The Jerusalem Conference

This transcript was generated automatically. Its accuracy may vary

Short Summary
The panel discussion provides an in-depth exploration of Acts chapter 15, focusing on the early church’s struggle to integrate Gentile believers without imposing Jewish customs such as circumcision. It highlights the pivotal Jerusalem Council where apostles and elders, including Peter and James, debated and ultimately decided that Gentiles need not adhere to the full Mosaic Law but should observe certain guidelines to maintain unity and sensitivity toward Jewish Christians. The discussion also underscores the symbolic transition from physical circumcision to spiritual commitment through baptism and the importance of open dialogue and leadership consensus in resolving doctrinal conflicts.

Long Summary
Detailed Summary of the Panel Discussion on Acts Chapter 15 and Related Scripture

Overview of the Book of Acts
– Acts contains 28 chapters, marking the early Christian church’s development.
– The first 12 chapters cover Jesus’ ascension (Acts 1), Pentecost (Acts 2), early church growth, including the martyrdom of Stephen (Acts 7) and James the Apostle (Acts 12), and Peter’s miraculous escape from prison.
– Chapters 13-28 describe Paul’s missionary journeys and later captivity.
– The discussion centers on Acts 15, the pivotal chapter marking the church’s transition in dealing with Gentile believers.

Context of Acts 15 – The Jerusalem Council
– The first missionary journey (Acts 13-14) was successful mainly among Gentiles.
– This raised disputes about the requirements for Gentile converts, especially circumcision, a key Jewish custom.
– Jewish Christians struggled with accepting Gentiles without requiring them to follow the Mosaic law.
– Acts 15 records the apostles and elders meeting to resolve this controversy.

Historical and Prophetic Reflections
– The martyrdom of Stephen signifies early church persecution mainly from Jewish authorities.
– James’ martyrdom at the hands of Roman authorities symbolizes later persecution by Romans.
– Peter’s escape and Herod’s death foreshadow Christianity’s eventual acceptance under Constantine.

Gentile Inclusion and Peter’s Vision
– Peter’s vision (Acts 10) of a linen cloth with unclean animals, commanded to eat, signifies God’s acceptance of Gentiles without requiring Jewish customs (Acts 15:7-11).
– Peter recounts this experience before the council, emphasizing the Holy Spirit’s work among Gentiles.
– The Holy Spirit falling on Cornelius and his household validated Gentile inclusion.

Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians and the Circumcision Debate
– Galatians 2 recounts Paul’s confrontation with Peter over withdrawing from Gentile believers under pressure from “certain men from James” (Galatians 2:11-14).
– Paul argues that justification comes by faith, not by circumcision (Galatians 6:15).
– Titus, a Greek believer, was not compelled to be circumcised, illustrating liberty from the Mosaic law.
– Paul calls those insisting on circumcision “false brethren” trying to spy on their liberty.

Biblical Teaching on Circumcision
– Circumcision began with Abraham (Genesis 17:10-12), before the Mosaic law.
– Abraham was justified by faith before circumcision (Genesis 15:6); circumcision was a sign or seal of the righteousness already credited.
– Romans 4:9-12 reinforces that faith counted for righteousness before circumcision, making Abraham the father of both circumcised and uncircumcised believers.

Spiritual Circumcision and Baptism
– Baptism replaces physical circumcision as the Christian initiation rite (Colossians 2:11-12).
– Baptism symbolizes “putting off the body of sins” and being raised with Christ.
– Unlike circumcision, baptism is for both men and women, reflecting the new covenant inclusivity (Galatians 3:28).

Structure of the Jerusalem Council
– Both apostles and elders participated, reflecting the need for unity among leaders overseeing thousands of believers (Acts 15:6).
– Elders managed local congregations; apostles focused on preaching and mission work.
– Peter was not the sole authority; the council’s decision was collective.

Acts 15:1-6 – The Problem and the Journey to Jerusalem
– Some men from Judea taught that Gentiles must be circumcised to be saved (v.1).
– Paul and Barnabas disputed this strongly and were sent to Jerusalem with the question (v.2).
– On the way, they shared news of Gentile conversions, bringing joy to the churches (v.3-4).
– Upon arrival, they reported all God had done among the Gentiles (v.4-6).

Peter’s Testimony to the Council (Acts 15:7-11)
– Peter recounts his vision and visit to Cornelius, emphasizing God’s acceptance of Gentiles.
– The Holy Spirit was given to Gentiles just as to Jews, showing no distinction before God.
– Peter urges not to burden Gentile believers with the Mosaic law.

Paul and Barnabas’ Report (Acts 15:12)
– They shared the miracles and wonders God performed among the Gentiles, confirming the authenticity of their ministry.

James’ Leadership and the Council’s Conclusion (Acts 15:13-21)
– James, the Lord’s brother, chaired the council and summarized the discussion.
– He quoted Amos 9:11-12 (LXX) to show Scripture predicted Gentile inclusion.
– The council decided not to impose circumcision but to ask Gentiles to abstain from:
– Meat sacrificed to idols
– Blood
– Meat of strangled animals
– Sexual immorality (Acts 15:20)
– This was to maintain peace between Jewish and Gentile believers and respect Jewish sensitivities.

The Letter to the Gentile Believers (Acts 15:22-29)
– Judas (Barsabbas) and Silas were sent with Paul and Barnabas to Antioch to deliver the council’s letter.
– The letter affirmed the decision and encouraged Gentiles to obey the stated guidelines.
– Written documentation ensured the decision was clear and authoritative.

Jewish Law and Noachian Covenant Reference
– The council’s instructions reflect a universal moral code rooted in Genesis 9 (Noahic Covenant), forbidding blood consumption and emphasizing respect for life.
– This universal law applies to all humanity, not just Jews.

Lessons on Church Governance and Dispute Resolution
– The council modeled open discussion, listening, and debate before reaching consensus.
– The importance of elders alongside apostles in decision-making was highlighted.
– The epistle and delegation helped maintain unity and prevent division.
– The discussion included reflections on modern church practices for addressing differing views respectfully and openly, citing “Volume Six” of the Christadelphian writings recommending regular meetings for airing divergent opinions.

Key Bible Verses Cited in the Discussion
– Acts 7 (Stephen’s martyrdom)
– Acts 12 (James’ martyrdom, Peter’s escape)
– Acts 10: Peter’s vision and Cornelius’ conversion
– Acts 15:1-29 (Jerusalem Council)
– Galatians 2:1-14 (Paul’s confrontation with Peter)
– Galatians 6:15 (“For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.”)
– Romans 4:9-12 (Faith counted before circumcision)
– Colossians 2:11-12 (Spiritual circumcision in baptism)
– Genesis 15:6 and 17:10-12 (Abraham’s faith and circumcision)
– Amos 9:11-12 (Gentile inclusion prophecy)
– Jeremiah 44:4 (Circumcision of the heart)
– Genesis 9:3-6 (Noachian law reference on blood and life)

Overall Significance
– Acts 15 marks a foundational moment when the early church navigated the transition from a Jewish sect to a multi-ethnic faith.
– The council’s decision affirmed salvation by faith apart from the Mosaic law for Gentiles, while promoting unity and mutual respect.
– The discussion underscores the need for wisdom, patience, and scriptural guidance in resolving doctrinal disputes.
– It highlights the balance between maintaining core truths and adapting to new cultural realities within the body of Christ.
– The inclusion of Gentiles without circumcision opened the gospel to all people, fulfilling God’s promise to Abraham and the prophetic scriptures.

—

This summary captures the key points and biblical references discussed in the panel, highlighting the theological, historical, and practical aspects of Acts 15 and the early church’s handling of Gentile inclusion.

Transcript

Well, Brother David, it’s a blessing to be here in dialogue with you, and we’re going to share with the brethren some of the questions and insights that are in the 15th chapter of Acts. But to give a broader overview of the entire book, can you just take a little time and explain to the brethren where we’re going with this? Okay, well, the book of Acts, as you may know, has 28 chapters. So if you divide that in half, chapter 15, that is a subject for our dialogue today, is going to be the first chapter of the second half.

Now, we’ve got just a little outline here of what those are. The first 12 chapters are the early years of the Christian movement, starting with Jesus ascension in chapter one and then going on with Pentecost on chapter two, and then the next eight chapters are about the three missionary tours of Paul, and then after that, Paul is captive, and the next eight chapter is about his five years of captivity that end in Rome, where he is very productive.

Okay, we’re going to go from there. Now. Those are the first 12 chapters, and you can see them. We’re not going to go through them. That’s just what happened.

I will mention, though, you see that in number seven, chapter number seven, that’s where Stephen is the first Christian martyr, and you know that Stephen died at the hands of Jewish authorities. When you get to chapter 12, you find James the Apostle, who was a Christian martyr, the second Christian martyr, and he died at the hands of the Roman authority, and after that, Peter is taken to be killed, but he is saved and the iron gates of Rome open up and he’s free, and after that, Herod himself dies.

Now, I’m partial to interpretation, as you know, this is interpretation. But I believe that in all of these experiences there are interpretive, prophetic things. We’re not going to talk a lot about that today. We’re going to talk about other things in chapter 15. But I just mention and suggest that Stephen’s martyrdom does picture for us the first stage of the Church where most of the experiences difficult for the church were from their Jewish friends, or I shouldn’t say friends, but their Jewish leaders.

And after that, the Romans in period number two of the church for 10 years from 303 to 313 was called the great persecution by the Roman Empire. James death at the hands of Herod, a Roman governor, I think is symbolic of that, and then in the third period of the Church, suddenly Christianity begins to be accepted and Constantine comes to the throne because his mother was Christian, and so I think Peter’s release has something to do with that, and a generation later, the last of the pagan Roman emperors was overthrown.

So anyway, I think that there’s prophecy involved in these issues. That’s the first missionary journey of fall, and this is going to take us up to chapter 15. The first missionary tour of Paul is going to start in chapters 13 and 14, and it’s very successful.

But he’s going to have a lot of success with Gentile believers, and that’s what’s going to precipitate chapter 15. Because the Jews that were the opening of Christianity are not accustomed to having Gentile believers, and this is going to be a the reason why there’s disputation about how the Gentiles coming into the Christian church should conduct themselves, should they be circumcised, for example, and that’s going to be the heart of our discussion.

So you notice in the first journey they left from Antioch where there were already Christian Gentile disciples and they went to Cyprus. Why did they go to Cyprus first? Well, I believe that Barnabas was from Cyprus and Barnabas was the leader of this pair of that was journeying. So they went to Cyprus and then they went to Perga. That’s on the underbelly of what we would call the country of Turkey today.

That’s where John Mark left them. That’ll come into the discussion later. Then they went farther north to Antioch. Now this is another Antioch, not the Antioch they left from, and after that they’re going to have considerable success in Antioch.

What Paul did is he went to the synagogue, and at the synagogue there were. There were Gentile people that were attending the synagogue, and they were so impressed with the Gospel at that time that next week when he came back and had another presentation, it says almost the whole city came out to see them. Now this tells us something about how prolific the extension of the Gospel was to Gentile believers.

And this was the predicate for some difficulties in this first missionary tour and will be the predicate for Acts 15 where they’re dialoguing in Jerusalem. What do we do with these Gentile believers? Well, then they went on to Iconium. They went on because their lives were threatened at Antioch by not Gentiles, but by Jewish, Jewish non believers who were a little jealous because the Gentiles were coming in. So they had to leave and they went to Iconium.

They had good success there, and they had to leave again because they were threatened, and they went to Lystra, and Lystra is where they were received very well. But because their accusers came from Antioch and Iconium, they stirred up strife.

And that’s where Paul, pardon me, was stoned and left for death, and then he went there on to Derby. Then they retraced their steps, came back, and they were at Antioch. Once they got back to Antioch. Now I don’t have the control, so I don’t, I’m unable to switch.

But then we have this acts 15 and that’s what we’re going to talk about today. But I want to show you a little more. Let’s go to the next slide. That’s the second missionary tourney journey that was as a consequence of the experience in Acts chapter 15, and now one more.

And this is a third missionary tour. We’re not going to talk about that too much, and let’s go one more, and then finally when Paul went his journey to Rome, that was the last eight chapters experience where he’s in jail and Caesarea for a while and then they take him to Rome. Okay, let’s go back.

Go back to the backwards, backwards, backwards. There we go. That’s what we’re going to stop at. Okay, so that’s just kind of a review of the Book of Acts, and what’s happening in the second missionary tour that follows the Acts 15 dialogue that we’re going to talk about is there was a kind of a conflict between Barnabas and Paul because Barnabas was related to John Mark.

He wanted to take John Mark with him again. Paul said, no, I don’t think that’s a good idea. He left us already once. Just so you know, John Mark turned out to be an exceptional disciple, and Paul praised him in his later years.

And he is, by the way, the author of the Gospel of Mark. So things turn out well. Just like when I make mistakes, I hope things turn out better. So they do. So, okay, now I’m talking lots.

I’m going to turn it over to Brother Richard. But this is where we’re going to look at Acts 15, brother, and as we look at this, we’re talking about a transition time for the church, and the question that is in everybody’s mind is how Jewish do you have to be to come into Christ?

As Brother David reviewed the book of Acts, we remember that the first part of it focuses on the activity in the Jewish brethren who came into Christ, and this was the core of the church, not just the apostles, but those who were touched by their words at Pentecost, those that came in, and we see thousands who came to baptize, be baptized into Christ. So we have a core of Jews in Christ, thankful for the Messiah coming and fulfilling the promises. But anytime there’s a transition, let’s say what we might call a dispensational change, there’s adjustments that need to be made, and in this case, it was really a shock to Peter, who is going to show up in Acts 15 to get a repeated dream where he was shown essentially a linen cloth coming down from heaven with unclean beasts and told to go and slay those beasts.

And when the interpretation became clear to him, it was the Lord’s will for the word of Jesus, for the promise of salvation through Jesus, to go out, not just to those Jews who believed in the promises of the, of the Tanakh, okay, the whole, the Tanakas, the Torah, the prophets and the Psalms and the other writings, but to Gentiles who had maybe almost no acquaintance, almost everybody knew about the Jews because they had been dispersed throughout the world of that time, and so we’re going to be looking at some of the human interactions here. This question of what does a Gentile have to do to come into Christ was a crisis, and we have an elaboration of what the nature of that crisis is. If we turn together to the six chapter of Galatians.

And for those of you who were looking at the lovely set of maps that brother David brought in, Galatia is in sort of the central part of what we today call Turkey, or at the time, Asia Minor, and as the name indicates, this is really a Gentile community because this was definitely not an area where you had a lot of synagogues. But Paul says this in Galatians 6:15. For in Christ neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature, and that’s in a way, the conclusion of the matter that we really see brought into focus in the second chapter of Galatians.

So I’d like. I’d like you to turn together with me to get the sense of what was going on. He. He talks about in two one, he talks about 14 years Barnabas going to Jerusalem, and then he gets in verse three, this issue of Titus, who being a Greek with me was compelled to be circumcised, verse 4.

And that because the false brethren unawares brought in who came in privately to spy out our liberty, here you had Christian believers who were Gentiles, and they really weren’t following the customs that were common amongst the core of the church, the Jewish brethren back in, in. In Jerusalem, and of course Galilee, the areas around there to whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue, and I want you to jump down then to the seventh verse. When they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me. In other words, everybody knew that Paul was going out and no longer just trying to address those believers in the synagogue who were interested in the fulfillment of the Messianic promises, but to Gentiles directly, as the gospel of the circumcision was committed unto Peter.

And we’re told that these characters we’re going to meet in Acts 15 show up in verse nine. You have James, who’s going to end up being the chairman for this conference in Jerusalem. You have Cephas or Peter, of course, that’s just his Aramaic name and the apostle John. When they saw how Paul was blessed in this, they were enthusiastic. But brother David talked about the focus of the church at Antioch.

And of course we know that’s where the brethren were first called Christians. In verse 11, when Peter came to Antioch, I withstood him to the face because he was to be blamed for before that. Certain came from James. Okay, so we’re talking about the James that we’re going to talk a little bit about James. But certain came from James.

He ate with the gentiles. Peter was fine with being with non kosher, but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them that were of the circumcision, and when other Jews dissembled, it says in King James, those of you with a more modern translation will see the Greek word there doesn’t need translation. It’s hypocrisy. When we saw what a hypocrite he was, he was confronted by Paul.

So here, here you have our beloved apostle Peter being directly confronted as a hypocrite, which just shows that we can make mistakes, and Peter was to be blamed here. Okay, this wasn’t just the situation in Antioch. You know, the word had been spreading around. This epistle to the Galatians was inflammatory.

And the brethren copied and circulated it. Why do I say it’s inflammatory? The law was called the pedagogue, and there’s different thoughts amongst the brethren. The thought of a pedagogue that you could find in the Greek times was when you had an old servant, an old male servant who really couldn’t do as much work anymore.

His job was to make sure the boys got to their tutoring and home from their tutoring without getting into trouble, and that was the pedagogue. Pedias to child and to leave. So this was an inflammatory epistle. Paul talks about calling Peter a hypocrite.

Well, you know, brethren always talk, and this got to Jerusalem. So now we’re into the Council of Jerusalem. Let’s turn together in the Acts, chapter 15, and brother David, would you be able to just take us through reading the first four verses of that, please?

Oh, sure.

You know what? Four or five? Okay, let’s go with your outline. We’ll go with five. Okay.

And certain men which came down from Judea taught the brethren and said, except you be circumcised after the manner of Moses, you can’t be saved. When therefore, Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, and they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain other of them should go to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question, and being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phoenicia and Samaria declaring the conversion of the Gentiles, and they caused great joy unto all the brethren.

And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them. 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. Okay, so the first question to begin with is the issue that is critical to these brethren is to see this practice of circumcision, and they’re saying this is in the law of Moses, of course, which is correct.

But is circumcision, as a custom, something that began with Moses? What might we say about that? Brother David? No, actually began way back with Abraham, and in Genesis, the 15th chapter, verse 6, Abraham is recognized as a person of faith.

You know, he’s wondering if he’s really going to have a child. He says, maybe my servant is going to have one on my behalf. God says, no, no, no, look up to the stars that that’s the number of your descendants that you’re going to have here in your own body. It says he believed him and he was counted to him for righteousness, and then later in chapter 17, just before he actually is going to have a child, Isaac, God says, you need to be circumcised.

And that’s where circumcision first came into play. You’ll find it in Genesis 17, 10, 12, and that’s where we even read that circumcision is to be on the eighth day for his, you know, newborns that come later. But Abraham and all of the people in his camp were circumcised. Now, of course, from Abraham is going to come Israel, and that’s Moses and so forth.

So it’s going to be part of the law. But it really started with Abraham before the law. But engagingly, Abraham was already justified by his faith before he ever was circumcised. Now that’s going to be a factor in Paul’s thinking because he realizes that faith does not require one to be circumcised. Abraham was had faith and was righteous before that.

So let me pick up on that, Brother David. We can, if, if we turn together to the fourth chapter of the epistle to the Romans. Paul makes exactly the argument that brother David was repeating. Here he talks about the blessings to Abraham, and let’s pick up in verse nine where he says, cometh this blessedness upon the circumcision only or upon the uncircumcision also.

Okay. By the way, that is good rabbinical dialogue where you ask questions and I, I think it’s something worth copying. So he says, for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. How then was it reckoned? Another question.

When he was in circumcision or in uncircumcision, not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision, Paul asks and answers his own question, and he received the sign of circumcision, verse 11, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had, yet being uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all them that believe. Now that’s us, though they be not circumcised, that the righteousness might be imputed unto them also. So circumcision preceded the law. It was certainly re established in the law.

That wasn’t an issue. But the basic argument that the Pharisee group who had come into Christ and were thankful for, you know, that we hold on to things and, you know, it’s really important to think about that, especially when we’re in. When we’re in experiences where we might be doing work in foreign lands, and both brother David and I have had that privilege. You know, it’s a different culture and there’s a different set of baggage, you know, that comes along with the culture.

If, you know, we know that the end of this is going to be the understanding that circumcision is not necessary. Is there something in the Christian community that serves as a replacement for circumcision? Well, you may have in mind baptism there is, you know, we’re baptized so that we kind of remember our commitment personally, and then others are have a testimony by our outward baptism that we are committed. So baptism, I wouldn’t say it’s required because, you know, even in volume six, Brother Esther says, you know, this is. It’s a symbol.

Yeah, and if circumstances are such that a person is unable to be physically or something, okay, this is not a requirement. But if you think about something, if you’re circumcised, you’re a good Jew. If you’re baptized, you’re good Christian. So I would say vampy baptism.

And I think we can pick up on that thought Brother David’s presenting by looking at the. The second chapter of Colossians. So let’s turn together to verse 11, where Paul makes this case, in whom also ye are circumcised. Oh, you are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands. So he’s spiritualizing the circumcision here in putting off the body of sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ buried with him in baptism.

So, you know, he doesn’t directly say that it’s baptism, but speaking about baptism, right, in this context suggests that, yes, there is an external ceremony, and it now is baptism, wherein also you are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead, and you being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh has he quickened or made live together with him, having forgiven you all your trespasses, and as we see the way in which baptism was being practiced in the church, there’s one really significant difference that comes along with this external ceremony that shows your commitment to Christ.

Both men and women can participate now. Okay. The circumcision will be limited to the men, but we’re told that in Christ there is neither male nor female. There is neither bond nor free, not even the Scythian, you know. But at any rate, we wanted to give the background of what the crisis bringing the church together to Jerusalem was and a little bit of discussion on the replacement.

And we find in verse six of Acts that both the apostles and elders came together. Why not just the apostles? Brother David, any thoughts on that? And why the apostles and the elders? Well, you know, at this time, this is a good question.

We can only reason upon this point. Absolutely. But, you know, I think the elders were really managing the ecclesia very nicely. I think the apostles were active in preaching and distributing the gospel outward. When we think of 12 apostles, we think those are the leaders of the church, period.

That’s the foundation. That should be the ones making a decision. But you know, they were dealing with thousands of people in Jerusalem at this time. Now you remember that on the day of Pentecost, 3,000 people were baptized. Now Richard brought to my attention.

Yeah, but some of those were visitors. That’s true. But a couple of chapters later, chapter five, you’ve got 5,000 that were baptized, and this is after pentecost, excuse me, 5,000 that had been baptized. This was after Pentecost, and that was only men.

Double that to women, and you’ve got 10,000 people in the church in Jerusalem. So you’ve got to have a lot of elders as well to manage 10,000 people, and I think that they’re respected leaders and I think it was appropriate. Who am I to say it’s appropriate?

I mean, it was done, I think it was appropriate. But I can understand why it would be that you need the leadership generally to be in sync on this point. Okay, and clearly if there’s going to be any change this significant, it really makes a difference to have what to use the vernacular is a buy in. But by the leadership that is going to have to carry forward on this.

And just to make a minor point, you notice that Peter is not set up on a throne as the head of the whole council, and everybody comes to say, give us the final word on this matter. This was well going to get into what the account actually says about the discussion that took place. Can I just add something absolutely about circumcision? You know, back Jeremiah, even in the Old Testament, they recognized that circumcision really was symbolic of something more precious.

Jeremiah 44 says, you should be circumcised in the heart, not just in the foreskin, and so when you get to the New Testament, circumcision still of the heart is still what we want, but it’s not literal, it’s symbolic and it’s very precious, and it’s very mandatory and necessary that we be circumcised in the heart, but not that we replicate all of the actual literal details of the law or going backwards. That’s me, and I just wanted to include a quote here from reprint 3018, which says the truth has nothing to lose by fairness, openness and a reasonable moderation, looking at turning on all the light available or obtainable.

So the apostles and elders heard all that was to be said on the subject. I believe that’s an interpretive reading of verse 7 of Acts 15, which says, and when there had been much disputing, I can only tell you that that gives me comfort during some more lengthy business meetings. You know, that would. That I may have experienced in my lifetime. But at any rate, Peter is the first one to.

He. Even though he’s not on the throne or anything, he is the first one to speak, and, and, Brother David, as we look at verses 7 to 11, what are. What are the main points that Peter is.

Is making to the council here in Jerusalem? Well, first, Peter gives his own experience. He reminds them that it was God that gave him a dream to go see Cornelius, and he had gone to see Cornelius. When he went to Cornelius, he asked Cornelius, okay, what would you like?

Why did you send men to come receive me? Now, I think Peter actually knew, but he wanted Cornelius to express the point Jesus. Well, you know, I had an. A vision in the ninth hour. An angel appeared to me and said, why should contact you?

And I’m interested in the Gospel and the truth and, and so forth. So Peter began to speak to him, and he spoke not only to Cornelius, but to those that were assembled there that were basically all Gentiles. Cornelius was a Roman centurion.

That always surprises me. The first, you know, Gentile convert was a Roman general. Yeah, basically. But, and so when Cornelius.

When Peter first arrived, Cornelius literally bowed down to the feet of Peter. That’s how much respect and reverence he had for the worship of Jesus, represented by Peter. Peter says, no, no, don’t do that. Just stand up. Please stand up.

I’m a man like you. But Peter began to speak and to preach, and while Peter was speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon these assembled people. Now, you know what happened at Pentecost. The Holy Spirit came, and they began speaking in tongues.

That happened with Cornelius and the band that was with him. Now, it wasn’t so they could tell other people that didn’t know their language. It was really a symbol to show Peter and those associated with Peter talk about that in just a moment that this really is real. This is the Holy Spirit. The same way it was manifested to the Jews at Pentecost is manifest to the Gentiles on this experience.

And Peter had brought with him other people, and that was wise. He had six other people with him. So there were seven people in the entourage with Peter, and this was notable and helpful later when they came to discuss between other people, because as soon as he got back now it was chapter 10, when he saw Cornelius as Soon as he got back in chapter 11, immediately people said, why are you with these Gentiles? And Peter had six other witnesses to explain exactly what happened and the testimony that God had accepted them, on which case they all rejoiced and were thankful and appreciative.

And that’s going to be a good testimony here in Acts chapter 15 as well. Now, if I. Never mind. There was something in question two we didn’t get. Go for it.

It’s long. Okay. We’re kind of. I’m keeping track. Maybe we should keep moving forward.

Point number two. Get it Intelligent. Should we hold elders? Elders councils. Oh, yeah, that’s a fun one to resolve divisive interests today.

Yeah. Well, not the way they did then because we don’t have 12 apostles with us, but we do have elders. Yeah, but has that ever happened? Yeah, it has happened. I know three examples where it has happened.

And you know, before me, how many years went by when it might have happened? I don’t know. There was one occasion I know where a brother. Now, I came from a very conservative background, and some of my thinking as I studied, I realized there were problems with some of the views that I had entertained and had, and so I actually asked a brother.

I have, Brother Ken Rossen. He’s gone now, but you all know who he was. I said, you know, I would like to speak to the elders about a problem that we have. Probably most of you know what I have in mind, but I won’t go into detail on that. I was impressed when I went back to a convention in the east and I served there, that he asked 30 elders to come after dinner early before the.

The other brethren, and listen to the concern that I had. I was deeply impressed with that. Now, Brother Ken never agreed with me in my position. Right. But he saw the principle involved that perhaps it was good to express to the elders a concern.

Now, this happened again with another brother, Bear the David Duran. I don’t want to say names too much, but. Okay. But he’s a very dear brother and I have a deep respect for him. He also doesn’t agree with my positions.

But there was a cons. There was an issue came up among the conservative brother, and he felt that they should be discussed and dialogued among the brethren. So he put out a request for a. A gathering of the elders, and it was declined. But at least he had that thought in mind.

And I know another issue that I’m not going to talk about. It’s when you told me, and I think I’m Going to close here. But I just want to say, yes, it’s not necessarily a bad idea. But you see how rare it is. That’s all.

And one of the other things we can see from, you know, the way this starts with Peter relating his entire experience to the council. You know, you try to express things to the brother and as clearly as you can, and sometimes it really takes a while for it to sink in. So imagine that you’re one of these messianic Jews from a Pharisee background who’s hearing Peter’s report. It’s like he went to a Gentile.

He was a centurion, you know, I mean, this, you know, this, this should have really ideally sunk in that there is a change of dispensation here. The Lord is dealing in new way. But even though this report had gone through the whole church, Peter needed to repeat it again and bring that to the brethren’s attention, and then we get to the 12th verse of Acts 15 where Barnabas and Paul, and by the way, notice the order here.

You know, Barnabas looks like he’s still the one who’s doing the leading during this part of the relationship between the two. What, what might we say are the main. You know, we really don’t have too much on the main points. Everybody knew what Paul and Barnabas were doing. That’s the reason there was a crisis.

But that’s discussed in verse 12 and for time after both of the. Unless, do you want to say something about what Paul and Barnabas said we’ve all talked about. Okay. It’s very brief here. Just one verse.

Can I read that? You can read the verse. Then the multitude kept silence and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wr Gentiles by them. In our review of the first missionary tour, you heard something about what happened. Have you ever been in a place where a brother has given a testimony to the truth and the entire city showed up the next week to hear more about it?

Whoa, that’s a pretty stunning situation. So when in this one verse, it talks about them repeating what their experience is in that experience, they had remarkable success in the next four cities they went to. This is worthy of telling the council of apostles and elders the kind of success that God allowed to happen, and these were almost all Gentiles, So this was very meaningful to bring up to the council here and to realize, are you going to go back to the city of Antioch, the other Antioch in Turkey, and you’re going to advise all of these people to Be circumcised. This doesn’t make sense.

Circumcision of a heart. Yes, go ahead. So the case has been laid out. There’s been much disputing and the chairman of the council, James and I, I think maybe for time, we. That’s right, yeah.

Yeah. It is clear James is related directly to our Lord Jesus, and boy does it. Then we go off in different directions on where to go with that. But that’s okay.

James, who is called our Lords Adelphos or brother, was the chairman of the meeting and he summarizes things. Now look at the dynamics here. Who was the one who created the problem? That Paul addressed Peter directly and said, you’re a hypocrite. This was both letters and in an epistle, an individual who’d come from James.

So the council has had a lengthy exploration of everything that has taken place, and now here’s James, the writer of that a letter summarizing things and what is, and, and that’s really a long section 13 through 21. Brother David, what can we say about the summary James gives here?

Okay. In verse number 20, he said, this is the summary of what all of the apostles and elders agree that they’re now going to tell the other brethren. This is a good approach. Verse 20, avoid meat offered to idols. Well, now that’s obvious.

I mean, that seems reasonable. Now, technically, there’s nothing wrong with eating meat wherever it came from, it’s okay. But if you know that it’s offered to an idol, then you’re eating the meat. That’s going to be offensive to Jewish minds, and by the way, even a gentile shouldn’t do that if they can avoid it.

So that’s number one, avoid meat offered idols, day one. Number two, avoid fornication. Okay. That has a little to do with Gentiles, perhaps. But you know, I did remember with brothers Tim Krupa’s talk that sometimes when you found the Gentiles, they were in circumstances there.

This was a factor. Yeah. So that. That was worthy of mention. Three things strangled.

Now, Brother Richard has better information on that. But things strangled. Well, they would have blood in it. But Richard, Richard could say more on that. Well, yeah, let me just jump in and say that the way in which we want to be as humane as possible in slaughter was important to the Jews.

And, and that really is an important thing to do. But, and to drain the blood. However, there was an observation that if you slowly killed the animal, the meat got tender. So this, this, this was just on.

This was an unhumane thing to do, and, and it’s condemned. Okay, keep going. Okay.

Yeah. Number. Verse number 21. Moses has a lot of people in every city, and you should be sensitive, therefore, to their concerns.

So be sensitive to the Jewish Christians, even if it’s not mandatory for you, and we should be sensitive also. You know, you mentioned all the other cultures. Yeah. Well, you go to Africa, you’re sensitive to their culture, and so you should be sensitive.

We should be sensitive as well. Verse number 22, Judas, Barsabbas and Silas sent with Paul and Barnabas to report the results to Antioch, and it’s nice to have a written agreement about what’s to be done, but you need, and remember, Barnabas and Paul had come from Antioch to Jerusalem. Now you’re going to have two people, Silas and Judas, going back with them as personal testifiers of what happened in all of their agreements.

Now, I’d like to say something about the earlier verses. Of course. Okay. In verse, what James says when he starts off, starting in verse 15 to this verse 14, says, Remember Peter, Simon Peter declared how he went to see the Gentiles. Very good.

And to this degree, the words of the prophets, that is as it is written, and he’s going to quote Amos 9, 11, and 12. Now, if you look in the Hebrew, you’re going to find a different words than you’re going to find here in Acts, because he’s quoting with the Septuagint, and the Septuagint does it better to express what James has in mind than the Hebrew does? But here it is.

After the. After I will return and build again the tabernacle of David which has fallen down and build the ruins thereof, that the residue of men might seek after the Lord and all the Gentiles upon whom my name is called. Now, I know that mostly we think of that passage in Acts as a picture of the kingdom. But I believe James is taking that and to a prophecy that applies two ways and recognizing that right now, in his day, the temple of David that had fallen down has now been resurrected because the King Jesus that came from David is now in glory. He is our king, and he’s also our priest.

That’s Melchizedek. So I think what he’s saying is now the residue of men might seek after the Lord and all the Gentiles. So what James is doing is adding a scripture from the Old Testament to demonstrate that we are at that time in history where Gentiles will be coming into the church in droves, in large numbers, and therefore we’ve got to deal with this, and we can’t impose things of the Old Judaic law upon them that we all feel comfortable with. Okay.

And just to make a textual point linking in with what Brother David was saying, if you look at verse 12, and I’m going to read it from King James, that they may possess the remnant of Edom. Edom, Adam, man are all the same Hebrew word. I see. Okay. So when the Septuagint translators came, they said, we don’t know if this is talking about the locality where that we call Edom.

This could be talking about men generally, and so they. Hence, they translated it that way. Well, thank you. That actually is very good in making the point.

Why the Septuagint might be correct. Yeah. Why the Septuagint did it, and believe me, I’m no supporter of the Septuagint. Jesus, Joshua Bar Sirach said it’s not a good translation when it came out.

He’s in the apocryphal books, and one point that is important for the brethren to note, if you did not notice this in some of your studies of Genesis, when the ark is grounded and finally, it’s time that you could see the animals coming out and going onto the dry land, we find that there is a series of laws that are given to man from that point forward. So what? Just. My.

My dear wife got a track from one of the members of the Jewish community when she was shopping and one of the grocery stores at Kosher to remind her of the importance of the covenant that was for all of us, and that’s found in Genesis 9, and it’s being echoed here by the Council because this is upon all of us. So starting in verse three, it says, every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you, even as the green herb have I given you all things, but the flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof ye shall not eat. So for those of you of Polish descent, you can’t have. You can’t have Kishka anyway.

And surely your blood of your lives will I require at the hand of every beast will I require in it at the hand of man, the hand of every man’s brother. Will I require the life of man. So now there’s an instruction to take the life of one who has murdered another, and it’s not an eye for an eye. Notice that here it’s.

Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed. But, of course, that wasn’t repeated at the Council since the Roman Civil authorities had pretty strong opinions on who and who should, and who should not slay people in Rome. But just to. The council is also picking up and focusing on the.

It’s sometimes called the Noachian law, which is incumbent on us all. Okay, moving forward to verse 22, we have a resolution, and when this resolution, based on the summary by the conference chairman, James D. Adelphos of our Lord is. Is presented, both epistles and brethren are sent forth. Why.

Why would that be, Brother David? Well, I think it was a twofold good way to do it. You know, as we mentioned earlier, Paul and Barnabas went back to Antioch, where they were from, and the two other people that were from Jerusalem to testify and affirm from Jerusalem that this was correct. Well, that was appropriate. But you need something in writing as well to show that this is not just a bad memory.

Yeah, this is. This is exactly what the Council determined. It’s very reasonable to do that, and as you pointed out to me also, once the. The people had left, because Paul Barnabas went on separate journeys after that, and Silas went with them, you need the written document as testimony to the brethren from that time forward.

You need that, and I have the privilege of writing the minutes for both the elders meeting and the elders and deacons meeting that we have every month in Chicago. So over the course of the year, I get the Privilege of writing 24 sets of minutes as well as special meeting minutes. So what we have here, what I’m reading through Acts 15, this is a complete set of business meeting minutes that we have presented here with the background what took place, and then actually the epistle with the resolution that’s in it, and we have.

Picking up on that, that really takes us from verse 23 through 29, and as we’ve already talked about it, but is there anything additional you’d like to. Would you mind if I went back just a little bit? Of course not. Okay. You know, we’re talking about the fact that how do we interchange with brethren on.

On issues. This was a really strong issue because it was the whole culture of the Jewish people, and yet they were able to manage it and deal with it. There’s. There’s references in volume six that we often don’t talk about, but it’s, I think, really good advice. In volume six, page 314.

This won’t be long. I’m going to quit. Read a quote, though. Volume six, page 314, he talks about four kind of meetings that we should have in our regular meetings, and this is one that we don’t often have.

But it says there should be frequent regular meetings at which reasonably full opportunities would be given to anyone to present what he might believe to be a different view of the truth than that generally held and approved. Page 317, same point. In support of this proposition. No matter how confident we are that we have the truth, it would be unwise for us to show, shut and lock the door of interrogation and contrary expression as thoroughly to exclude all that might be considered error by the leader of the meeting or the congregation. Now, I just want to say everybody knows I have some different opinions, but I don’t read this for that point.

It is because there are various different opinions. The older I get, the more I remember good elders from past who are now gone, who did have different opinions, and I sometimes feel that I didn’t listen appropriately to those opinions. It doesn’t mean they’re right, doesn’t mean they were wrong. But if I had to do over again, I would do it differently and perhaps not create as much division as I did.

So I think that when they’re in this council of Jerusalem, they really took pains to listen, to think, to discuss, to dialogue, and the Lord blessed them. Thank you, and I just have to be impressed by James coming, coming around and summarizing everything, and he says, okay, you’ve got an epistle from me before.

Here comes another one. This one’s a little different in tone, and what a blessing, because as the 34th verse kind of closes the section out and then we move into the additional missionary journeys, we’re told that the brethren rejoiced. Isn’t that the way we’d love to see the conflicting business meetings come to an end? Yeah, that’s the way it should be.

Click Here for the PDF transcript.