obedience to it.
In Ezekiel 36:26-27, the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey God's law, so being led by the Spirit is not good justification for refusing to submit to God's law, especially when in Romans 8:4-7, those who walk in the Spirit are contrasted with those who refuse to submit to God's law.
