Acts chapter 15

Our understanding of this passage is assisted by comparing it with the passage in Gal 2 that describes the same event:
Gal 2:1-10
Then after an interval of fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along also.
It was because of a revelation that I went up; and I submitted to them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but I did so in private to those who were of reputation, for fear that I might be running, or had run, in vain.
But not even Titus, who was with me, though he was a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised.
But it was because of the false brethren secretly brought in, who had sneaked in to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage.
But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel would remain with you.
But from those who were of high reputation (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)—well, those who were of reputation contributed nothing to me.
But on the contrary, seeing that I had been entrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision, just as Peter had been of the circumcision
(for He who effectually worked for Peter in his apostleship to the circumcised effectually worked for me also to the Gentiles),
and recognizing the grace that had been given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, so that we might go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.
They only asked us to remember the poor—the very thing I also was eager to do.

BrotherJJ said:

Council at Jerusalem

Acts 15:
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.

(MY NOTE: Some believing Pharisees show up & say. Gentile believers must get circumcised & keep the law of Moses.)

6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.

(MY NOTE: After a heated debate & hearing from the Jerusalem assembly apostles & elders)

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.

(MY NOTE: Peter stands & revisits his trip to Cornelius house where, as he spoke, they believed)

8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;

(MY NOTE: God knew their heart & baptized the gentiles with His Holy Spirit)

9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

(MY NOTE: Because of their FAITH they were purified/baptized with the H/S)

11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

(MY NOTE: Peter say's the gentiles were saved by grace thru faith, void of Mosaic law keeping)

Click to expand...

People can obey the Mosaic Law and become circumcised for purposes other than trying to earn our salvation, so two groups can disagree about whether Gentiles should become circumcised for the purpose of becoming saved, and the Jerusalem Council can making a ruling about the correct means of being saved in favor of one of those groups, all while everyone there being in agreement that Gentiles should obey the Mosaic Law and become circumcised.

Case in point, in Acts 15:1, there was a group of men who came down from Judea who wanted to require all Gentiles to become circumcised according to the customs of Moses in order to become saved, however, that was never the purpose for which God commanded in circumcision, so they were opposed in Acts 15:5 by a group of believers from among the Pharisees who agreed that Gentiles should obey the Law of Moses and become circumcised, but they did not agree that circumcision was for the purpose of becoming saved.

In Acts 15:7, Peter said that God made a choice that the Gentiles should hear the Gospel and believe. In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Mosaic Law was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is an integral part of the way to hear the Gospel of believe. Furthermore, in Matthew 24:12-14, Jesus prophesied that the Gospel would be proclaimed to all nations, and in Matthew 28:16-20, he commissioned his disciples to make disciples of all nations, teaching the nations everything that he had taught them. In addition, in Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Mosaic Law is the way to believe in what Jesus accomplished through the cross (Acts 21:20).

In Acts 15:8-9, God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit as he did to us, and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith. In Deuteronomy 30:1-8, it prophesies about a time when the Israelites would return from exile, God would circumcise their hearts, and they would return to obedience to the Mosaic Law. In Ezekiel 36:26-27 and Jeremiah 31:33, the context is in regard to the New Covenant and the Israelites returning from exile, where God is circumcising our hears by means of the Spirit, where he will takes away our hearts of stone, gives us hearts of flesh, and sends His Spirit to lead us in obedience to the Mosaic Law, and where He will put the Mosaic Law in our minds and write it on our hearts. In Romans 2:25-29, the way to recognize that a Gentile has a circumcised heart is by observing their obedience to the Mosaic Law and circumcision of the heart is a matter of the Spirit, which is in contrast with Acts 7:51-53, where those who have uncircumcised hearts resist the Spirit and do not obey the Mosaic Law. In addition, in Romans 8:4-14, those who are led by the Spirit are sons of God, which is in contrast with those who have minds set on the flesh, who are enemies of God, who refuse to submit to the Mosaic Law.

The Bible also frequently connects obedience to the Mosaic Law with faith, such as in Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that faith is one of the weightier matters of the Mosaic Law. In Romans 3:31, our faith does not abolish our need to obey the Mosaic Law, but rather our faith upholds it. In Romans 1:5, we have received grace in order to bring about the obedience of faith. In James 2:17-18, he said that faith with out works is dead and that he would show his faith by his works. In Revelation 14:12, those who kept faith in Jesus are the same as those who kept God's commandments. In Hebrews 3:18-19, unbelief is equated with disobedience. In Numbers 5:6, disobedience is described as breaking faith.

So Acts 15:7-9, every aspect of Gentiles hearing and believing the Gospel, of being given the Holy Spirit, of there being no distinction between them and us, and of having cleansed their hearts by faith is in support of Gentiles keeping the Mosaic Law, and in support of the group of Pharisees among the believers in Acts 15:5. In Acts 15:11, it says that we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will, so it makes is clear that the ruling in Acts 15:10 was in regard to an incorrect means of salvation, and against the group of men from Judea in Acts 15:1. No one there made the case before the Jerusalem Council that Gentiles shouldn't obey the Mosaic Law or become circumcised. In Psalms 119:29-30, David wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Mosaic Law, and he chose the way of faithfulness, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith. In Ephesians 2:8-10, we are new creations in Christ to do good works, so while it denies that we can earn our salvation by obeying the Mosaic Law lest anyone should boast, doing good works in obedience to it is nevertheless intrinsically part of being saving from not doing good work.

In Deuteronomy 30:11-20, God said that the Mosaic Law is not too difficult for us to obey and that obedience brings life and a blessing while disobedience bring death and a curse, and in 1 John 5:3, to love God is to obey His commandments, which are not burdensome, so if Acts 15:10-11 had been ruling that the Mosaic Law was a heavy burden that no one could bear rather than against an incorrect means of salvation, then they would have been in direct disagreement with God, they would have been ruling that Gentiles should be cursed rather than blessed, and they would have been ruling that Gentiles shouldn't love God. In addition, Christ spent his ministry teaching his followers how to obey the Mosaic Law by word and by example, so if they had done as you suggest, then they would have been ruling that Gentiles shouldn't follow Christ.

Furthermore, the Psalms express an extremely positive view of the Mosaic Law, such as with David repeatedly saying that he loved it and delighted in obeying with it, so if we view the Psalms as being Scripture and as therefore expressing a correct view of the Mosaic Law, then we will share it, as Paul did (Romans 7:22), while viewing the Mosaic Law as being a heavy burden that no one could bear is incompatible with the view that the Psalms are Scripture. Furthermore, a negative view of the Mosaic Law should not be superimposed onto people who consider the Psalms to be Scripture, such as the NT authors and those in the churches delighting in not having to obey it.

23 And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia.

(MY NOTE: Jerusalem assembly decision: Send letters to gentile city churches)

24 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:

(MY NOTE: Peter, James & John tell gentile believers they DON'T have to be CIRCUMCISED or KEEP MOSAIC LAWS)

28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;

(MY NOTE: After prayerful consideration Jerusalen assembly leadership sends letters to gentile churches with these rules: see next verse)

29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

(MY NOTE: The above Holy Spirit inspired instructions/rules are sent to the gentile assemblies. NOTE: NO mentioned requirement of Sabbath observance.)

31 Which when they had read, they rejoiced for the consolation

(MY NOTE: The NT church read the letter & REJOICED!)

Bible source link: King James version

Believers (Jew or Gentile) Rejoice! You're not required to get circumcised OR keep the law of Moses to be saved!

Click to expand...

In Acts 15:21, the justification for the letter was the expectation that Gentiles would continue to learn about how to obey Moses by hearing him taught every Sabbath in the synagogues, so what was said in that letter should not be understood as being contrary the justification for it. The Jerusalem Council were not enemies of God, so they should not be interpreted as speaking against obeying Him, and even if that is what they were doing, they didn't have the authority to countermand God. The bottom line is that we must obey God rather than man, so we should be quicker to disregard everything that the Jerusalem Council said than to disregard anything that God has commanded. In Deuteronomy 13:4-5, the way that God instructed His people to determine that someone is a false prophet who was not speaking for Him was if they taught against obeying the Mosaic Law, so if the Jerusalem Council had done as you suggest, then those who reject what the Jerusalem Council said and what you said as being the words of false prophets would be acting in accordance with what God has instructed His people to do.

You're under grace, not law (Rom 6:14)

You've been delivered from the law's sting. (Rom 7:6, 1 Cor 15 55-56)

Click to expand...

In Romans 7:12-25, Paul said that he delighted in obeying the Mosaic Law and that he served it with his mind, but contrasted that with the law of sin that was holding him captive, that was working within his members to cause him not to do the good of obeying the Mosaic Law that he wanted to do, and that he served with his flesh. In Romans 7:6, Paul spoke about being set free from a law that held us captive, which should not be interpreted as referring to the Mosaic Law that he delighted in obeying, but rather it should be interpreted as referring to being set free the law of sin that he described as holding him captive. Likewise, in regard to Romans 6:14, Paul should not be interpreted as delighting in sin having dominion over him, or in 1 Corinthians 15:55-56 as delighting in the sting of death and the power of sin, or in Romans 7:5, as delighting in stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death, but rather these verses are referring to the law of sin. We have been set free from the law of sin in order to be free to obey the Law of Moses, not the other way around.

A few observations in Acts 15:

- 15:1 the debate was whether a person could be saved apart from being circumcised according to the "custom" of Moses.
- 15:5 now in Jerusalem to discuss the matter, believing Pharisees say it is "necessary" (likely the strong sense of this word meaning it is binding, it must be done) to circumcise the gentile believers and (likely an ascensive stress meaning "namely" drawing very close coordination - IOW circumcise them namely or meaning...) meaning command them to keep Moses' Law. IOW circumcision is the main issue.
- 15:7 Peter explains that God chose him to proclaim the word/message of the Good News [of Christ] to the Gentiles so they could hear & believe > that God had acknowledged the Gentile believers by giving them the Holy Spirit & had cleansed the believing Gentiles' hearts. So, circumcision had not been an issue in Peter's work with the Gentiles.

The debate so far is whether or not the Gentiles needed to be circumcised pursuant to Mosaic Law in order to be saved in the sense of turning to God (15:19). The council determined that it was not necessary & that they should not put a yoke upon the necks of these Gentiles that neither the Jewish fathers nor their descendants could carry (15:10). Some knew that circumcision & keeping Mosaic Law was not the issue but faith in YHWH's Messiah was necessary to be saved (15:11). The council ultimately agreed & James made it clear that this was pursuant to what YHWH was obviously doing already in accordance with Scripture (15:13-19).

The point is that Paul, Peter, and James at minimum knew that Salvation was by faith in Messiah. Keeping Moses's Law was another discussion. The other point is that the restrictions the Jerusalem counsel did institute were pursuant to Mosaic Law. So, if Moses' Law was not important for whatever reasons, then we would not expect to see these restrictions & I doubt Paul would have agreed to them.

Then, and I know Soyeong has brought this out at points, but 15:21 needs to be dealt with. I've seen it explained a couple different ways, but the clearest reading is that these Gentiles turning to God would likely be in synagogues ("in every city" - Thank you God for the Dispersion) every Sabbath (so they'd likely learn about Sabbath & be observing it???) hearing Moses proclaimed and would learn more about what God had commanded through Moses. And all the other things concerning what had been fulfilled in Christ would be getting worked out over time as is evident in the NC Writings. And then the destruction of the Temple would come and even more would be made clear as to what needed to be observed and not. So, there was an infancy to maturity situation not only for individual believers but for the corporate Ekklesia.

If this is not what 15:21 means, then what's your take?

Also, it's simple to say that we're under the Law of Christ, which is to Love, but Paul for one tells us that Love is a summary statement for Torah (Romans 13:9). That means to me that if one doesn't know God's moral standards from Torah, then we should be able to question whether one really knows if they're loving God, neighbor, and one another as Christ loved us.

BrotherJJ said:

Here's my take:

Sabbath was a contract between God & 1 nation, Israel (Ex 19) Having said that, God did rest from His work in Gen.

Christians always worshipped on the 1st day of the week (Sunday). Having said that, Peter James & other Jewish law zealots worshipped both days.

1.) Jesus was resurrected on Sunday:

Jn 20:1 “Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance.”

Mk 16:9-10 “When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons.”

2.) Jesus appeared to the disciples on Sunday:

Jn 20:19 “On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!"

(MY NOTE: The Jews were following the Roman method of days in Jesus’ times. Morning to morning refer to one day. In the Old Testament it was evening to evening. Otherwise, John would have written in the evening of the second day.)

3.) A week later Jesus appears to His disciples again on Sunday.

Jn 20:26 “A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!"”

4.) Pentecost (The salvation sealing outpouring of God’s Holy Spirit) also happened on Sunday.

Acts 2:1-4 “When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place.”

Lev 23:15-17 clearly explains that Pentecost happens the day after the seventh Sabbath:

(MY NOTE: “From the day after the Sabbath, the day you brought the sheaf of the wave offering, count off seven full weeks. Count off fifty days up to the day after the seventh Sabbath, and then present an offering of new grain to the LORD.”)

1 Corinthians 16:2
2 Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.

Acts 20:7
7 Upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread

(MY NOTE: Early church Christians worshipped & broke bread (communion) on the 1st day of the week)

Heb 4:
6 Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief:

(MY NOTE: Many Israelites were not allowed to enter into the promised land it was due to unbelief)

7 Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts.

8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.

9 There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.

10 For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.
(MY NOTE: BELIEF in Jesus is our rest)

11 Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.
(MY NOTE: Every believer is a priest. The Temple Priesthood operated 24/7. They worked on the Sabbath with inpunity)

Finally, I put Soyeong on ignore a long time ago (shook off the dust). A hugh wall of text with a carpet bombing of OT verses unrelated to your OP. Making any reply impossible. It seems to me the objective is to derail any thread that doesn't line up to his beliefs. I wish him well. JJ

Click to expand...

Thanks for the response.

My question did not really relate to Sabbath. That was a side note.

My question is: what does Acts 15:21 mean? Would the new Gentile Christians pick up more of Moses (than the few regulations issued by the Jerusalem council) at synagogues? Or do you interpret this verse differently and can you explain it?

BrotherJJ said:

Paul the risen Christ chosen (Acts 26:14-17) gentile apostle & evangelist. Didn't start churches in synagogues. He did teach clean living within all the churches he started.

I have no way of knowing how many (if any) gentiles went into synagogues. Nor how many Jewish believers went into them either. My reply laid out my belief the gentile assemblies worshipped on Sunday

Click to expand...

So, what does Acts 15:21 mean?

Structurally it's connected to 15:19 and the verb "judge" & is explaining why James sees fit not to complicate things for these new Gentile Christians. He either thinks they're going to end up being taught in these synagogues or they're going to be around Jews being taught Moses in every city so he's judging to put some restrictions on these Gentiles so they're less offensive to the Jews to hopefully be evangelized into Christ or???? Does James know or think Sabbath meetings will be changed to the first day of the week?

Either way, Paul seems to have no issue with the judgment of the council. And either way, these Gentiles had some restrictions placed upon them that I think are pursuant to Mosaic Law and even prior to Mosaic Law.

Also, do we truly think these are the only law-based restrictions Gentile Christians are responsible for in Christ by His Spirit? Are they the only restrictions Paul places on his hearers as time moves on? What Law is being written on hearts under the New Covenant so we will obey it and be conformed to Christ's likeness? What specifies the sin (lawlessness, unrighteousness) that we're commanded not to obey in Romans 6, and what is the righteous requirement of the Law to be fulfilled in we who walk in Spirit per Romans 8, and why does the same chapter infer that we in Spirit in Christ can have minds that are subordinate to God's Law and can please Him?

The Sunday meeting interpretations don't answer these things.

BrotherJJ said:

Acts 15 say's without any doubts. Gentiles (this would apply to Jews too) You don't have to get circumcised Or keep Mosaic law to be saved.

It over rules the believing Law zealots that tried to place gentiles under both.

You're trying to force one verse into a doctrine. How does freeing the gentiles from the yoke/heavy burden of trying to keep laws they can't & no one can. Complicate their lives?

You've given/speculated your opinion/view on this one verse. I think James is trying to appease the law zealots (throw them a bone) attempting to avoid an uproar.

If James really wanted to complicate their lives. He would have put them under the yoke. Like so many law zealots try too today.

Finally, what their responsible for is to trust Christ & Love one another. Love fulfils the law (Rom 13:8-10). Best wishes, JJ

Click to expand...

Actually, all I've done is ask you respectfully multiple times to tell me what you think one verse of Scripture means. It's somewhat pivotal to the narrative.

I haven't tried to force any doctrine or opinion & had to give you a few options to get any meaningful response from you. Now I wade through several meaningless sentences in order to find your antinomian opinion in the midst of them - "...James is trying to appease the law zealots (throw them a bone) attempting to avoid an uproar." It's novel, I'll give you that.

So, James is going against Christ - against God - in order to appease the "law zealots." What do you do with the letters written by these law zealots (I think you mentioned at least James & Peter)? And why do you think we have no indication that Paul refused this judgment as being against Christ? And why do you think Paul taught what he did that agreed with the requirement against fornication?

And what do you do with verses that tell us that those who love God are those who keep His commandments? That's John BTW - another law zealot? And then the ones also in John's writings that tie this same necessity of obedience to God to love neighbor? IOW you can't truly love God or neighbor apart from keeping God's commandments. There's a reason love fulfills Law - it's because those who love according to God obey God's commandments. Care to speculate what those would be?

The fun thing about answers like yours is that you leave love undefined, and you can therefore make it anything you want it to be and think you're obeying the first & second greatest commandments (according to Jesus Christ - another law zealot?). But God doesn't leave important things like love undefined or unexplained. And you're going to have to do some reading on Law to understand love. If you don't know what sin is, you're not going to be able to fulfill the Law of Christ & love others as He loved us.

BrotherJJ said:

I have respectfully tried to answer all your questions (BTW you didn't answer many of mine either). I said James was trying to keep things calm.

Review what the law zealots did to Christ, Stephen, Paul (Acts 9:29, 13:50, 14:5, 16:22-23, 18:12, 20:23, 21:31, 22:22, 23:3, 2 Cor 11:24, 25, 26) & in the end killed him & Peter too.

You can disagree & that's fine. At the same time, it doesn't change my answers.

After my Acts 15 revisit below. I'm going to leave our (obvious unfruitful) exchange. With a simple we disagree.

Op topic Acts 15: Synopsis

5 Law zealous Jews try to place Chrisy believing gentiles under Mosaic law. (vs 6) a meeting is called.

7 both sides argue their case, Peter revisits his God given mission to gentiles.

8 Peter proclaims God indwelt them (btw: VOID of law keeping) with His salvation sealing Holy Spirit. (2 Cor 1:22, 5:5, 2 Tim 1:14, Eph 4:30)

9 God Purified their hearts by faith. (VOID of ANY law keeping)

10 Peter say's why r u law zealots tempting ye God. Why r u law zealots trying to place these gentiles under the burden (not love) of the law's condemnation?

11 Peter say's everyone (Jew of Gentile) is saved by grace thru faith (VOID of ANY law keeping)

12 Barnabas & Paul declare all the Holy Spirit miracles & wonders God did for Gentiles thru them.

13 - 19 James takes the floor, cites Peters testimony with the gentiles, then thru Holy Spirit inspiration, James quote scriptures

19 James rules gentiles don't have to adhere to (btw: a then obsolete) Mosaic law covenant

20 James gives rules for the gentiles (VOID of Mosaic law keeping)

21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day
(MY NOTE: The law zealots LOST & you're trying to derail the entire Council at Jerusalem meeting & decision with YOUR interpretation of ONE verse)

22-23 Letters are sent with the council's decision

24 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:
(MY NOTE: Peter, James & John tell gentile believers they DON'T have to be CIRCUMCISED or KEEP MOSAIC LAWS. The law zealots LOST! Praise God! Unfortunately, they haven't given up & are still trying to place NT believers under the laws YOKE.) Best wishes, JJ

Click to expand...

Thanks for all the Scripture. I have them too.

BrotherJJ said:

I said James was trying to keep things calm.

Click to expand...

You said more than that. Backtracking.

BrotherJJ said:

Review what the law zealots did to Christ, Stephen, Paul (Acts 9:29, 13:50, 14:5, 16:22-23, 18:12, 20:23, 21:31, 22:22, 23:3, 2 Cor 11:24, 25, 26) & in the end killed him & Peter too.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the suggestion, but no need. And I do understand where you get your phrase "law zealots." I just don't think you have a balanced view of God's Law and how to use it lawfully. Frankly you sound like an anti-law zealot. Maybe I'm wrong, but you've not answered much re: our relationship to God's Law & Commandments.

BrotherJJ said:

8 Peter proclaims God indwelt them (btw: VOID of law keeping) with His salvation sealing Holy Spirit. (2 Cor 1:22, 5:5, 2 Tim 1:14, Eph 4:30)

Click to expand...

We have no disagreement re: people coming to Christ "Void of law keeping" (as I think you're using the phrase). It's mostly a matter of our relationship to God's Law & Commands after entering into Christ Jesus.

BrotherJJ said:

19 James rules gentiles don't have to adhere to (btw: a then obsolete) Mosaic law covenant

Click to expand...

I guess you're referring to fornication being an obsolete law.

BrotherJJ said:

(MY NOTE: The law zealots LOST & you're trying to derail the entire Council at Jerusalem meeting & decision with YOUR interpretation of ONE verse)

Click to expand...

Maybe you could show me where I've interpreted this verse in finality. As I recall I've simply offered some possible interpretations to flush out yours, which you've provided. Thanks. Honestly, FWIW, the last thing I try to accomplish is the derailing of God's Word. I'm comfortable He knows that.

BrotherJJ said:

I'm going to leave our (obvious unfruitful) exchange. With a simple we disagree.

Click to expand...

Your choice, obviously. I doubt you even know what we disagree about. I've mostly asked you questions.

BrotherJJ said:

I have respectfully tried to answer all your questions (BTW you didn't answer many of mine either).

Click to expand...

I don't think you've answered many of my questions, but I acknowledge I've likely asked you too many.

Want to ask me 1 or 2 to keep it simple?

How about you answer just this one in 2 parts: What is the status of God's Law today and what is the Christian's relationship to it (how is it used by the Christian if God's Law is still active)?

GDL said:

Thanks for the response.

My question did not really relate to Sabbath. That was a side note.

My question is: what does Acts 15:21 mean? Would the new Gentile Christians pick up more of Moses (than the few regulations issued by the Jerusalem council) at synagogues? Or do you interpret this verse differently and can you explain it?

Click to expand...

The Gospel to the Jew's began with John's baptism. God's wrath was coming on the Jew's. Christ was an escape from that wrath. Jew's were first and foremost at this time because the time was short. That wrath occurred in 70 ad.
So,,,,Ceaser's law, Jewish law, temple law, still stood as Jew's were preaching to Jew's.
Ceaser's law and Jewish law.
Jew's were exempt from Idol's under Rome. Certainly this was extended to the God fearing Gentiles in attendance at synagogue and going to temple.
Paul accused of violating law
Acts 25:7 And when he was come, the Jews which came down from Jerusalem stood round about, and laid many and grievous complaints against Paul, which they could not prove.
8 While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all.
2 Cor 6:3 Giving no offence in any thing, that the ministry be not blamed:
4 But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, {approving: Gr. commending }
5 In stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings;

Paul was accused of defiling the temple by bringing an uncircumcised man there. Indeed, that would have defiled the temple. He was accused of sedition etc. Gentiles were to behave no differently with regards to Jewish/Roman state law than what was taught in Synagogue..... That the apostolic ministry not be blamed for anything.

ralliann said:

The Gospel to the Jew's began with John's baptism. God's wrath was coming on the Jew's. Christ was an escape from that wrath. Jew's were first and foremost at this time because the time was short. That wrath occurred in 70 ad.
So,,,,Ceaser's law, Jewish law, temple law, still stood as Jew's were preaching to Jew's.
Ceaser's law and Jewish law.
Jew's were exempt from Idol's under Rome. Certainly this was extended to the God fearing Gentiles in attendance at synagogue and going to temple.
Paul accused of violating law
Acts 25:7 And when he was come, the Jews which came down from Jerusalem stood round about, and laid many and grievous complaints against Paul, which they could not prove.
8 While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all.
2 Cor 6:3 Giving no offence in any thing, that the ministry be not blamed:
4 But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, {approving: Gr. commending }
5 In stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings;

Paul was accused of defiling the temple by bringing an uncircumcised man there. Indeed, that would have defiled the temple. He was accused of sedition etc. Gentiles were to behave no differently with regards to Jewish/Roman state law than what was taught in Synagogue..... That the apostolic ministry not be blamed for anything.

Click to expand...

Thank you. Could you boil this down or clarify for me? It seems your answer to the meaning of Acts 15:21 is in your last paragraph and new gentile believers would be learning more of God's will in synagogue, correct? Thus, the council's limited behavioral restrictions were meant not to over burden & discourage them & allow them to grow?

GDL said:

Thank you. Could you boil this down or clarify for me? It seems your answer to the meaning of Acts 15:21 is in your last paragraph and new gentile believers would be learning more of God's will in synagogue, correct? Thus, the council's limited behavioral restrictions were meant not to over burden & discourage them & allow them to grow?

Click to expand...

What I am saying is there was a cultural situation which these things occurred in.
What was Roman law? What was Jewish law?
An example: Accusations of LEGAL OFFENSES
Ac 16:19 And when her masters saw that the hope of their gains was gone, they caught Paul and Silas, and drew them into the marketplace unto the rulers, {marketplace: or, court }
20 And brought them to the magistrates, saying, These men, being Jews, do exceedingly trouble our city,
21 And teach customs, which are not lawful for us to receive, neither to observe, being Romans.

There were laws concerning religion in the empire, and legally enforced by ROME. .
Jew's had an exemption from Idol's other religions did not have. This exemption was extended to the God fearing Gentiles. Their were laws to not defile the temple precincts even in the court of the Gentiles. You are not taking any of this into account.
2Co 6:3 Giving no offence in any thing, that the ministry be not blamed:

There were various legalized religions within the empire. Paul found himself in trouble for the things he spoke against the goddess Diana at Ephesus. He could have been "legally put to death for violating their religious law there.
Jew's kept the law as well as the customs of the elders. They attended temple. It would have been legal to punish Jew or Gentile for violating those laws. Jew's were Jew's, Gentiles were Gentiles and they publically behaved within those bounds. A Gentile would never have dared to eat a "JEWISH" passover Seder. It would have violated Moses law. Gentiles in Christ were to behave as a God fearing Gentile, and Jew's as Jew's.

ralliann said:

What I am saying is there was a cultural situation which these things occurred in.
What was Roman law? What was Jewish law?
An example: Accusations of LEGAL OFFENSES
Ac 16:19 And when her masters saw that the hope of their gains was gone, they caught Paul and Silas, and drew them into the marketplace unto the rulers, {marketplace: or, court }
20 And brought them to the magistrates, saying, These men, being Jews, do exceedingly trouble our city,
21 And teach customs, which are not lawful for us to receive, neither to observe, being Romans.

There were laws concerning religion in the empire, and legally enforced by ROME. .
Jew's had an exemption from Idol's other religions did not have. This exemption was extended to the God fearing Gentiles. Their were laws to not defile the temple precincts even in the court of the Gentiles. You are not taking any of this into account.
2Co 6:3 Giving no offence in any thing, that the ministry be not blamed:

There were various legalized religions within the empire. Paul found himself in trouble for the things he spoke against the goddess Diana at Ephesus. He could have been "legally put to death for violating their religious law there.
Jew's kept the law as well as the customs of the elders. They attended temple. It would have been legal to punish Jew or Gentile for violating those laws. Jew's were Jew's, Gentiles were Gentiles and they publically behaved within those bounds. A Gentile would never have dared to eat a "JEWISH" passover Seder. It would have violated Moses law. Gentiles in Christ were to behave as a God fearing Gentile, and Jew's as Jew's.

Click to expand...

Sorry. I did not see that you had responded.

That's all good detail, but I can't see that it answers my question. Maybe you would elaborate or simplify for me. You know the verses, but here they are for discussion:

NKJ Acts 15:19-21 "Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God, 20 "but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood. 21 "For Moses has had throughout many generations those who preach him in every city, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath."

• James judges not to trouble the gentiles who are turning to God
• But that they abstain from the things listed
• 15:21 is James explaining why he made this judgment

I've read Messianics who say that this means the gentiles would be learning more of Moses in time.

I've read non-Messianics who say that James was simply giving the gentiles some things to abstain from so as not to be as offensive to the Jews in their locales and that there was no need for the gentiles to learn Moses.

This ends up being a debated verse between Messianics and non-Messianics.

I understand there is instruction in Moses pertaining to gentiles.

What specifically is James explaining in 15:21 in relation to the judgment he is making? Does he expect the gentile believers to learn from Moses, or just want them to not be as offensive to Jews, or???

GDL said:

Sorry. I did not see that you had responded.

Click to expand...

Sorry you do not see it. I said (as a last conclusion) Gentiles were to behave as Gentiles, and Jew's as Jews. Perhaps I should more clearly have said, Gentiles need not learn anymore Torah than what the synagogue already taught concerning Gentiles.

GDL said:

That's all good detail, but I can't see that it answers my question. Maybe you would elaborate or simplify for me. You know the verses, but here they are for discussion:

NKJ Acts 15:19-21 "Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God, 20 "but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood. 21 "For Moses has had throughout many generations those who preach him in every city, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath."

• James judges not to trouble the gentiles who are turning to God
• But that they abstain from the things listed
• 15:21 is James explaining why he made this judgment

I've read Messianics who say that this means the gentiles would be learning more of Moses in time.

Click to expand...

No, they were to maintain the universal standards taught concerning Gentiles and they would do well. Since the teaching concerning Gentile righteousness had already been established all over the empire. They needed nothing more. Not for synagogue attendance, not for temple attendance, nor for Roman exemption from Idol's. The apostles themselves maintained the status of a "sect" as well. While there were various sects among Jew's, Each one fell within "acceptability", as distinct from apostasy altogether.

GDL said:

I've read non-Messianics who say that James was simply giving the gentiles some things to abstain from so as not to be as offensive to the Jews in their locales and that there was no need for the gentiles to learn Moses.

This ends up being a debated verse between Messianics and non-Messianics.

I understand there is instruction in Moses pertaining to gentiles.

What specifically is James explaining in 15:21 in relation to the judgment he is making? Does he expect the gentile believers to learn from Moses, or just want them to not be as offensive to Jews, or???

Click to expand...

I believe you can see the Gospels as well as the rest of the new testament scripture shows attempts to "criminalize". Just as was done in the book of Esther, Daniel, To Joseph in Egypt. The age in which the Church was being built on the apostles of Christ, was far removed from our modern day democracy and freedom of religion.
Paul legally punishing even unto death....criminals of Judaism, and Rome
Ac 22:5 As also the high priest doth bear me witness, and all the estate of the elders: from whom also I received letters unto the brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there bound unto Jerusalem, for to be punished.

Ac 26:11 And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.

ralliann said:

Gentiles need not learn anymore Torah than what the synagogue already taught concerning Gentiles.

Click to expand...

ralliann said:

No, they were to maintain the universal standards taught concerning Gentiles and they would do well. Since the teaching concerning Gentile righteousness had already been established all over the empire.

Click to expand...

So, you're saying that James's judgement of the things the gentiles needed to do as Christians was all that was necessary so they could attend synagogue and they needed to learn nothing else from the Jews? You're saying this was already well-established all over the empire, so James is actually judging nothing new?

BrotherJJ said:

This debate was settled long ago. Yet, people today are still trying to place others under Mosaic laws.

Click to expand...

I don't think you understand the discussion. Some of really do understand the Faith issue.

We also see clearly that your notes are not Scripture.