Acts 15 is a watershed the Jesus message could have been lost in a Jewish sect if the issues presented to the Jerusalem Council hadn’t been dealt with.
When you look at it, the future of Christianity depended on just a few people.
Paul and Barnabas v2 and v12
Peter v6
James v13
Let me point something weird out. There is no mention of the process of decision making. None at all.
The principles are there:
V7 – Much discussion
V2 – Sharp dispute and debate.
But the format, the law and procedures of meetings was not opened up.
It is probable that the style of decision making that was Jewish and Greek was used. The debates certainly would have followed the format of Jewish debate and most probably the understanding of rhetorical debate and argument was used. But, we aren’t told nor are we instructed to follow any format.
Notice what happens. The bible spells it out for us.
AC 15:1 Some men came down from Judea to
The debate happened in
The
And the issue is stated.
AC 15:5 Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses.”
Notice what happens next.
AC 15:6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question.
The guys with the no how set about coming to a conclusion.
Notice a couple of principals here.
i. The question comes from the believers.
ii. It is dealt with by the leadership.
This is similar to our situation and our church governance.
When an issue happens the right process to go through the diaconate. Let them set up the meetings and find the people suitable for the issue to be dealt with. Some may not agree with this, but it is this chapter and others that we get our Baptist distinctives of leadership form but there are further principals further on in the passage to look at.
Anyway, next comes the issue being presented and debated.
Notice, discussion had already been happening. Luke, the author is giving us an overview here. We don’t see all the argument or debate. Again that is similar to our church meetings, not every word is included in the minutes, but discussion and debate is encouraged.
7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”
Notice, Peter gives a testimony of his understanding. Remember, Peter is an apostle, a disciple, has leadership credibility as well as being particularly outspoken. Luke, the author, gives us the view point of Peter. 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”
Then the argument is supported by the people at the frontline. Paul and Barny.
AC 15:12 The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them.
Notice they make no reference to theology or scripture but to signs and wonders. They talk about the experiences of God changing people’s lives. Now this is really out there.
Many of the Jewish guys would have been Pharisee’s and scripture is their total basis.
That is why the issue was an issue. Hey wanted everything to add up scripturally.
Just as an aside. Paul had been Pharisee. He knew where they were coming from.
BUT
The Pharisee’s had no idea where Paul was coming from. He was totally out of their box.
What we need to be careful of is that we as leaders of churches do not become like the Pharisee’s and try to put everyone in our box. As I said last week, we need to let people be who God created them to be. Not expect them to be as we are.
Let me explain this a bit further. Paul was a Pharisee before he was a Christian. He knew about Jesus, to a point where he thought Jesus was wrong. He wanted the Christians to conform to what he believed. Then something happened. The
. Experience. Notice what changed him – the experience, his theological changes came later on. But experiences are vital. Paul was arguing when he and Barny told of the signs and wonders that his experience was valid.
What Paul really wants is for the people who want the Jewish guys to experience Jesus.
13 When they finished, James spoke up: “Brothers, listen to me. 14 Simon has described to us how God at first showed his concern by taking from the Gentiles a people for himself. 15 The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written:
AC 15:16 ” `After this I will return and rebuild David’s fallen tent. Its ruins I will rebuild, and I will restore it,
AC 15:17 that the remnant of men may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who bear my name, says the Lord, who does these things’
AC 15:18 that have been known for ages.
Notice this bit. This bit appeals to what the Jewish guys understand. The bible, OT, the scriptures. Even though this situation was going to change the way Christianity was done and perceived, there still is firstly a connection with the old testament and secondly James communicates to them on their terms. Just let me say within this though Amos was not a favourite of the Pharisees. Amos’s prophetic ministry was a kick in the guts of the religious establishment of his times. (this is a quote from Amos 9:11-12)
An interesting aside here, if we look at the ministry of Jesus – the only people Jesus put the boot into was – The Pharisees, Sadducees and Herod – the civil and religious leaders – in other words the establishment. Really it was those who tried to control from a power base.
AC 15:19 “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.
These verses are fabulous!!!! James, the head guy in the church in Jerusalem was saying – lets not put our rules on them – let’s let them be who they are in Jesus.
We have the responsibility to respond positively to this. We should not expect people to become Christians and become like us. We should be encouraging them to find out who they are in Christ. That means if they come to church looking different – respect that. If they live a different lifestyle – respect that. If they like different things or different music – respect that.
Notice the list of things that are mentioned.
Abstain from food offered to idols, sexually immorality, meat of strangled animals and from drinking blood.
These things are not rules but door openers. They open the doors to allow gentile Christians to be able to fellowship with Jewish Christians. Jews couldn’t cope with those things, so respect is shown here to the Jew and to the gentiles. If these rules are followed the church can be one, not a Jewish church and a gentile church. They are allowed table fellowship, having meals together which in those times was a huge thing in fact they can share communion together. Eating with people was important, it still is. It is and was a sign of acceptance and a sign of family.
See what happened.
i. The people brought up an issue.
ii. The leaders worked it through
iii. The Bible was part of the process
iv. The decision was made for the good of the church
v. It was then communicated.
We don’t have time to look at the communication process fully. But we see a letter was sent. Now, letters in those days didn’t go to the Church secretary or the pastor, they went to the whole church. Very few letters at that time were private. They were communications, somewhat similar to TV. People gathered for the reading of a letter.
The other thing is the guys selected to deliver the letter were also interpreters of the letter. It wasn’t just read, it would have been discussed and those guys would have acted as qualifiers to the issues raised by people at the reading.
Now, while we don’t have a set format for discussion, don’t we have a really practical format for dealing with issues. Don’t we also have a real sense that all people need to be treated with respect – even if they do things differently.
Entries (RSS)