Text -- Acts 15:1-18 (NET)

The Jerusalem Council

15:1 Now some men came down from Judea and began to teach the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot cannot be saved.” 15:2 When Paul and Barnabas had a major argument and debate with them, the church appointed Paul and Barnabas and some others from among them to go up to meet with the apostles and elders in Jerusalem about this point of disagreement. 15:3 So they were sent on their way by the church, and as they passed through both Phoenicia and Samaria, they were relating at length the conversion of the Gentiles and bringing great joy to all the brothers. 15:4 When they arrived in Jerusalem, they were received by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they reported all the things God had done with them. 15:5 But some from the religious party of the Pharisees who had believed stood up and said, “It is necessary to circumcise the Gentiles and to order them to observe the law of Moses.” 15:6 Both the apostles and the elders met together to deliberate about this matter. 15:7 After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that some time ago God chose me to preach to the Gentiles so they would hear the message of the gospel and believe. 15:8 And God, who knows the heart, has testified to them by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, 15:9 and he made no distinction between them and us, cleansing their hearts by faith. 15:10 So now why are you putting God to the test by placing on the neck of the disciples a yoke that neither our ancestors nor we have been able to bear? 15:11 On the contrary, we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they are.” 15:12 The whole group kept quiet and listened to Barnabas and Paul while they explained all the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. 15:13 After they stopped speaking, James replied, “Brothers, listen to me. 15:14 Simeon has explained how God first concerned himself to select from among the Gentiles a people for his name. 15:15 The words of the prophets agree with this, as it is written, 15:16 ‘After this I will return, and I will rebuild the fallen tent of David; I will rebuild its ruins and restore it, 15:17 so that the rest of humanity may seek the Lord, namely, all the Gentiles I have called to be my own,’ says the Lord, who makes these things 15:18 known from long ago.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Robertson: Act 15:1

And certain men came down from Judea ( kai tines katelthontes apo tēs Ioudaias ).

Evidently the party of the circumcision in the church in Jerusalem (Act 11:2) had heard of the spread of the gospel among the Gentiles in Cyprus, Pamphylia, and South Galatia (Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycaonia). Possibly John Mark after his desertion at Perga (Act 13:13) told of this as one of his reasons for coming home. At any rate echoes of the jubilation in Antioch in Syria would be certain to reach Jerusalem. The Judaizers in Jerusalem, who insisted that all the Gentile Christians must become Jews also, had acquiesced in the case of Cornelius and his group (11:1-18) after plain proof by Peter that it was the Lord’ s doing. But they had not agreed to a formal campaign to turn the exception into the rule and to make Christianity mainly Gentile with a few Jews instead of mainly Jewish with a few Gentiles. Since Paul and Barnabas did not come up to Jerusalem, the leaders among the Judaizers decided to go down to Antioch and attack Paul and Barnabas there. They had volunteered to go without church action in Jerusalem for their activity is disclaimed by the conference (Act 15:24). In Gal 2:4 Paul with some heat describes these Judaizers as "false brethren, secretly introduced who sneaked in to spy out our liberty."It is reasonably certain that this visit to Jerusalem described in Gal 2:1-10 is the same one as the Jerusalem Conference in Acts 15:5-29 in spite of the effort of Ramsay to identify it with that in Act 11:29. Paul in Galatians is not giving a list of his visits to Jerusalem. He is showing his independence of the twelve apostles and his equality with them. He did not see them in Act 11:29., but only "the elders."In Acts 15 Luke gives the outward narrative of events, in Gal 2:1-10 Paul shows us the private interview with the apostles when they agreed on their line of conduct toward the Judaizers. In Gal 2:2 by the use of "them"(autois ) Paul seems to refer to the first public meeting in Acts before the private interview that came in between verses Act 15:5-6. If we recall the difficulty that Peter had on the subject of preaching the gospel to the heathen (10:1-11:18), we can the better understand the attitude of the Judaizers. They were men of sincere convictions without a doubt, but they were obscurantists and unable and unwilling to receive new light from the Lord on a matter that involved their racial and social prejudices. They recalled that Jesus himself had been circumcised and that he had said to the Syro-Phoenician woman that he had come only save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Mat 15:24.). They argued that Christ had not repealed circumcision. So one of the great religious controversies of all time was begun, that between spiritual religion and ritualistic or ceremonial religion. It is with us yet with baptism taking the place of circumcision. These self-appointed champions of circumcision for Gentile Christians were deeply in earnest.

Robertson: Act 15:1

Taught the brethren ( edidaskon tous adelphous ).

Inchoative imperfect active, began to teach and kept it up. Their attitude was one of supercilious superiority. They probably resented the conduct of Barnabas, who, when sent by the Church in Jerusalem to investigate the conversion of the Greeks in Antioch (Act 11:20-26), did not return and report till a strong church had been established there with the help of Saul and only then with a big collection to confuse the issue. Paul and Barnabas were on hand, but the Judaizers persisted in their efforts to force their views on the church in Antioch. It was a crisis.

Robertson: Act 15:1

Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved ( ean me peritmēthēte tōi ethei Mōuseōs , ou dunasthe sōthēnai ).

There was the dictum of the Judaizers to the Gentiles. Paul and Barnabas had been circumcised. This is probably the precise language employed, for they spoke in Greek to these Greeks. It is a condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of being determined, ean plus the first aorist passive subjunctive of peritemnō ). There was thus hope held out for them, but only on condition that they be circumcised. The issue was sharply drawn. The associative instrumental case (tōi ethei ) is customary. "Saved"(sōthēnai ) here is the Messianic salvation. This doctrine denied the efficacy of the work of Christ.

Robertson: Act 15:2

When Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and questioning with them ( Genomenēs staseōs kai zētēseōs ouk oligēs tōi Paulōi kai Barnabāi pros autous ).

Genitive absolute of second aorist middle participle of ginomai , genitive singular agreeing with first substantive staseōs . Literally, "No little (litotes for much) strife and questioning coming to Paul and Barnabas (dative case) with them "(pros autous , face to face with them). Paul and Barnabas were not willing to see this Gentile church brow-beaten and treated as heretics by these self-appointed regulators of Christian orthodoxy from Jerusalem. The work had developed under the leadership of Paul and Barnabas and they accepted full responsibility for it and stoutly resisted these Judaizers to the point of sedition (riot, outbreak in Luk 23:25; Act 19:40) as in Act 23:7. There is no evidence that the Judaizers had any supporters in the Antioch church so that they failed utterly to make any impression. Probably these Judaizers compelled Paul to think through afresh his whole gospel of grace and so they did Paul and the world a real service. If the Jews like Paul had to believe, it was plain that there was no virtue in circumcision (Gal 2:15-21). It is not true that the early Christians had no disagreements. They had selfish avarice with Ananias and Sapphira, murmuring over the gifts to the widows, simony in the case of Simon Magus, violent objection to work in Caesarea, and now open strife over a great doctrine (grace vs. legalism).

Robertson: Act 15:2

The brethren appointed ( etaxan ).

"The brethren"can be supplied from Act 15:1and means the church in Antioch. The church clearly saw that the way to remove this deadlock between the Judaizers and Paul and Barnabas was to consult the church in Jerusalem to which the Judaizers belonged. Paul and Barnabas had won in Antioch. If they can win in Jerusalem, that will settle the matter. The Judaizers will be answered in their own church for which they are presuming to speak. The verb etaxan (tassō , to arrange) suggests a formal appointment by the church in regular assembly. Paul (Gal 2:2) says that he went up by revelation (kat' apokalupsin ), but surely that is not contradictory to the action of the church.

Robertson: Act 15:2

Certain others of them ( tinas allous ).

Certainly Titus (Gal 2:1, Gal 2:3), a Greek and probably a brother of Luke who is not mentioned in Acts. Rackham thinks that Luke was in the number.

Robertson: Act 15:2

The apostles and elders ( tous apostolous kai presbuterous ).

Note one article for both (cf. "the apostles and the brethren"in Act 11:1). "Elders"now (Act 11:30) in full force. The apostles have evidently returned now to the city after the death of Herod Agrippa I stopped the persecution.

Robertson: Act 15:3

They therefore ( hoi men oun ).

Luke’ s favourite method of resumptive narrative as we have seen (Act 11:19, etc.), demonstrative hoi with men (indeed) and oun (therefore).

Robertson: Act 15:3

Being brought on their way by the church ( propemphthentes hupo tēs ekklēsias ).

First aorist passive participle of propempō , old verb, to send forward under escort as a mark of honour as in Act 20:38; Act 21:5; 3 Jo Act 1:6. They were given a grand send-off by the church in Antioch.

Robertson: Act 15:3

Passed through ( diērchonto ).

Imperfect middle describing the triumphal procession through both (te kai ) Phoenicia and Samaria.

Robertson: Act 15:3

The conversion ( tēn epistrophēn ).

The turning.

Robertson: Act 15:3

They caused great joy ( epoioun charan megalēn ).

Imperfect active. They were raising a constant paean of praise as they proceeded toward Jerusalem. Probably the Judaizers had gone on or kept still.

Robertson: Act 15:4

Were received ( paredechthēsan ).

First aorist passive indicative of paradechomai , old verb, to receive, to welcome. Here it was a public reception for Paul and Barnabas provided by the whole church including the apostles and elders, at which an opportunity was given to hear the story of Paul and Barnabas about God’ s dealings with them among the Gentiles. This first public meeting is referred to by Paul in Gal 2:2 "I set before them (autois ) the gospel, etc."

Robertson: Act 15:5

But there rose up ( exanestēsan de ).

Second aorist active indicative (intransitive). Note both exō and an . These men rose up out of the crowd at a critical moment. They were believers in Christ (pepisteukotes , having believed), but were still members of "the sect of the Pharisees"(tēs haireseōs tōn Pharisaiōn ). Evidently they still held to the Pharisaic narrowness shown in the attack on Peter (Act 11:2.). Note the dogmatism of their "must"(dei ) after the opposition of Paul and Barnabas to their "except"(ean me ) at Antioch (Act 15:1). They are unconvinced and expected to carry the elders with them. Codex Bezae says that they had appealed to the elders (Act 15:2, Act 15:5). At any rate they have made the issue in open meeting at the height of the jubilation. It is plain from Act 15:6that this meeting was adjourned, for another gathering came together then. It is here that the private conference of which Paul speaks in Gal 2:1-10 took place. It was Paul’ s chance to see the leaders in Jerusalem (Peter, James, and John) and he won them over to his view of Gentile liberty from the Mosaic law so that the next public conference (Acts 15:6-29) ratified heartily the views of Paul, Barnabas, Peter, James, and John. It was a diplomatic triumph of the first order and saved Christianity from the bondage of Jewish ceremonial sacramentalism. So far as we know this is the only time that Paul and John met face to face, the great spirits in Christian history after Jesus our Lord. It is a bit curious to see men saying today that Paul surrendered about Titus and had him circumcised for the sake of peace, the very opposite of what he says in Galatians, "to whom I yielded, no not for an hour."Titus as a Greek was a red flag to the Judaizers and to the compromisers, but Paul stood his ground.

Robertson: Act 15:6

Were gathered together ( sunēchthēsan ).

First aorist (effective) passive indicative. The church is not named here as in Act 15:4, but we know from Act 15:12-22 that the whole church came together this time also along with the apostles and elders.

Robertson: Act 15:6

Of this matter ( peri tou logou toutou ).

Same idiom in Act 8:21; Act 19:38. They realized the importance of the issue.

Robertson: Act 15:7

When there had been much questioning ( pollēs zētēseōs genomenēs ).

Genitive absolute with second aorist middle participle of ginomai . Evidently the Judaizers were given full opportunity to air all their grievances and objections. They were allowed plenty of time and there was no effort to shut off debate or to rush anything through the meeting.

Robertson: Act 15:7

Peter rose up ( anastas Petros ).

The wonder was that he had waited so long. Probably Paul asked him to do so. He was the usual spokesman for the apostles and his activities in Jerusalem were well-known. In particular his experience at Caesarea (Acts 10) had caused trouble here in Jerusalem from this very same party of the circumcism (Acts 11:1-18). It was fitting that Peter should speak. This is the last time that Peter appears in the Acts.

Robertson: Act 15:7

A good while ago ( aph' hēmerōn archaiōn ).

From ancient days. The adjective archaios is from archē , beginning, and its actual age is a matter of relativity. So Mnason (Act 21:16) is termed "an ancient disciple."It was probably a dozen years since God "made choice"(exelexato ) to speak by Peter’ s mouth to Cornelius and the other Gentiles in Caesarea. His point is that what Paul and Barnabas have reported is nothing new. The Judaizers made objection then as they are doing now.

Robertson: Act 15:8

Which knoweth the heart ( kardiognōstēs ).

Late word from kardia (heart) and gnōstēs (known, ginōskō ). In the N.T. only here and Act 1:24 which see.

Robertson: Act 15:8

Giving them the Holy Spirit ( dous to pneuma to hagion ).

And before their baptism. This was the Lord’ s doing. They had accepted (Act 11:18) this witness of God then and it was true now of these other Gentile converts.

Robertson: Act 15:9

He made no distinction between us and them ( outhen diekrinen metaxu hēmōn te kai autōn ).

He distinguished nothing (first aorist active ind.) between (both dia and metaxu ) both (te kai ) us and them. In the matter of faith and conversion God treated us Jews as heathen and the heathen as Jews.

Robertson: Act 15:9

Cleansing their hearts by faith ( tēi pistei katharisas tas kardias autōn ).

Not by works nor by ceremonies. Peter here has a thoroughly Pauline and Johannine idea of salvation for all both Jew and Greek. Cf. Act 10:15.

Robertson: Act 15:10

Why tempt ye God? ( tōi peirazete ton theoṉ ).

By implying that God had made a mistake this time, though right about Cornelius. It is a home-thrust. They were refusing to follow the guidance of God like the Israelites at Massah and Meribah (Exo 17:7; Deu 6:16; 1Co 10:9).

Robertson: Act 15:10

That ye should put ( epitheinai ).

Second aorist active infinitive of epitithēmi , epexegetic, explaining the tempting.

Robertson: Act 15:10

A yoke upon the neck ( zugon epi ton trachēlon ).

Familiar image of oxen with yokes upon the necks. Paul’ s very image for the yoke of bondage of the Mosaic law in Gal 5:1. It had probably been used in the private interview. Cf. the words of Jesus about the Pharisees (Mat 23:4) and how easy and light his own yoke is (Mat 11:30).

Robertson: Act 15:10

Were able to bear ( ischusamen bastasai ).

Neither our fathers nor we had strength (ischuō ) to carry this yoke which the Judaizers wish to put on the necks of the Gentiles. Peter speaks as the spiritual emancipator. He had been slow to see the meaning of God’ s dealings with him at Joppa and Caesarea, but he has seen clearly by now. He takes his stand boldly with Paul and Barnabas for Gentile freedom.

Robertson: Act 15:11

That we shall be saved ( sōthēnai ).

First aorist passive infinitive in indirect discourse after pisteuomen . More exactly, "We believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus in like manner as they also."This thoroughly Pauline note shows that whatever hopes the Judaizers had about Peter were false. His doctrine of grace is as clear as a bell. He has lifted his voice against salvation by ceremony and ritualism. It was a great deliverance.

Robertson: Act 15:12

Kept silence ( esigēsen ).

Ingressive first aorist active of sigaō , old verb, to hold one’ s peace. All the multitude became silent after Peter’ s speech and because of it.

Robertson: Act 15:12

Hearkened ( ēkouon ).

Imperfect active of akouō , descriptive of the rapt attention, were listening.

Robertson: Act 15:12

Unto Barnabas and Paul ( Barnaba kai Paulou ).

Note placing Barnabas before Paul as in Act 15:25, possibly because in Jerusalem Barnabas was still better known than Paul.

Robertson: Act 15:12

Rehearsing ( exēgoumenōn ).

Present middle participle of exēgeomai , old verb, to go through or lead out a narrative of events as in Luk 24:35; Act 10:8 which see. Three times (Act 14:27; Act 15:4, Act 15:12) Paul is described as telling the facts about their mission work, facts more eloquent than argument (Page). One of the crying needs in the churches is fuller knowledge of the facts of mission work and progress with enough detail to give life and interest. The signs and wonders which God had wrought among the Gentiles set the seal of approval on the work done through (dia ) Barnabas and Paul. This had been Peter’ s argument about Cornelius (Act 11:17). This same verb (exēgēsato ) is used by James in Act 15:14referring to Peter’ s speech.

Robertson: Act 15:13

After they had held their peace ( meta to sigēsai autous ).

Literally, "after the becoming silent (ingressive aorist active of the articular infinitive) as to them (Barnabas and Paul, accusative of general reference)."

Robertson: Act 15:13

James answered ( apekrithē Iakōbos ).

First aorist passive (deponent) indicative. It was expected that James, as President of the Conference, would speak last. But he wisely waited to give every one an opportunity to speak. The challenge of the Judaizers called for an opinion from James. Furneaux thinks that he may have been elected one of the twelve to take the place of James the brother of John since Paul (Gal 1:19) calls him apostle. More likely he was asked to preside because of his great gifts and character as chief of the elders.

Robertson: Act 15:14

Hearken unto me ( akousate mou ).

Usual appeal for attention. James was termed James the Just and was considered a representative of the Hebraic as opposed to the Hellenistic wing of the Jewish Christians (Act 6:1). The Judaizers had doubtless counted on him as a champion of their view and did later wrongfully make use of his name against Peter at Antioch (Gal 2:12). There was instant attention when James began to speak.

Robertson: Act 15:14

Symeon ( Sumeōn ).

The Aramaic form of Simon as in 2Pe 2:1. This little touch would show his affinities with the Jewish Christians (not the Judaizers). This Aramaic form is used also in Luk 2:25, Luk 2:34 of the old prophet in the temple. Possibly both forms (Symeon, Aramaic, and Simon, Greek) were current in Jerusalem.

Robertson: Act 15:14

How ( kathōs ).

Strictly, "according as,"here like hos in indirect discourse somewhat like the epexegetic or explanatory use in 3 Jo Luk 1:3.

Robertson: Act 15:14

First ( prōton ).

Told by Peter in Act 15:7. James notes, as Peter did, that this experience of Barnabas and Paul is not the beginning of work among the Gentiles.

Robertson: Act 15:14

Did visit ( epeskepsato ).

First aorist middle indicative of episkeptomai , old verb to look upon, to look after, provide for. This same verb occurs in Jam 1:27 and is one of various points of similarity between this speech of James in Acts and the Epistle of James as shown by Mayor in his Commentary on James. Somehow Luke may have obtained notes of these various addresses.

Robertson: Act 15:14

To take from the Gentiles a people for his name ( labein exō ethnōn laon tōi onomati autou ).

Bengel calls this egregium paradoxon , a chosen people (laon ) out of the Gentiles (ethnōn ). This is what is really involved in what took place at Caesarea at the hands of Peter and the campaign of Barnabas and Paul from Antioch. But such a claim of God’ s purpose called for proof from Scripture to convince Jews and this is precisely what James undertakes to give. This new Israel from among the Gentiles is one of Paul’ s great doctrines as set forth in Galatians 3; Romans 9-11. Note the use of God’ s "name"here for "the Israel of God"(Gal 6:16).

Robertson: Act 15:15

To this agree ( toutōi sumphōnousin ).

Associative instrumental case (toutōi ) after sumphōnousin (voice together with, symphony with, harmonize with), from sumphōneō , old verb seen already in Mat 18:19; Luk 5:36; Act 5:9 which see. James cites only Amo 9:11, Amo 9:12 from the lxx as an example of "the words of the prophets"(hoi logoi tōn prophētōn ) to which he refers on this point. The somewhat free quotation runs here through Act 15:16-18 of Acts 15 and is exceedingly pertinent. The Jewish rabbis often failed to understand the prophets as Jesus showed. The passage in Amos refers primarily to the restoration of the Davidic empire, but also the Messiah’ s Kingdom (the throne of David his father,"Luk 1:32).

Robertson: Act 15:16

I will build again ( anoikodomēsō ).

Here lxx has anastēsō . Compound (ana , up or again) of oikodomeō , the verb used by Jesus in Mat 16:18 of the general church or kingdom as here which see.

Robertson: Act 15:16

The tabernacle of David ( tēn skēnēn Daueid )

, a poetical figure of the throne of David (2Sa 7:12) now "the fallen tent"(tēn peptōkuian ), perfect active participle of piptō , state of completion.

Robertson: Act 15:16

The ruins thereof ( ta katestrammena autēs ).

Literally, "the ruined portions of it."Perfect passive participle of katastrephō , to turn down. It is a desolate picture of the fallen, torn down tent of David.

Robertson: Act 15:16

I will let it up ( anorthōsō ).

Old verb from anorthoō (ana , orthos ), to set upright. See note on Luk 13:13 of the old woman whose crooked back was set straight.

Robertson: Act 15:17

That the residue of men may seek after the Lord ( hopōs an ekzētēsōsin hoi kataloipoi tōn anthrōpōn ton kurion ).

The use of hopōs with the subjunctive (effective aorist active) to express purpose is common enough and note an for an additional tone of uncertainty. On the rarity of an with hopōs in the Koiné[28928]š see Robertson, Grammar , p. 986. Here the Gentiles are referred to. The Hebrew text is quite different, "that they may possess the remnant of Edom."Certainly the lxx suits best the point that James is making. But the closing words of this verse point definitely to the Gentiles both in the Hebrew and the lxx, "all the Gentiles"(panta ta ethnē ). Another item of similarity between this speech and the Epistle of James is in the phrase "my name is called"(epikeklētai to onoma mou ) and Jam 2:7. The purpose of God, though future, is expressed by this perfect passive indicative epikeklētai from epi̇kaleō , to call on. It is a Jewish way of speaking of those who worship God.

Robertson: Act 15:18

From the beginning of the world ( ap' aiōnos ).

Or, "from of old."James adds these words, perhaps with a reminiscence of Isa 45:21. His point is that this purpose of God, as set forth in Amos, is an old one. God has an Israel outside of and beyond the Jewish race, whom he will make his true "Israel"and so there is no occasion for surprise in the story of God’ s dealings with the Gentiles as told by Barnabas and Paul. God’ s eternal purpose of grace includes all who call upon his name in every land and people (Isa 2:1; Mic 4:1). This larger and richer purpose and plan of God was one of the mysteries which Paul will unfold in the future (Rom 16:25; Eph 3:9). James sees it clearly now. God is making it known (poiōn tauta gnōsta ), if they will only be willing to see and understand. It was a great deliverance that James had made and it exerted a profound influence on the assembly.

Vincent: Act 15:1

Taught

Rather the imperfect, were teaching. They had not merely broached the error, but were inculcating it.

Vincent: Act 15:1

Manner ( ἔθει )

Better, custom, as Rev.

Vincent: Act 15:2

Question ( ζητήματος )

Found only in the Acts, and always of a question in dispute.

Vincent: Act 15:3

Being brought on their way ( προπεμφθέντες )

Lit., having been sent forth; under escort as a mark of honor.

Vincent: Act 15:3

Declaring

See on Act 13:41. In the various towns along their route.

Vincent: Act 15:4

Were received ( ἀπεδέχθησαν )

The word implies a cordial welcome, which they were not altogether sure of receiving.

Vincent: Act 15:5

Arose

In the assembly.

Vincent: Act 15:5

Sect

See on heresies, 2Pe 2:1.

Vincent: Act 15:7

The word of the gospel ( τὸν λόγον τοῦ εὐαγγελίου )

This phrase occurs nowhere else; and εὐαγγε.λιον , gospel, is found only once more in Acts (Act 20:24).

Vincent: Act 15:8

Which knoweth the heart ( καρδιογνώστης )

Only here and Act 1:24.

Vincent: Act 15:10

Were able ( ἰσχύσαμεν )

See on Luk 14:30; and Luk 16:3.

Vincent: Act 15:12

Hearkened

The imperfect (ἤκουον ) denotes attention to a continued narrative.

Vincent: Act 15:12

Declaring ( ἐξηγουμένων )

Better, as Rev., rehearsing. See on Luk 24:35.

Vincent: Act 15:12

What miracles, etc

Lit., how many (ὅσα ) .

Vincent: Act 15:13

James

See Introduction to Catholic Epistles.

Vincent: Act 15:18

Known unto God, etc

The best texts join these words with the preceding verse, from which they omit all; rendering, The Lord, who maketh these things known from the beginning of the world.

Wesley: Act 15:1

Perhaps to supply what they thought Paul and Barnabas had omitted.

Wesley: Act 15:2

This is the journey to which St. Paul refers, Gal 2:1-2, when he says he went up by revelation: which is very consistent with this; for the Church in sending them might be directed by a revelation made either immediately to St. Paul, or to some other person, relating to so important an affair. Important indeed it was, that these Jewish impositions should be solemnly opposed in time; because multitudes of converts were still zealous for the law, and ready to contend for the observance of it. Indeed many of the Christians of Antioch would have acquiesced in the determination of Paul alone. But as many others might have prejudices against him, for his having been so much concerned for the Gentiles, it was highly expedient to take the concurrent judgment of all the apostles on this occasion.

Wesley: Act 15:4

That is solemnly welcomed.

Wesley: Act 15:5

For even believers are apt to retain their former turn of mind, and prejudices derived therefrom.

Wesley: Act 15:5

The whole law, both moral and ritual.

Wesley: Act 15:7

It does not appear that this was among the apostles themselves. But if it had, if they themselves had debated at first, yet might their final decision be from an unerring direction. For how really soever they were inspired, we need not suppose their inspiration was always so instantaneous and express, as to supersede any deliberation in their own minds, or any consultation with each other.

Wesley: Act 15:7

This is the last time he is mentioned in the Acts.

Wesley: Act 15:8

That he had accepted them, by giving them the Holy Ghost.

Wesley: Act 15:9

This word is repeated from Act 10:15; their hearts - The heart is the proper seat of purity; by faith - Without concerning themselves with the Mosaic law.

Wesley: Act 15:10

Seeing these things are so: why tempt ye God? - Why do ye provoke him to anger, by putting so heavy a yoke on their neck?

Wesley: Act 15:11

He does not here say our Lord; because in this solemn place he means the Lord of all, we - Jews, shall be saved even as they - Gentiles, namely, through the grace of the Lord Jesus, not by our observance of the ceremonial law.

Wesley: Act 15:12

By which also what St. Peter had said was confirmed.

Wesley: Act 15:14

James, the apostle of the Hebrews, calls Peter by his Hebrew name.

Wesley: Act 15:14

That is to believe in him, to be called by his name.

Wesley: Act 15:15

St. Peter had urged the plain fact, which St. James confirms by Scripture prophecy.

Wesley: Act 15:15

One of whom is immediately cited.

Wesley: Act 15:16

After the Jewish dispensation expires.

Wesley: Act 15:16

By raising from his seed the Christ, who shall build on the ruins of his fallen tabernacle a spiritual and eternal kingdom. Amo 9:11.

Wesley: Act 15:17

That is, who are called by my name; who are my people.

Wesley: Act 15:18

Which the apostle infers from the prophecy itself, and the accomplishment of it. And this conversion of the Gentiles being known to him from eternity, we ought not to think a new or strange thing. It is observable, he does not speak of God's works in the natural world, (which had been nothing to his present purpose,) but of his dealing with the children of men. Now he could not know these, without knowing the characters and actions of particular persons, on a correspondence with which the wisdom and goodness of his providential dispensations is founded. For instance, he could not know how he would deal with heathen idolaters (whom he was now calling into his Church) without knowing there would be heathen idolaters: and yet this was a thing purely contingent, a thing as dependent on the freedom of the human mind, as any we can imagine. This text, therefore, among a thousand more, is an unanswerable proof, that God foreknows future contingencies, though there are difficulties relating hereto which men cannot solve.

JFB: Act 15:1-2

See the description of them in Gal 2:4.

JFB: Act 15:2

Now the recognized heads of the Church at Antioch.

JFB: Act 15:2

That is, the church did.

JFB: Act 15:2

Titus was one (Gal 2:1); probably as an uncircumcised Gentile convert endowed with the gifts of the Spirit. He is not mentioned in the Acts, but only in Second Corinthians, Galatians, Second Timothy, and the Epistle addressed to him [ALFORD].

JFB: Act 15:2

That such a deputation should be formally despatched by the Church of Antioch was natural, as it might be called the mother church of Gentile Christianity.

JFB: Act 15:3-6

A kind of official escort.

JFB: Act 15:3-6

(See on Act 11:19).

JFB: Act 15:3-6

As the converts in those parts were Jewish (Act 11:19), their spirit contrasts favorably with that of others of their nation.

JFB: Act 15:4

This was Paul's THIRD VISIT TO JERUSALEM after his conversion, and on this occasion took place what is related in Gal 2:1-10. (See there).

JFB: Act 15:4

Evidently at a meeting formally convened for this purpose: the deputation being one so influential, and from a church of such note.

JFB: Act 15:4

(See on Act 14:14-27).

JFB: Act 15:6

But in presence, as would seem, of the people (Act 15:12, Act 15:22-23).

JFB: Act 15:7

This is the last mention of him in the Acts, and one worthy of his standing, as formally pronouncing, from the divine decision of the matter already in his own case, in favor of the views which all of Paul's labors were devoted to establishing.

JFB: Act 15:7

Probably about fifteen years before this.

JFB: Act 15:7

(See on Act 11:21).

JFB: Act 15:8

Implying that the real question for admission to full standing in the visible Church is the state of the heart. Hence, though that cannot be known by men, no principle of admission to church privileges which reverses this can be sound.

JFB: Act 15:9

"Purification" here refers to "sprinkling (of the conscience by the blood of Jesus) from dead works to serve the living God." (See on 1Co 6:11). How rich is this brief description of the inward revolution wrought upon the genuine disciples of the Lord Jesus!

JFB: Act 15:10

"try," "provoke"

JFB: Act 15:10

By standing in the way of His declared purpose.

JFB: Act 15:10

He that was circumcised became thereby bound to keep the whole law. (See Gal 5:1-6). It was not then the mere yoke of burdensome ceremonies, but of an obligation which the more earnest and spiritual men became, the more impossible they felt it to fulfil. (See Rom 3:5; Gal 2:4, &c.).

JFB: Act 15:11

That is, by that only.

JFB: Act 15:11

Circumcision in our case being no advantage, and in their case uncircumcision no loss; but grace doing all for both, and the same for each.

JFB: Act 15:12

On this order of the names here, see on Act 15:25.

JFB: Act 15:12

This detail of facts, immediately following up those which Peter had recalled to mind, would lead all who waited only for divine teaching to see that God had Himself pronounced the Gentile converts to be disciples in as full standing as the Jews, without circumcision; and the attesting miracles to which Paul here refers would tend, in such an assembly to silence opposition.

JFB: Act 15:13

Whoever this James was (see on Gal 1:19), he was the acknowledged head of the church at Jerusalem, and here, as president of the assembly, speaks last, winding up the debate. His decision, though given as his own judgment only, could not be of great weight with the opposing party, from his conservative reverence for all Jewish usages within the circle of Israelitish Christianity.

JFB: Act 15:14-17

A Hebrew variation of Simon, as in 2Pe 1:1; (Greek), the Jewish and family name of Peter.

JFB: Act 15:14-17

Answering to Peter's own expression "a good while ago" (Act 15:7).

JFB: Act 15:14-17

In the exercise of His adorable sovereignty.

JFB: Act 15:14-17

The honor of his name, or for His glory.

JFB: Act 15:15

Generally; but those of Amos (Amo 9:11) are specified (nearly as in the Septuagint version). The point of the passage lies in the predicted purpose of God, under the new economy, that "the heathen" or "Gentiles" should be "called by His name," or have "His name called upon them." By the "building again of the fallen tabernacle of David," or restoring its decayed splendor, is meant that only and glorious recovery which it was to experience under David's "son and Lord."

JFB: Act 15:18-19

He who announced these things so long before, and He who had now brought them to pass, were one and the same; so that they were no novelty.

Clarke: Act 15:1

Except ye be circumcised, etc. - The persons who taught this doctrine appear to have been converts to Christianity; but, supposing that the Christian religion was intended to perfect the Mosaic, and not to supersede it, they insisted on the necessity of circumcision, because, by that, a man was made debtor to the whole law, to observe all its rites and ceremonies. This question produced great disturbance in the apostolic Church; and, notwithstanding the decree mentioned in this chapter, the apostles were frequently obliged to interpose their authority in order to settle it; and we find a whole Church, that at Galatia, drawn aside from the simplicity of the Christian faith by the subtilty of Judaizing teachers among themselves, who insisted on the necessity of the converted Gentiles being circumcised

Clarke: Act 15:1

Ye cannot be saved - Ye can neither enjoy God’ s blessing in time, nor his glory in eternity. Such an assertion as this, from any reputable authority, must necessarily shake the confidence of young converts.

Clarke: Act 15:2

No small dissension and disputation - Paul and Barnabas were fully satisfied that God did not design to bring the converted Gentiles under the yoke of circumcision: they knew that Jesus Christ was the end of the law for righteousness (justification) to every one that believed, and therefore they opposed the Judaizing teachers. This was one of the first controversies in the Christian Church; but, though the difference of sentiment was considerable, it led to no breach of Christian charity nor fellowship among themselves

Clarke: Act 15:2

They determined that Paul, etc. - This verse is read very differently in the Codex Bezae: Γενομενης δε εκτασεως και ζητησεως ουκ ολιγης τῳ Παυλῳ και τῳ Βαρναβᾳ συν αυτοις. ελεγεν γαρ ὁ Παυλος μενειν οὑτως, καθως επιϚευσαν, διΐσχυριζομενος. οἱ δε εληλυθοτες απο Ἱερουσαλημ, παρηγγειλαν αυτοις, τῳ Παυλῳ και τῳ Βαρναβᾳ και τισιν αλλοις, αναβαινειν προς τους ΑποϚολους και Πρεσβυτερους εις Ἱερουσαλημ, ὁπως κριθωσιν επ ’ αυτοις ( αυτων ) περι του ζητηματος τουτου . But when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, Paul said, with strong assurance, that they should remain so as they had believed. But those who came from Jerusalem charged Paul and Barnabas and certain others to go up to the apostles and elders to Jerusalem, that a determination might be made by them concerning this question

Clarke: Act 15:2

And certain other of them - If this be the journey to which St. Paul alludes, Gal 2:1-5, then he had Titus with him; and how many elders went from the Church of Antioch we cannot tell. This journey was 14 years after Paul’ s conversion, and was undertaken by express revelation, as he informs us, Gal 2:2, which revelation appears to have been given to certain persons in the Church of Antioch, as we learn from this verse, and not to Paul and Barnabas themselves.

Clarke: Act 15:3

Being brought on their way by the Church - That is; the members of the Church provided them with all necessaries for their journey; for it does not appear that they had any property of their own

Clarke: Act 15:3

Declaring the conversion of the Gentiles - Much stress is laid on this: it was a miracle of God’ s mercy that the Gentiles should be received into the Church of God; and they had now the fullest proof that the thing was likely to become general, by the conversion of Cornelius, the conversion of the people of Antioch, of Cyprus, Pisidia, Pamphylia, Lycaonia, etc., etc.

Clarke: Act 15:4

They were received of the Church - The whole body of Christian believers

Clarke: Act 15:4

The apostles - Either the whole or part of the twelve; though we read of none but John, Peter, and James. See Gal 2:9

Clarke: Act 15:4

And elders - Those who were officers in the Church, under the apostles

Clarke: Act 15:4

They declared - To this council they gave a succinct account of the great work which God had wrought by them among the Gentiles. This was St. Paul’ s third journey to Jerusalem after his conversion. See an account of his first journey, Act 9:26, and of his second in Act 11:30.

Clarke: Act 15:5

But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees - This verse appears to be part of the declaration made by Paul and Barnabas to this council: for, having stated how God blessed their ministry among the Gentiles, they proceed to declare how all the good work was likely to be destroyed by certain Pharisees, who, having received the Christian faith, came down to Antioch, and began to teach the necessity of circumcision, etc., and thus filled the minds of the young converted Gentiles with doubtful disputations.

Clarke: Act 15:6

The apostles and elders came together - This was the first council ever held in the Christian Church; and we find that it was composed of the apostles and elders simply.

Clarke: Act 15:7

When there had been much disputing - By those of the sect of the believing Pharisees; for they strongly contended for circumcision, and at the head of these, tradition tells us, was Cerinthus, a name famous in the primitive Church, as one who labored to unite the law and the Gospel, and to make the salvation promised by the latter dependent on the performance of the rites and ceremonies prescribed by the former. Though the apostles and elders were under the inspiration of the Almighty, and could by this inspiration have immediately determined the question, yet it was highly necessary that the objecting party should be permitted to come forward and allege their reasons for the doctrines they preached, and that these reasons should be fairly met by argument, and the thing proved to be useless in itself, inexpedient in the present case, and unsupported by any express authority from God, and serving no purpose to the Gentiles, who in their uncircumcised state, by believing in Christ Jesus, had been made partakers of the Holy Ghost

Clarke: Act 15:7

Peter rose up, and said - This was after the matters in dispute had been fully debated; and now the apostles, like judges, after hearing counsel on both sides, proceed to give judgment on the case

Clarke: Act 15:7

A good while ago - Αφ ’ ἡμερων αρχαιων, From the days of old: a phrase which simply signifies some years ago; and, if he here refers to the conversion of Cornelius, (see Acts 10:1-48), he must mean about ten years before this time; but it is more likely that he refers to that time when Christ gave him the keys of the kingdom of heaven, that be might open the door of faith to the Gentiles

Clarke: Act 15:7

God made choice among us - That is, he chose me to be the first apostle of the Gentiles.

Clarke: Act 15:8

And God which knoweth the hearts - Ο καρδιογνωϚης Θεος . We had this epithet of the Divine Being once before; see Act 1:24, and the note there: it occurs no where else in the New Testament

Clarke: Act 15:8

Bare them witness - Considered them as proper or fit to receive the Gospel of Christ. It is properly remarked by learned men, that μαρτυρειν τινι, to bear witness to any person, signifies to approve, to testify in behalf of. Here it signifies that, as God evidently sent the Gospel to the Gentiles, and, by the preaching of it, conveyed the Holy Spirit to them who believed, and as he can make no improper judgment of any who knows all hearts and their secrets, therefore what he had done was right: he saw that it was time for them to receive the Gospel; and he saw that they might be safely trusted with this heavenly deposit; and the experience of eighteen hundred years has justified the conduct of God.

Clarke: Act 15:9

Put no difference between us and them - Giving them the Holy Spirit, though uncircumcised, just as he had given it to us who were circumcised: an evident proof that, in the judgment of God, circumcision was no preparation to receive the Gospel of Christ. And as the purification of the heart by the Holy Spirit was the grand object of the religion of God, and that alone by which the soul could be prepared for a blessed immortality, and the Gentiles had received that without circumcision, consequently, the shadow could not be considered of any worth, now the substance was communicated.

Clarke: Act 15:10

Now therefore why tempt ye God - A God, by giving the Holy Spirit to the Gentiles, evidently shows he does not design them to be circumcised, in order to become debtors to the law, to fulfill all its precepts, etc., why will ye provoke him to displeasure by doing what he evidently designs shall not be done

Clarke: Act 15:10

A yoke - which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? - This does not refer to the moral law - that was of eternal obligation - but to the ritual law, which, through the multitude of its sacrifices, ordinances, etc., was exceedingly burthensome to the Jewish people. And had not God, by an especial providence, rendered both their fields and their flocks very fruitful, they could not possibly have borne so painful a ritual

There is a curious story in Midrash Shochar, told in Yalkut Simeoni, part i. fol. 229, where Korah is represented as showing the oppressive nature of the law, and avarice of its priests, in justification of his rebellion. "There was,"said he, "a widow in our neighbourbood who had two orphan children: she had one field; and, when she began to plough it, one came and said, Thou shalt not plough with an ox and an ass together. When she went to sow it, he said, Thou shalt not sow thy field with divers seeds. When she began to reap, and to gather the sheaves together, he said, Leave a handful and the corners of the field for the poor. When she prepared to thresh it, he said, Give me the wave-offering, and the first and second tithes. She did as she was commanded, and then went and sold her field, and bought two ewes, that she might clothe herself and family with the wool, and get profit by the lambs. When they brought forth their lambs, Aaron came and said, Give me the firstlings, for the holy blessed God hath said, All the first born, whatsoever openeth the womb, shall be thine. She yielded to his demands, and gave him two lambs. When shearing time came, he said, Give me the first fruits of the wool. When the widow had done this, she said, I cannot stand before this man; I will kill my sheep and eat them. When she had killed the sheep, Aaron came and said, Give me the shoulder, and the jaws, and the ventricle. The widow said, Though I have killed my sheep, I am not delivered from this man; I therefore consecrate the whole to God. Then Aaron said, All belongs to me, for the holy blessed God hath said, Every thing that is consecrated in Israel shall be his, i.e. the priest’ s. He therefore took the whole carcasses, and marched off, leaving the widow and her orphan daughters overwhelmed with affliction."This is a terrible picture of the requisitions of the Mosaic ritual; and, though exaggerated, it contains so many true features that it may well be said, This is a yoke which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear. See Schoettgen. In the same vexatious way may the tithes of the national Church in this country be exacted, and in this very way is the exaction frequently exercised. It is high time that these abuses should be corrected.

Clarke: Act 15:11

Through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved - This seems to be an answer to an objection, "Has not God designed to save us, the Jews, by an observance of the law; and them, the Gentiles, by the faith of the Gospel?"No: for we Jews can be saved no other way than through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ; and this is the way in which the Gentiles in question have been saved. There is but one way of salvation for Jews and Gentiles, the grace, mercy, or favor coming by and through the Lord Jesus, the Christ; this is now fully opened to the Gentiles; and we believe we shall be saved in the same way.

Clarke: Act 15:12

All the multitude kept silence - The strong facts stated by St. Peter could not be controverted. His speech may be thus analyzed

1.    Circumcision is a sign of the purification of the heart

2.    That purification can only be effected by the Holy Ghost

3.    This Holy Spirit was hitherto supposed to be the portion of those only who had received circumcision

4.    But the Gentiles, who were never circumcised, nor kept any part of the law of Moses, have had their hearts purified by faith in Christ Jesus

5.    As God, therefore, has given them the thing signified, he evidently does not intend that the sign should be administered

6.    Should we impose this burthensome rite, we should most evidently be provoking God, who plainly shows us that he intends no more to save in this way

7.    Therefore it is evident that both Jews and Gentiles are to be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ

Clarke: Act 15:12

Gave audience to Barnabas and Paul - These apostles came forward next, to corroborate what Peter had said, by showing the miracles and wonders which God had by them wrought among the Gentiles. Peter stated facts: Paul and Barnabas confirmed the statement.

Clarke: Act 15:13

James answered - He was evidently president of the council, and is generally called bishop of Jerusalem. The rest either argued on the subject, or gave their opinion; James alone pronounced the definitive sentence. Had Peter been prince and head of the apostles, and of the Church, he would have appeared here in the character of judge, not of mere counsellor or disputant. Thy popish writers say that "James presided because the council was held in his own church."These men forget that there was not then what they term a Church on the face of the earth. The Church, or assembly of believers, then met in private houses; for there was no building for the exclusive purpose of Christian worship then, nor till long after. These writers also forget that the pope pretends to be the head of the catholic or universal Church; and, consequently, no man can preside where he is present, but himself. Peter did not preside here; and this was the first ecclesiastical council, and now, if ever, he should have assumed his character of prince and chief; but he did not; nor did any of the other apostles invite him to it, which they would have done had they thought that Jesus Christ constituted him head of the Church. From this very circumstance there is the most demonstrative evidence that Peter was no pope, and that the right of his pretended successor is a nonentity.

Clarke: Act 15:14

Simeon hath declared - It is remarkable that James does not give him even the title which he received from our Lord at the time in which he is supposed to have been made head of the Church, and vicar of Christ upon earth; so that, it is evident, James did not understand our Lord as giving Peter any such pre-eminence; and, therefore, he does not even call him Peter, but simply Simeon. It is truly surprising that such a vast number of important pretensions should rest on such slight foundations! If tradition, no matter how interrupted or precarious, did not lend its support, feeble as that necessarily must be, the cause tried by plain Scripture would fall to the ground

Clarke: Act 15:14

To take out of them a people for his name - To form among the Gentiles, as he had among the Jews, a people called by his name and devoted to his honor.

Clarke: Act 15:15

And to this agree the words of the prophets - Peter had asserted the fact of the conversion of the Gentiles; and James shows that that fact was the fulfillment of declarations made by the prophets.

Clarke: Act 15:16

After this I will return, and will build again, etc. - These two verses, 16th and 17th, are quoted from Amo 9:11, Amo 9:12, nearly as they now stand in the best editions of the Septuagint, and evidently taken from that version, which differs considerably from the Hebrew text. As St. James quoted them as a prophecy of the calling of the Gentiles into the Church of God, it is evident the Jews must have understood them in that sense, otherwise they would have immediately disputed his application of them to the subject in question, and have rejected his conclusion by denying the premises. But that the words were thus understood by the ancient Jews, we have their own testimony. In Sanhedr. fol. 69, we have these remarkable words: "Rabbi Nachman said to Rabbi Isaac, ‘ Whence art thou taught when Bar Naphli will come?’ He saith unto him, ‘ Who is this Bar Naphli?’ The other replied, ‘ He is the Messiah.’ ‘ Dost thou then call the Messiah Bar Naphli?’ ‘ Yes,’ said he, ‘ for it is written, In that day I will build again the tabernacle of David, הנՀ¤לת Hanopheleth , which is falling down.’ "This is evidently a quotation from Amo 9:11, and a proof that the Jews understood it to be a prophecy concerning the Messiah. See Lightfoot.

Clarke: Act 15:17

That the residue of men might seek - Instead of this, the Hebrew has, That they may possess the remnant of Edom. Now it is evident that, in the copy from which the Seventy translated, they found ידרשו yidreshu , they might seek, instead of יירשו yireshu , they may possess, where the whole difference between the two words is the change of the י yod for a ד daleth , which might be easily done; and they found אדם adam , man, or men, instead of אדום Edom , the Idumeans, which differs from the other only by the insertion of ו vau between the two last letters. None of the MSS. collated by Kennicott and De Rossi confirm these readings, in which the Septuagint, Arabic, and St. James agree. It shows, however, that even in Jerusalem, and in the early part of the apostolic age, the Septuagint version was quoted in preference to the Hebrew text; or, what is tantamount, was quoted in cases where we would have thought the Hebrew text should have been preferred, because better understood. But God was evidently preparing the way of the Gospel by bringing this venerable version into general credit and use; which was to be the means of conveying the truths of Christianity to the whole Gentile world. How precious should this august and most important version be to every Christian, and especially to every Christian minister! A version, without which no man ever did or ever can critically understand the New Testament. And I may add that, without the assistance afforded by this version, there never could have been a correct translation of the Hebrew text, since that language ceased to be vernacular, into any language. Without it, even St. Jerome could have done little in translating the Old Testament into Latin; and how much all the modern versions owe to St. Jerome’ s Vulgate, which owes so much to the Septuagint, most Biblical scholars know.

Clarke: Act 15:18

Known unto God are all his works from the beginning - As if he had said, This is not a new counsel of God: he had purposed, from the time he called the Israelites, to make the Gentiles partakers of the same grace and mercy; and ultimately to destroy those rites and ceremonies which separated them from each other. He therefore has sent the Gospel of his Son, proclaiming equally peace to him that is afar off, the Gentiles, and to him that is nigh, the Jews

The whole of this verse is very dubious: the principal part of it is omitted by the most ancient MSS., and Griesbach has left γνωϚα απ ’ αιωνος doubtful, and has thrown εϚι τῳ ̀˜̀µῳ παντα τα εργα αὑτου out of the text. Of the former clause, Professor White, in his Crisews, says, " forsitan delenda ,""probably these words should be blotted out."And of the latter clause he says, " certissime delenda ,""most assuredly these should be blotted out."Supposing the whole to be genuine, critics have labored to find out the sense. Some very learned men, and particularly Schleusner, contend that the word γνωϚα, from γινωσκειν, to know, should be understood here in the same sense in which ידא yada is in many parts of the Old Testament, which not only signifies to know, but to approve, love, etc. They therefore would translate the passage thus: All the works of God are ever dear unto him. And, if so, consequently we might naturally expect him to be merciful to the Gentiles, as well as to the Jews; and the evidence now afforded of the conversion of the Gentiles is an additional proof that all God’ s works are equally dear to him.

Calvin: Act 15:1

1. When Paul and Barnabas had endured many combats against the professed enemies of the gospel, Luke doth now begin to declare that they were tried by domestic war; so that it was meet that their doctrine and ministry should be proved by all means, to the end it might the better appear that they were furnished by God, and armed against all the assaults of the world and Satan. For that was no small confirmation for their doctrine, in that being shaken and battered with so many engines, it stood nevertheless, neither could the course thereof be broken off by so many hindrances. Therefore, to this end doth Paul boast that he suffered fights without and terrors within, ( 2Co 7:5.) This history is most worthy the noting; for though we do naturally abhor the cross and all manner [of] persecution, yet civil and domestic discord is more dangerous, lest haply they discourage us. − ⁶⁸ When tyrants bend their force and run violently upon men, flesh indeed is afraid; and all those who are not endued with the spirit of fortitude do tremble with all their heart; but then their consciences are not properly touched with any temptation. For this is known to be as it were the fatal estate of the Church. But when it falleth out so that the brethren go together by the ears, and that the Church is on an uproar within itself, it cannot be but that weak minds shall be troubled and also faint; and especially when the controversy is about doctrine, which alone is the holy bond of brotherly unity. Finally, there is nothing which doth more indamage the gospel than civil discord, because it doth not only pierce and wound weak conscience, but also minister occasion to the wicked to backbite. −

Wherefore, we must diligently note this history, that we may know that it is no new example, if among those who profess the same gospel there arise some wranglings and strife about doctrine, when proud men can get them a name, (whereof they are so furiously desirous,) by no other means but by bringing in their own inventions. It is certain, that as there is but one God, so there is but one truth of this God. − ⁶⁹ Therefore, when Paul goeth about to exhort the faithful unto mutual consent, he useth this argument, “One God, one faith, one baptism,” etc., ( Eph 4:6.) But when we see wicked men arise, who go about to divide [rend] the Church by their factions, and also either to corrupt the gospel with their false and filthy [spurious] inventions, or else to bring the same in suspicion, we ought to know the subtlety [artifice] of Satan. Therefore, Paul saith elsewhere that heresies come abroad, that those who are tried may be made manifest, ( 1Co 11:19.) And, assuredly, the Lord doth wonderfully make void the subtlety of Satan, in that he trieth the faith of his by such trials, and doth beautify his word with worthy and excellent victory; and causeth the truth to shine more clearly which the wicked went about to darken. But it is very convenient to weigh all the circumstances of the history which Luke noteth. −

Which came down from Judea This cloak and color was very forcible to deceive even good men then. Jerusalem was honored not without cause among all churches, because they reverenced it even as their mother. For the gospel was deducted, as it were, by pipes and conduits − ⁷⁰ from that fountain. These seducers come thence; they pretend the apostles; they boast that they bring nothing but that which they learned of them. They blind and blear the eyes of the unskillful with this smoke; and those who are light and wicked do greedily snatch at the color which is offered them. The perturbation of the Church doth, like a tempest, shake those who were otherwise good and moderate, so that they are enforced to stumble. Therefore, we must note this subtlety of Satan, that he abuseth the names of holy men that he may deceive the simple, who, being won with the reverence of the men, dare not inquire after the thing itself. Luke doth not express, indeed, with what affection these knaves were moved; yet it is likely that perverse zeal was the cause which moved them to set themselves against Paul and Barnabas; for there be certain churlish natures which nothing can please but that which is their own. They had seen that circumcision and other rites of the law were observed at Jerusalem; wheresoever they become, they can abide nothing which is not agreeable thereto, as if the example of one church did bind all the rest of the churches with a certain law. And though such be carried with a preposterous zeal to procure tumults, yet are they pricked inwardly with their ambition, and with a certain kind of stubbornness. Nevertheless, Satan hath that he would; for the minds of the godly have such a mist cast before them that they can scarce know black from white. −

Therefore, we must beware first of this plague, that some prescribe not a law to other some after their manner, that the example of one church be not a prejudice − ⁷¹ of a common rule. Also, we must use another caution, that the persons of men do not hinder or darken the examination of the matter or cause. For if Satan transfigure himself into an angel of light, ( 2Co 11:14,) and if, by sacrilegious boldness, he usurp the holy name of God, what marvel is it if he do like wickedly deceive men under the names of holy men? The end shall at length declare that the apostles meant nothing less than − ⁷² to lay the yoke of the law upon the neck of the Gentiles; and yet Satan meant under this shift to get in. So it falleth out oftentimes that those who contrary [oppose] the doctrine of Christ, creep in under the title of his servants. Therefore, there is one only remedy, to come to search out the matter − ⁷³ with sound judgments; also it behoveth us to prevent an offense, lest we think that the faithful servants of God do therefore strive among themselves, because Satan doth falsely abuse their names, that he may set certain shadows by the ears together to terrify the simple. −

Calvin: Act 15:2

2.When there was sedition arisen This was no small trial, in that Paul and Barnabas are haled into a troublesome tumult. There was mischief enough already in the matter [dissension] itself; but it is a more cruel mischief when the contention waxeth so hot, that they are enforced to fight with their brethren as with enemies. Add, moreover, the infamy wherewith they saw themselves burdened among the simple and unskillful, as if they would trouble the peace of the Church with their stubbornness. For it falleth out oftentimes so, that the faithful servants of Christ are envied alone, and bear all the blame, after that they have been unjustly troubled, and have faithfully employed themselves in defense of a good cause. Therefore, they must be endued with invincible courage to despise all false reports which are carried about concerning them. Therefore, Paul boasteth in another place that he went through the midst of seditions, ( 2Co 6:5.) But the servants of God must observe such moderation, that they abhor so much as they can all discord; if at any time Satan raise tumults and contentions, let them endeavor to appease them, and, finally, let them do all that they can to foster and cherish unity. But again, on the other side, when the truth of God is assailed, let them refuse no combat for defense thereof; nor let them fear to oppose themselves valiantly, though heaven and earth go together. −

And let us, being admonished by this example, learn, so often as there ariseth any tumult in the Church, wisely to weigh through whose fault it came, lest we rashly condemn the faithful ministers of Christ, whose gravity is rather to be praised, because they can abide so valiantly such violent assaults of Satan. Secondly, let us call to mind that Satan was bridled by the wonderful providence of God, that he might not put the doctrine of Paul to the foil. For if he had been suffered to do hurt at his pleasure, so soon as the faith of the Gentiles had been pulled down and overthrown, the gospel preached by Paul should have fallen to the ground, and the gate should have [been] shut against the calling of the Gentiles. Thirdly, let us learn that we must in time prevent dissension, of what sort soever it be, lest it break out into the flame of contention; because Satan seeketh nothing else by the fans of dissension but to kindle so many fires. But again, seeing we see the primitive Church on an uproar, and the best servants of Christ exercised with sedition, if the same thing befall us now, let us not fear as in some new and unwonted matter; but, craving at the Lord’s hands such an end as he now made, let us pass through tumults with the same tenor of faith. −

Unless ye be circumcised Luke setteth [defineth] down briefly in these words the state of the question, to wit, that these seducers went about to bind men’s consciences with necessity of keeping the law. Circumcision is indeed mentioned alone in this place; but it appeareth by the text that they moved the question about the keeping of the whole Law. And, because circumcision was, as it were, a solemn entrance and admission into other rites of the law, therefore, by synecdoche, the whole law is comprehended under one part. These enemies of Paul did not deny that Christ was the Messiah; but though they gave him their names, they retained therewithal the old ceremonies of the law. −

The error might have seemed tolerable at the first glimpse. Why doth not Paul then dissemble, at least, for some short time, lest he shake the Church with conflict? for the disputation was concerning external matters, concerning which Paul himself forbiddeth elsewhere to stand and strive too much. But there were three weighty causes which enforced him to gainstand. For, if the keeping of the law be necessary, man’s salvation is tied to works, which must be grounded in the grace of Christ alone, that the faith may be settled and quiet. Therefore, when Paul saw the worship of the law set against the free righteousness of faith, it was unlawful for him to hold his peace, unless he would betray Christ. For, seeing the adversaries did deny that any should be saved, save he which did observe the law of Moses, by this means they did translate unto works the glory of salvation, which they took from Christ, and having shaken assurance, they did vex miserable souls with unquietness. Again, it was no small thing, neither of any small importance, to spoil and rob faithful souls of the liberty gotten by Christ’s blood. Though the inward liberty of the Spirit were common to the fathers as well as to us, yet we know what Paul saith, that they were shut up under the childish ward and custody of the law, so that they did not much differ from servants; but we are loose from the schoolmastership of the law after that Christ was revealed, ( Gal 3:24,) and we have more liberty, the time of our nonage being, as it were, ended. The third vice of this doctrine was, because it darkened the light of the Church, − ⁷⁴ or at least did put in, as it were, certain clouds, that Christ the Sun of righteousness might not give perfect light. In sum, Christianity should shortly have come to nothing if Paul should have yielded to such beginnings. Therefore, he entereth the combat, not for the external uncircumcision of the flesh, but for the free salvation of men. Secondly, that he may acquit and set free godly consciences from the curse of the law, and the guilt of eternal death. Last of all, that after all hindrances are driven away, the brightness of the grace of Christ may shine as in a pleasant and clear heaven. Moreover, these knaves did great injury to the law when they did wickedly corrupt the right use thereof. This was the natural and right office of the law, to lead men by the hand, like a schoolmaster, unto Christ; therefore, it could not be worse corrupt than when, under color of it, the power and grace of Christ were diminished. −

After this sort must we look into the fountains of all questions, lest by our silence we betray the truth of God, so often as we see Satan, by his subtlety, aim right at it; neither let our minds be changed and wax faint through any perils, or reproaches and slanders, because we must constantly defend pure religion, though heaven and earth must [should] go together. The servants of Christ must be no fighters, ( 2Ti 2:24;)therefore, if there be any contention risen, they must rather study to appease and pacify the same by their moderation, than by and by to blow to the assault. − ⁷⁵ Secondly, they must take good heed of superfluous and vain conflicts; neither shall they handle controversies of any small weight; but when they see Satan wax so proud, that religion cannot any longer continue safe and sound unless he be prevented, they must needs take a good heart to them, and rise to resist; neither let them fear to enter even most hateful combats. The name of peace is indeed plausible and sweet, but cursed is that peace which is purchased with so great loss, that we suffer the doctrine of Christ to perish, by which alone we grow together into godly and holy unity. −

The Papists cause us at this day to be sore hated, as if we had been the causers of deadly tumults, wherewith the world is shaken; but we can well defend ourselves, because the blasphemies which we endeavored to reprove were more cruel − ⁷⁶ than that it was lawful for us to hold our peace; there we are not to be blamed, because we have taken upon us to enter combats in defense of that cause, for which we were to fight even with the very angels. Let them cry till their throats be sore; Paul’s example is sufficient for us, that we must not be either cold or slack in defending the doctrine of godliness when the ministers of Satan seek to overthrow it with might and main; for their brainsick distemperature ought not to pass − ⁷⁷ the constancy of the servants of God. When Paul did zealously set himself against the false apostles, sedition began at length − ⁷⁸ by reason of the conflict; and yet the Spirit of God doth not therefore reprove him; but doth rather with due praises commend that fortitude which he had given that holy man. −

They determined, etc The Spirit of God put them in mind of this remedy to appease the tumult, which might otherwise have gone farther with doing much hurt, whereby we be also taught, that we must always seek such means as be fit − ⁷⁹ for ending discord; because God doth so highly commend peace, let the faithful show − ⁸⁰ that they do what they can to nourish the peace of the Church. The truth must always be first in order with them, in defense whereof they must be afraid of no tumults; yet they must so temper their heat that they refuse no means of godly agreement; yea, let them of their own accord invent what ways soever they can, and let them be witty in seeking them out. Therefore, we must observe this mean, lest being carried away through immoderate vehemency of zeal we be carried beyond the just bounds; for we must be courageous in defense of true doctrine, not stubborn, nor rash; therefore, let us learn to join together these two virtues which the Spirit of God commandeth in Paul. When he is drawn into the field by the wicked, he is not afraid boldly to offer himself; but when he doth meekly admit the remedy which was offered, he declareth plainly what small desire he had to fight, for otherwise he might have boasted that he did not pass for the apostles, − ⁸¹ and so have stood stoutly in that; but the desire of peace did not suffer him to refuse their judgment. Moreover, ignorant and weak men should have conceived a sinister opinion, if they should have seen two men only separated from all the servants of Christ; and godly teachers must in no case neglect this way to cherish faith, that they may show that they agree with the Church. −

Paul, indeed, did not depend upon the beck of the apostles, that he would change his opinion if he should have found them contrary to him, who would not have given place even to the very angels, as he boasteth in first chapter to the Galatians, ( Gal 1:8;) but lest the wicked should slanderously report that he was a man that stood too much in his own conceit, and which was too proud, and which did please himself with an unseemly contempt of all men, he offered to give an account of his doctrine, as it became him, and as it was profitable for the Church; secondly, he presented himself before the apostles with sure hope of victory, because he knew full well what would be their judgment, seeing they were guided by the same Spirit wherewith he was governed. Notwithstanding, it may be demanded for what purpose the men of Antioch sent Paul and Barnabas unto the rest of the apostles; for if they did so greatly reverence them, that they stood in doubt until they had given judgment on this side or that, their faith was hitherto vain and altogether none? But the answer is easy, seeing they knew that all the apostles were sent − ⁸² by Christ alone with the same commandments, and that they had the same Spirit given them, they were fully persuaded of the end and success, and, undoubtedly, this counsel proceeded from honest and stout men, who were not ignorant that the knaves did falsely pretend the names of James and Peter. Wherefore, they sought nothing else but that the apostles might further a good matter with their consent. − ⁸³ −

To the same end were all holy synods assembled since the beginning, that grave men, and such as were well exercised in the word of God, might decide controversies, not after their own pleasure, but according to the authority of God. This is worth the noting, lest the Papists pierce any man with their loud outcries, − ⁸⁴ who, to the end they may overthrow Christ and his gospel, and put out all the light of godliness, thrust upon us Councils, as if every definition and determination of men were to be counted an heavenly oracle; but if the holy Fathers had their sitting at this day, they would cry with one mouth, that there was nothing more unlawful for them, neither did they mean any thing less than to set down or deliver any thing without having the word of Christ for their guide, who was their only teacher, [master,] even as he is ours. I omit this, that the Papists lean only unto untimely − ⁸⁵ Councils, which breathe out nothing but gross ignorance and barbarism; but even the best and most choice must be reckoned in that number, that they may be subject to the word of God. There is a grievous complaint of Gregory Nazianzene extant, that there was never any Council which had a good end. What excellency soever did flourish and was in force in the Church, it cannot be denied but that it began to decay an hundred years after; therefore, if that holy man were now living, how stoutly would he reject the toys of the Papists, who, without all shame, most impudently bring in the jugglings of visors instead of lawful Councils, and that to that end, that the Word of God may pack, − ⁸⁶ so soon as a few bald and foolish men have set down whatsoever pleased them? −

Calvin: Act 15:3

3.Being brought on the way by the Church Whereas, by the common consent of the Church, there were joined to Paul and Barnabas companions, who might, for duty’s sake, conduct them, we may thereby gather, that all the godly were on their side; and that they did never otherwise think but that the cause was theirs as well as the apostles. Wherefore they determined the journey of Paul and Barnabas with like minds as they took it in hand; to wit, that they might tame and put to silence those troublesome spirits who did falsely make boast of the apostles. Whereas he saith shortly after, that they certified the brethren in their voyage of the wonderful conversion of the Gentiles, it is a testimony and token that they came not to Jerusalem fraught with fear; but that they did even without fear stoutly profess that which they had taught before. Therefore, they come not to plead their cause before their judges; but that they may, with common consent and judgment, on both sides, approve that which was commanded by God touching the abolishing of ceremonies. For though they did not despise the judgment of the apostles, yet because they knew that it was not lawful for them, neither for the apostles, to decree otherwise concerning the cause, it did not become them to stand as men whose matter is handled at the bar. − ⁸⁷ Thence cometh the boldness of rejoicing; to this end − ⁸⁸ tendeth the joy of the godly, whereby they subscribe both to the doctrine of Paul and also the calling of the Gentiles. −

Calvin: Act 15:4

4.They were received of the Church By this word Church he meaneth the multitude itself and the whole body; that done, he assigneth a peculiar place to the apostles and elders, by whom Paul and Barnabas were specially received. Furthermore, because the apostles had no certain place of abode at Jerusalem, but went ever now and then sometimes to one place and sometimes to another, whithersoever occasion did call them, that church had elders to whom the ordinary government of the Church was committed; and what the one function differeth from the other we have before declared, ( Act 14:23.) And hereby it appeareth what brotherly courtesy there was in the apostles and elders, because they do not only courteously receive Paul and Barnabas, but so soon as they hear what success they had with their pains they took, they magnify the grace of God. Luke repeateth again that form of speech which we had before in the chapter next going before, when he saith, that they declared whatsoever things God had done with them. Wherein we must remember that which I said before, that God is not made a fellow-laborer, but all the whole praise of the work is ascribed to him. Therefore it is said, that he did that with Paul and Barnabas which he did by them, as he is said to deal mercifully with us when he helpeth our miseries. −

Calvin: Act 15:5

5.Certain of the sect of the Pharisees It is not without cause that Luke expresseth what kind of men they were which went about to trouble or hinder Paul, even at Jerusalem also. And it is to be thought that the evil flowed from that fountain; and that Luke doth now more plainly express, that there brake out now also fans [disturbers] out of that very same sect, from whence the authors of that wicked dissension came. For though they had given Christ their names, yet there remained relics of their former nature. We know how proud the Pharisees were, how haughty, how lofty their looks were; − ⁸⁹ all which they would have forgotten if they had truly put on Christ. Like as there remained no Phariseeism in Paul, but a great part had gotten the habit of stubbornness by long custom, which they could not shake off so easily by and by. Forasmuch as there reigned most of all among them hypocrisy, they were too much addicted to external rites, which are coverings for vices. They were likewise puffed up with pride, so that they did tyrannously covet to make all other men subject to their decrees. It is well-known how sore sick the monks are of both diseases. Whereby it cometh to pass, that nothing is more cruel than they to oppress the Church, nothing is more wicked or forward than they to despise the Word of God. Moreover, we see many of them which came out of those dens which have cast from them their cowl, and yet can they never forget those conditions which they learned there. − ⁹⁰

Calvin: Act 15:6

6.The apostles and elders met together Luke saith, not that all the whole Church was gathered together, but those who did excel in doctrine and judgment, and those who, according to their office, were competent − ⁹¹ judges in this matter. It may be, indeed, that the disputation was had in presence of the people. But lest any man should think that the common people were suffered hand over head to handle the matter, Luke doth plainly make mention of the apostles and elders, as it was more meet that they should hear the matter and to decide it. − ⁹² But let us know, that here is prescribed by God a form and an order in assembling synods, when there ariseth any controversy which cannot otherwise be decided. For seeing that many did daily gainstand Paul, this disputation alone, by reason whereof there was great ruin like to ensue, and which was already come to hot combats, did enforce him to go to Jerusalem. −

Calvin: Act 15:7

7.And when there had been great disputation Though there were choice made of grave men, and such as were public teachers of the Church, yet could not they agree by and by. − ⁹³ Whereby appeareth how the Lord did exercise his Church, even then, by the infirmity of men, that it might learn to be wise with humility. Moreover, he suffered (even in that company and assembly wherein he was chief) the principal point of Christian doctrine to be diversely tossed and handled, lest we should wonder, if at any time it so fall out, that men, who are otherwise learned and godly, do, through unskillfulness, fall into an error. For some were not so quick witted [acute] that they could thoroughly see into the greatness of the matter. So that when they judge that the law ought to be kept, being unadvisedly carried away with the zeal of the law, they see not into how deep a labyrinth they throw the consciences of other men, and their own also. They thought that circumcision was an eternal and inviolable token of God’s covenant; the same opinion had they of all the whole law. Wherefore Peter standeth chiefly upon this, to show the state of the question, which the most of them knew not. And his oration hath two members. For, first, he proveth by the authority of God that the Gentiles must not be enforced to keep the law; secondly, he teacheth that all man’s salvation is overthrown, if the conscience be once caught in this snare. Therefore, the former part (wherein he declareth that he was sent of God to teach the Gentiles, and that the Holy Spirit came down upon them) tendeth to this end, that men did not unadvisedly disannul the ceremonies of the law, but that God is the author of that disannulling. And so soon as the authority of God is brought forth, all doubting is taken away, because this is all our wisdom, to stay ourselves upon the authority, government, and commandment of God, − ⁹⁴ and to make more account of his beck and pleasure than of all reasons. Now, it is meet that we ponder the words of Peter, whereby he proveth that this was granted to the Gentiles by God, to be free from the yoke of the law. −

You know He calleth them to bear witness, (and unto them he appealeth,) lest any man should think that he is about to speak of some dark and doubtful thing. The history was well known to them all. That which remained, he showeth that they were blind even in most clear light, yea, because they had not long ago learned that which was openly showed. He calleth the beginning of the preaching of the gospel old days, or the old time, as if he should say, ago, as it were since the first beginning of the Church, after that Christ began to gather to himself any people. −

God did choose in us The word choose doth signify to appoint or decree. Though Peter doth comprehend as well the free election of God as the choice whereby God did adopt the Gentiles to be his people; therefore, he chose, that is, as it were, making choice, that he might show a token of his free election in the Gentiles, he would that by my mouth they should hear the doctrine of the gospel. These words, in us, do import as much as in our sight, or we being witnesses, or among us. − ⁹⁵ For his meaning is, that he declareth nothing but that which they knew full well; to wit, which was done before their eyes. The phrase is common enough both among the Grecians, and also among the Hebretians, [Hebrews,] unless we had liefer resolve it as some other do, He hath chosen me out of this company. −

And believe This was a seal to confirm the calling of the Gentiles. The office of teaching was enjoined Peter by an oracle; but the fruit which came of his doctrine doth make his ministry noble and authentical, as they call it. For, seeing that the elect are illuminate into the faith by a peculiar grace of the Spirit, doctrine shall bring forth no fruit, unless the Lord show forth his power in his ministers, in teaching the minds of those inwardly which hear, and in drawing their hearts inwardly. Therefore, seeing the Lord commanded that the doctrine of the gospel should be brought unto the Gentiles, he did sanctify them to himself, that they might be no longer profane. But the solemn consecration was then perfect in all points, when he imprinted in their hearts, by faith, the mark of their adoption. The sentence which followeth immediately is to be understood as set down by way of exposition; − ⁹⁶ for Peter annexeth the visible graces of the Spirit unto faith, as, assuredly, they were nothing else but an addition thereof. Therefore, seeing that the Gentiles are ingrafted into the people of God without circumcision and ceremonies, Peter gathereth that it was not well done to lay upon them any necessity to keep the law. Yet it seemeth to be but a weak argument to prove their election withal, because the Holy Ghost came down upon them. For they were such gifts that they could not reason from the same, that they were reckoned in the number of the godly. But it is the Spirit of regeneration alone which distinguisheth the children of God from strangers. I answer, Though men, who were otherwise vain, were endued with the gift of tongues and such like, yet doth Peter take for a thing which all men grant, that which was known, that God had sealed in Cornelius and his cousins [relatives] his free adoption by the visible grace of the Spirit, as if he should point out his children with his finger. −

The knower of the hearts He applieth this adjunct to God, according to the circumstance of the present matter; and it hath under it a secret contrariety, − ⁹⁷ that men are more addicted to external purity, because they judge according to their gross and earthly sense and understanding; but God doth look into the heart. Therefore, Peter teacheth that they judge preposterously in this matter according to man’s understanding, seeing that the inward pureness of the heart alone is here to be esteemed, which we know not. − ⁹⁸ And by this means doth he bridle our rashness, lest, taking to ourselves more than we ought, we murmur against the judgment of God. As if he should say, if thou see no reason of that testimony which God gave them, think with thyself what great difference there is between him and thee. For thou art holden with external pomp according to thy gross nature, which must be abandoned when we come to the throne of God, − ⁹⁹ where the hearts of men are known spiritually. But, in the mean season, we must note a general doctrine, that the eyes of God do not look upon the vain pomp of men, − ¹⁰⁰ but upon the integrity of men’s hearts, as it is written, ( Jer 5:3.) Whereas the old interpreter and Erasmus translate it, that God knoweth the hearts, it doth not sufficiently express that which Luke saith in Greek; for when he calleth God καρδιαγνωστην, he setteth him against − ¹⁰¹ men, who judge rather for the most part by the outward appearance; and therefore they may be προσωπογνωσται, or knowers of the face, if they be compared with God. −

Calvin: Act 15:9

9.And he put no difference There was indeed some difference, because the Gentiles who were uncircumcised were suddenly admitted unto the covenant of eternal life; whereas the Jews were prepared by circumcision unto faith. But Peter’s meaning is, that they were both chosen − ¹⁰² together by God unto the hope of the same inheritance, and that they were extolled into the like degree of honor, that they might be the children of God and members of Christ, and, finally, the holy seed of Abraham, a priestly and princely generation. Whereupon it followeth, that they cannot without sacrilege be counted unclean, sithence God hath chosen them to be a peculiar people, and hath consecrated them to be holy vessels of his temple. For the wall of separation being pulled down, whereby the Gentiles and Jews were divided among themselves, he hath joined the Gentiles to the Jews, that they might grow together into one body, ( Eph 2:14;) and that I may so say, he hath mixed circumcision and uncircumcision together, that as well those of the household as strangers may be one in Christ, and may make one Church; and that there may not be any longer either Jew or Grecian. −

Seeing that by faith he hath purified This member is answerable to that former adjunct which he applieth to God; as if he should say, that God, who knoweth the hearts, did inwardly purge the Gentiles, when he vouchsafed to make them partakers of his adoption, that they might be endued with spiritual cleanness. But he addeth farther, that this purity did consist in faith. Therefore he teacheth, first, that the Gentiles have true holiness without ceremonies, which may suffice before God’s judgment-seat. Secondly, he teacheth that this is attained unto by faith, and from it doth it flow. In like sort, Paul gathereth, that uncircumcision doth not hinder a man but that he may be counted holy and just before God, ( Rom 4:10;) because circumcision did follow after righteousness in the person of Abraham, and by order of time it was latter, [posterior.] −

But here ariseth a question, whether that purity which the fathers had in times past were unlike to that which God gave now to the Gentiles? For it seemeth that Peter distinguisheth the Gentiles from the Jews by this mark, because, being content with the cleanness of the heart alone, they need no help of the law. I answer, that the one of them differ from the other, not in substance, but in form, [only.] For God had respect always unto the inward cleanness of the heart; and the ceremonies were given to the old [ancient] people only for this cause, that they might help their faith. So that cleanness, as touching figures and exercises, was only for a time, until the coming of Christ, which hath no place among us at this day; like as there remaineth from the very beginning of the world unto the end the same true worship of God, to wit, the spiritual worship; yet is there great difference in the visible form. Now, we see that the fathers did not obtain righteousness by ceremonies, neither were they therefore pure before God, but by the cleanness of the heart. For the ceremonies of themselves were of no importance to justify them; but they were only helps, which did accidentally (that I may so term it) purge them; yet so that the fathers and we had the same truth. Now, when Christ came, all that which was accidental did vanish away; and, therefore, seeing the shadows be driven away, there remaineth the bare and plain pureness of the heart. −

Thus is that objection easily answered which the Jews think cannot possibly be answered. Circumcision is called the eternal covenant, or of the world, ( Gen 17:13;) therefore, say they, it was not to be abolished. If any man shall say that this is not referred unto the visible sign, but rather unto the thing figured, it shall be well answered; but there is another answer besides this. Seeing that the kingdom of Christ was a certain renewing of the world, there shall no inconvenience follow if he made an end of − ¹⁰³ all the shadows of the law, forasmuch as the perpetuity of the law is grounded in Christ. I come now unto the second member, where Peter placeth the cleanness [purity] of the Gentiles in faith. Why doth not he say, In perfection of virtues, or holiness of life, save only because men have righteousness from another, and not from themselves? For, if men, by living well and justly, should purchase righteousness, or if they should be clean before God by nature, this sentence of Peter should fall to the ground. Therefore, the Spirit doth in these words plainly pronounce that all mankind is polluted, and with filthiness defiled; secondly, that their blots can by no other means be wiped away than by the grace of Christ. For, seeing that faith is the remedy whereby the Lord doth freely help us, it is set as well against the common nature of all men, as against every man’s own merits. When I say that all mankind is polluted, my meaning is, that we bring nothing from our mother’s womb but mere filthiness, and that there is no righteousness in our nature which can reconcile us to God. Man’s soul was indeed endued with singular gifts at the first; but all parts thereof are so corrupt with sin, that there remaineth in it no drop of pureness any longer; therefore we must seek for cleanness without ourselves. −

For if any man allege that it may be recovered by merits of works, there is nothing more absurd than to imagine that wicked and coward nature can deserve anything. Therefore, it resteth that men seek elsewhere for that which they shall never be able to find within themselves. And surely it is the office of faith to translate that unto us which is proper to Christ, and to make it ours by free participation. So that there is a mutual relation between faith and the grace of Christ. For faith doth not make us clean, as a virtue or quality poured into our souls; but because it receiveth that cleanness which is offered in Christ. We must also note the phrase, that God purifieth the hearts; whereby Luke doth both make God the author of faith, and he teacheth also that cleanness is his benefit. To make short, he signifieth unto us, that that is given to men by the grace of God which they cannot give to themselves. But forasmuch as we said that faith taketh that of Christ which it transpoureth [transferreth] into us; we must now see how the grace of Christ doth make us clean, that we may please God. And there is a double manner of purging, because Christ doth offer and present us clean and just in the sight of his Father, by putting away our sins daily, which he hath once purged by his blood; secondly, because, by mortifying the lusts of the flesh by his Spirit, he reformeth us unto holiness of life. I do willingly comprehend both kinds of purging under these words; because Luke doth not touch one kind of purging only, but he teacheth that the whole perfection thereof consisteth without the ceremonies of the law. −

Calvin: Act 15:10

10.Now, therefore, why tempt ye? This is the other part of the sermon wherein Peter showeth how deadly that doctrine is which Paul’s enemies sought to bring in; to wit, which might drown godly souls in despair. He inferreth and gathereth out of the former member, that God is tempted if the Gentiles be enforced to keep the law of necessity; − ¹⁰⁴ he riseth higher, and pierceth even unto the very fountain. For he reasoneth hitherto, that the Gentiles should have injury done them if there be more required at their hands than God will; and seeing that he made them equal with the holy people, and did vouchsafe them the honor of adoption, it was. an unmeet and inconvenient [absurd] matter that they should be rejected, and so his liberality should be restrained. For he saith last of all, that this faith is sufficient for them, though they want ceremonies. And now he taketh an higher principle, that those who tie men’s salvation to the works of the law leave them no good hope; but rather throw the whole world headlong into horrible destruction, if it can obtain salvation by no other means but by keeping the law. With what arguments he proveth this we shall see in their place. As touching the words, seeing the Scripture saith, that God is tempted diverse ways, Peter’s meaning is, in this place, that God is provoked as it were of set purpose, when there is an heavier burden laid upon men than they be able to bear; and that his power is brought within bounds − ¹⁰⁵ when that yoke is bound which he doth loose, which is nothing else but by striving against nature to match ourselves with giants, as they say. −

That the yoke should be laid upon their necks The meaning of the words is plain, that God is tempted when there is laid upon men’s consciences a sorer burden than they are able to bear, and by this means the salvation of men’s souls is sore shaken; seeing that they must needs by this means be drowned in despair, which cannot be without their destruction. But that injury which is done to God is no whit more tolerable, when as he is robbed of his right that he may not have liberty to deliver us. But we may easily gather out of the thing itself that he doth not speak of the ceremonies only. The servitude of the old training up under the law was hard and laborious; but yet it were too absurd to call it a yoke that cannot be borne; and we know that not only holy men, but also even most hypocrites, did well and exactly accomplish the outward observation of the rites. −

Moreover, it were not any hard matter to satisfy the moral law, if it were content with corporeal obedience only, and did not require spiritual righteousness; for it is granted to many to bridle their hands and feet; but to moderate all the affections so that there may reign perfect abstinence and purity, as well in the soul as in the body, this is too hard a matter. −

Therefore, those be too foolish who restrain unto ceremonies Peter’s words, whereby the weakness of men to perform the righteousness of the heart is expressed; which doth not only far pass their strength, but is altogether contrary to nature. These men were, I warrant you, deceived by one reason, because the question was moved concerning ceremonies only; but they do remember that Peter did more attentively and more wisely consider as became him, what a labyrinth this error (to look to, but light) did bring with it. The false apostles did avouch, that no man could attain unto salvation unless he did keep the ceremonies. If man’s salvation be tied to works, it shall be no longer grounded in the grace of Christ, and so, by this means, free reconciliation shall fall flat to the ground. Now, seeing that man’s strength is unable to keep the law, all men are subject to the curse which the Lord there denounceth against the transgressors; and so, by this means, all men shall come in danger of despair, seeing that they see themselves guilty of eternal death by the law. Peradventure the false apostles understood these things craftily. But Peter pierceth the very fountain, that he may bring to light the deadly poison of that doctrine; and thus must we do, so often as Satan doth craftily thrust in wicked errors. −

At this day we seem to some to be too contentious, when as we do so stoutly stand in this, that men must not pray for the dead; for it is both a most ancient custom, neither is it a thing to look to very dangerous, though men pour out superfluous prayer; yet [nay] it is a plausible opinion, because it carrieth some color of human godliness. −

Furthermore, unskillful men judge thus, because they seek. not out the head spring. For, if we grant that men may pray for the dead, we must also admit this, that they are now punished by the judgment of God, because they made not satisfaction in this life for their sins. And so, by this means the force of Christ’s satisfaction is translated unto the works of men. Secondly, the rule of praying aright is overthrown, if men may pray at all adventure, without the word of God. This is also a greater absurdity than that we ought lightly to pass over it. In sum, we can never give true judgment of any question, unless, having thoroughly ripped up the fountain of that doctrine which is called in question, we deduct all consequences which it bringeth with it. Therefore, it is no marvel if Peter, to the end he may pull the false apostles out (by the ears,) as it were out of their lurking dens, do generally dispute touching the whole law; because he doth nothing else but open the matter itself, whereof the simple were ignorant; that they may all see what a deadly doctrine it is, which doth both extinguish the grace of Christ, and drown souls in the horrible dungeon of despair. − ¹⁰⁶ −

Neither we nor our fathers Peter doth not only dispute what men have done indeed, but what they were able to do; neither doth he speak only of the common riff-raff, − ¹⁰⁷ but of the holy fathers. Seeing that he denieth that they were able to bear the yoke of the law, it is manifest that the law cannot possibly be kept. I know that Jerome’s saying is so generally received, that it is, as it were, an undoubted and most certain maxim, If any man say that it is a thing impossible to keep the law, let him be accursed; but we must not hearken to any voice of man which is contrary to the judgment of the Spirit of God. We hear what the Spirit pronounceth in this place by the mouth of Peter, not concerning the will and works of men, but touching their ability and power. And hereunto agreeth Paul, affirming that it was an impossible thing that the law should give us life, forasmuch as it was weak through the flesh. Indeed, if any man were able to fulfill the law, he should find the life which is there promised; but forasmuch as Paul denieth that life can be gotten by the law, it followeth that there is farther and higher righteousness required there than man is able to perform. I confess, indeed, that Jerome doth not wholly grant to the strength of nature power to fulfill the law, but partly also to the grace of God, as he doth afterward expound himself, that a faithful man, holpen by the grace of the Spirit, may be said to be able to fulfill the law. But even that mitigation is not true. For, if we do weigh the strength of nature only, men shall not only be unable to bear the yoke of the law, but they shall not be able to move so much as a finger to perform the least jot of the law. And surely if that be true, that all the cogitations of man’s mind are wicked from his childhood, ( Gen 8:21;) that all the understandings of flesh − ¹⁰⁸ are enemies to God, ( Rom 8:7;) that there is none which seeketh after God, ( Psa 14:3;) and other such places, which are common in the Scripture, tending to the same end, but especially which are cited by Paul in the third to the Romans, ( Rom 3:11,) man’s power and ability to fulfill the law shall not only be weak and lame, but altogether none to begin. − ¹⁰⁹ −

Therefore, we must thus think, that even the very faithful, after they being regenerate by the Spirit of God, do study to attain unto the righteousness of the law, do perform, notwithstanding, but the half, and far less than half, not the whole. For doubtless Peter speaketh not in this place of the epicure − ¹¹⁰ or profane men; but of Abraham, of Moses, and of other holy fathers which were the most perfect in the world; and yet he saith that these fainted under the burden of the law, because it did pass their strength. It is hatefully objected that the Spirit of God is blasphemed when as ability to fulfill the law is taken away from his grace and help; but we may readily answer, because the question is not what the grace of the Spirit is able to do, but what that measure of grace is able to do which God doth divide to every one in this life. For we must always consider what God doth promise to do; neither let us unadvisedly ask this question, whether that can be done which he himself doth testify shall never be, and which he will not have done? He promiseth the grace and aid of the Spirit to the faithful, whereby they may be able to resist the lusts of the flesh, and to subdue them; yet shall they not quite abolish and drive them away. He promiseth them grace, whereby they may walk in newness of life; yet shall they not be able to run so swiftly as the law requireth. For he will have them kept under during their whole life, that they may fly to beg pardon. If it be unlawful to separate from the power of God’s counsel, and the order by him set down, it is a foolish and vain cavil, whereby the adversaries go about to burden us, when as they say that we diminish the power of God; nay rather, they transform God, when they hold that his counsel and purpose can be altered. −

The Pelagians did in times past, in like sort, burden − ¹¹¹ Augustine. He answereth, that though it be a thing possible that the law should be fulfilled, yet is that sufficient for him, that no man did ever fulfill it, and that the Scripture doth not testify that it shall be fulfilled until the end of the world. By which words he delivereth himself from their importunate subtlety. But there was no cause why he should doubt, but freely and flatly grant that it might be fulfilled, the Holy Ghost being the author. For we must limit the grace of the Spirit, that it may agree with the promises. Furthermore, we have already declared how far the promises reach. There is no man which moveth any question concerning this, whether God be not able if he will to make men perfect; but they dote foolish which separate his power from his counsel, whereof they have an evident and plain testimony in the Scripture. God doth plainly declare a hundred times what he will, and what he hath determined to do: to go any farther is sacrilege. −

Jerome was enforced by reason of philosophy to hurl out the thunderbolt of his curse against Peter and Paul; − ¹¹² because the laws must be applied unto their hability for whom they be appointed; which, as I confess to take place in man’s laws, so I utterly deny that it is good as touching the law of God, which, in exacting righteousness, doth not respect what man is able to do, but what he ought to do. −

Though here ariseth a harder question, “Whether the law were not given to this end, that it might enforce men to obey God? And this should be in vain, unless the Spirit of God should direct the faithful to keep it; and that the solemn protestation of Moses seemeth to put the matter out of doubt, when he saith that he giveth precepts to the Jews, not such as they may read, but indeed fulfill, ( Deu 30:12;) whence we gather that the yoke was laid upon the neck of the Jews when the law was given, that it might make them subject to God, that they might not live as them lusted.” I answer, that the law is counted a yoke two ways. For, inasmuch as it bridleth the lusts of the flesh and delivereth a rule of godly and holy life, it is meet that the children of God take this yoke upon them; but, inasmuch as it doth exactly prescribe what we owe to God, and doth not promise life without adding the condition of perfect obedience, and doth again denounce a curse if we shall in any point offend, it is a yoke which no man is able to bear. I will show this more plainly. −

The plain doctrine of good life, wherein God doth invite us unto himself, is a yoke which we must all of us willingly take up; for there is nothing more absurd than that God should not govern man’s life, but that he should wander at pleasure without any bridle. Therefore, we must not refuse the yoke of the law, if the simple doctrine thereof be considered. But these sayings do otherwise qualify (that I may so term it) the law. −

“He which shall do these things shall live in theme” etc.
( Lev 18:5.)

Again, −

“Cursed is he which continueth not in all things which are written,”
( Deu 27:26,) −

that it may begin to be a yoke which no man can bear. −

For, so long as salvation is promised to the perfect keeping of the law alone, and every transgression is called into judgment, mankind is utterly undone. In this respect doth Peter affirm that God is tempted, when man’s arrogance doth burden the consciences of men with the law; for it is not his purpose to deny but that men must be governed by the doctrine of the law, and so he granteth that they be under the law − ¹¹³ not simply − ¹¹⁴ to teach, but also to humble men with the guilt of eternal death. Considering that that quality was annexed unto doctrine, he affirmeth that the souls of the godly must not be tied with the yoke of the law, because by this means it should of necessity come to pass that they should be drowned in eternal destruction. But, when as not only the grace of the Holy Spirit is present to govern us, but also free forgiveness of sins to deliver and acquit us from the curse of the law; then is that of Moses fulfilled, that the commandment is not above us, ( Deu 30:11;) and then do we also perceive how sweet the yoke of Christ is, and how light his burden is, ( Mat 11:30.) For, because we know that through the mercy of God that is forgiven us, which is wanting through the infirmity of the flesh, we do cheerfully, and without any grief, − ¹¹⁵ take upon us that which he enjoineth us. Wherefore, so that the rigor of the law be taken away, the doctrine of the law shall not only be tolerable, but also joyful and pleasant; neither must we refuse the bridle which doth govern us mildly, and cloth not urge us sorer than is expedient. −

Calvin: Act 15:11

11.By the grace of Jesus Christ Peter compareth these two together as contrary the one to the other; to have hope − ¹¹⁶ in the grace of Christ, and to be under the yoke of the law; which comparison doth greatly set out the justification of Christ, inasmuch as we gather thereby, that those are justified by faith who, being free and quit from the yoke of the law, seek for salvation in the grace of Jesus Christ. Furthermore, I said before that the yoke of the law is made of two cords. The former is, “He which doth these things shall live in them;” the other is, “Cursed is every one which doth not continue in all the commandments.” Let us return unto the contrary member. If we cannot otherwise attain unto salvation by the grace of Christ, unless the yoke of the law be taken away, it followeth that salvation is not placed in keeping the law, neither are those which believe in Christ subject to the curse of the law; for if he could be saved through grace, who is as yet enwrapped in the yoke of the law, then should Peter’s reasoning be but foolish, which is drawn from contraries: thus, We hope for salvation by the grace of Christ; therefore we are not under the yoke of the law. Unless there were a disagreement between the grace of Christ and the yoke of the law, Peter should deceive us. − ¹¹⁷ −

Wherefore, those must needs depart from the righteousness of the law, whosoever desire to find life in Christ; for this contrariety appertaineth not unto doctrine, but unto the cause of justification. −

Whereby is also refuted their surmise, − ¹¹⁸ who say that we are justified by the grace of Christ, because he regenerateth us by his Spirit, and giveth us strength to fulfill the law. Those who imagine this, though they seem to ease the yoke of the law a little, yet they keep souls bound with the cords thereof. For this promise shall always stand in force, He which shall do these things shall live in them; on the other side, The curse shall come upon all which shall not absolutely fulfill the law. Wherefore, we must define the grace of Christ far otherwise (whereunto the hope of salvation leaneth) than they dream; to wit, that it be free reconciliation gotten by the sacrifice of his death; or, which is all one, free forgiveness of sins, which, by pacifying and appeasing God, doth make him of an enemy or severe judge, − ¹¹⁹ and which cannot be pleased nor entreated, a merciful Father. I confess, indeed, that we be regenerate into newness of life by the grace of Christ; but when we are about assurance of salvation, then must we call to mind the free adoption alone, which is joined with the purging [expiation] and forgiveness of sins. For, if works be admitted, that they may make us righteous in part only, the yoke of the law shall not be broken, and so Peter’s contrariety [antithesis] shall fall to the ground, or else be dissolved. −

Even as they Peter doth testify in this place, that though the servitude of the law were laid upon the fathers as touching the external shoe, yet were their consciences free and quit; whereby is put away that absurdity, which might otherwise have troubled godly minds not a little. For, seeing that the covenant of life is eternal, and the same which God made with his servants from the beginning until the end of the world, it were an absurd thing, and intolerable, that any other way to obtain salvation should be taught at this day than that which the fathers had in times past. Therefore, Peter affirmeth that we agree very well with the fathers, because they no less than we reposed hope of salvation in the grace of Christ; and so, reconciling the law and the gospel together, as touching the end of the doctrine, he taketh from the Jews the stumbling-block which they reigned to themselves by reason of the discord. −

Whereby it appeareth that the law was not given to the fathers that they might thereby purchase salvation, neither were the ceremonies added, that, by the observing thereof, they might attain unto righteousness; but this was the only end of all the whole law, that, casting from them all confidence which they might repose in works, they might repose all their hope in the grace of Christ. Whereby is also refuted the doting of those who think that the old people, inasmuch as they were content with earthly goods, did think no whit of the heavenly life. But Peter maketh the fathers partners with us of the same faith; and doth make salvation common to both; and yet there be some which delight in that brain-sick fellow, Servetus, with his so filthy sacrileges. Furthermore, we must note that Peter teacheth that the faith of the fathers [ancients] was always grounded in Christ, seeing that they could neither find life anywhere else, neither was there any other way for men to come unto God. Therefore, this place agreeth with that saying of the apostle, −

“Christ yesterday, and today, and for ever,” −
( Heb 13:8.)

Calvin: Act 15:12

12.All the multitude held their peace By these words, Luke giveth us to understand that the Spirit of God did so reign in that assembly, that they yielded forthwith to reason. The disputation was hot before; but now, after that Peter hath laid open the counsel of God, and hath handled the question according to the doctrine of the Scripture, by and by all noise being stayed, they are quiet and whist who did of late unadvisedly defend the error. This is a lively image of a lawful Council, when the truth of God alone, so soon as it is once come to light, maketh an end of all controversies; and assuredly it is effectual enough to appease all discord when the Spirit beareth the chief sway; because he is again a fit governor, as well to moderate their tongues who must speak before others as to keep the rest under obedience, that they be not too much addicted to themselves and wedded to their own wills, but that, laying away stubbornness, they may show themselves obedient to God. Neither is it to be doubted but that there was some few which would not yield, as it falleth out in a great assembly; yet the truth of God had the upper hand, so that the silence whereof Luke speaketh was a manifest testimony of common obedience. And this was no small moderation in Peter, in that having suffered every one to say for himself what he could, he deferred his judgment (lest it should be prejudicial to others) so long, until the question had been thoroughly discussed to and fro. −

They heard Barnabas and Paul. We may gather by these words that they were not heard with silence before.: For seeing that the more part was persuaded that they did wickedly admit the profane Gentiles into the Church, there should nothing which they should have said have been patiently received until this false opinion were corrected and reformed; but all should have been taken at the worst. We see what a poison displeasure conceived for no cause is, which doth so possess men’s minds, that it stoppeth the way, so that the truth can never have en, trance. Hereby we learn how true that saying is, All things are sound to the sound, ( Tit 1:15,) for there is nothing so wholesome but corrupt affection do turn the same into that which is hurtful. And to this end tendeth the narration made by Paul and Barnabas, that they may show and prove that God doth allow their apostleship among the Gentiles; forasmuch as it was ratified and confirmed by miracles, which are, as it were, certain seals thereof. −

Calvin: Act 15:13

13.James answered, saying Some old writers of the Church think that this James was one of the disciples, whose surname was Justus and Oblia, whose cruel death is recorded by Josephus in the Twentieth Book of his Antiquities. But would to God the old writers had travailed rather to know the man, than to set forth, with reigned praises, the holiness of a man whom they knew not. It is a childish toy and surmise, in that they say that it was lawful for him alone to enter into the most holy place. For if in that entering in there had been any religion, he had done it contrary to the law of God, forasmuch as he was not the highest priest. Secondly, it was a superstitious thing thus to foster the shadowish worship of the Temple. I omit other trifles. And they are greatly deceived in that they deny that he was one of the twelve apostles. For they are enforced to confess that it is he whom Paul commandeth so honorably, that he maketh him the chief among the three pillars of the Church, ( Gal 2:9.) Assuredly, a man inferior in order and degree could never have excelled the apostles so far; for Paul giveth him the title of an apostle. Neither is that worth the hearing which Jerome bringeth, [viz.] that the word is general there, seeing that the dignity of the order is there handled; forasmuch as Christ did prefer the apostles before other teachers of the Church. −

Moreover, we may gather out of this place, that they made no small account of James, ( Act 21:18;) forasmuch as he doth with his voice and consent so confirm the words of Peter, that they are all of his mind. And we shall see afterwards how great his authority was at Jerusalem. The old writers think that this was because he was bishop of the place; but it is not to be thought that the faithful did at their pleasure change the order which Christ had appointed. Wherefore, I do not doubt but that he was son to Alpheus, and Christ’s cousin, in which sense he is also called his brother. Whether he were bishop of Jerusalem or no, I leave it indifferent; neither doth it greatly make for the matter, save only because the impudency of the Pope is hereby refuted, because the decree of the Council is set down rather at the appointment, and according to the authority of James than of Peter. And assuredly Eusebius, in the beginning of his Second Book, is not afraid to call James, whosoever he were, the Bishop of the Apostles. Let the men of Rome go now and boast that their Pope is head of the Universal Church, because he is Peter’s successor, who suffered another to rule him, − ¹²⁰ if we believe Eusebius. −

Men and brethren, hear me James’ oration consisteth upon [of] two principal members; for, first, he confirmeth and proveth the calling of the Gentiles by the testimony of the prophet Amos; secondly, he showeth what is best to be done to nourish peace and concord among the faithful; yet so that the liberty of the Gentiles may continue safe and sound, and that the grace of Christ may not be darkened. Whereas Peter is in this place called Simeon, it may be that this name was diversely pronounced then. Whereas he saith that God did visit to take a people of the Gentiles, it is referred unto the mercy of God, whereby he vouchsafed to receive strangers into his family. It is, indeed, a harsh phrase, yet such as containeth a profitable doctrine; because he maketh God the author of the calling of the Gentiles, and pronounceth that it is through his goodness that they began to be reckoned among his people, when he saith that they were taken by him; but he proceedeth further, when he saith that he did visit that he might take. For this is his meaning, That at such time as the Gentiles were turned away from God he did mercifully look upon them; because we can do nothing but depart farther and farther from him, until such time as his fatherly look prevent us of his own accord. −

In his name The old interpreter hath, To his name, which is almost all one, though the preposition, it may be otherwise translated, to wit, For his name, or Upon his name. − ¹²¹ Neither shall the sense disagree, that the salvation of the Gentiles is grounded in the power or name of God, and that God did respect no other thing in calling them but his own glory; yet did I retain that which is more usual; to wit, that, in numbering them among his people, he would have them counted in his name, like as it shall be said shortly after, that his name is called upon by all those whom he gathereth together into his Church. The adverb of time, πρωτον, may be expounded two ways; if you read it, first, as the old interpreter and Erasmus have it, the sense shall be, that Cornelius and others were, as it were, the first fruits at whom God began the calling of the Gentiles; but it may be taken also comparatively, because there was already some token of the adoption of the Gentiles showed in Cornelius and his cousins, before that Barnabas and Paul preached the gospel to the Gentiles. And I do better like this latter sense. −

Calvin: Act 15:15

15.Hereto agree the words of the prophets We see now how the apostles took nothing to themselves imperiously, but did reverently follow that which was prescribed in the word of God. Neither did it grieve them, neither did they count it any disgrace to them to profess themselves to be the scholars of the Scripture. Also we must here note, that the use of the doctrine of the prophets is yet in force, which some brain-sick men would banish out of the Church. By citing the prophets, in the plural number, to be witnesses, whereas he doth allege one place only, he signifieth that there is such an agreement among them, that that which is spoken by one is the common testimony of them all, because they speak all with one mouth, and every one speaketh as in the person of all, or rather the Spirit of God speaketh in them all. Moreover, the oracles of all the prophets were gathered together, that they might make one body. Wherefore that might worthily and fitly be ascribed to all the prophets in general, which was taken out of some one part of the general book. −

Calvin: Act 15:16

16.After these things I will return Because the place is not cited word for word as it is in the prophet, we must see what difference there is, though it be not necessary to examine straitly what diversity there is in the words, so it appear that the prophecy doth fitly agree with the matter which is in hand. After that God hath promised the restoring of the tabernacle of David, he saith also, that he will bring to pass that the Jews shall possess the remnants of Edom. In all that text, there appeareth nothing as yet whence the calling of the Gentiles can be fet − ¹²² or gathered; but that which followeth immediately after in the prophet, concerning the remnant of the Gentiles which shall call upon the name of the Lord, doth plainly show that the Jews and Gentiles shall make one Church, because that which was then proper to the Jews alone is given to both in general. For God placeth the Gentiles in like degree of honor with the Jews, when he will have them to call upon his name. Those of Idumea, and the people thereabout, were in times past under David subject to the Jews; but though they were tributaries to the people of God, yet were they nevertheless strangers from the Church. Therefore, this was news and a strange thing, in that God reckoneth them up with the holy people, that he may be called − ¹²³ the God of them all; seeing that it is certain that they are all made equal in honor among themselves by this means. Whereby it doth plainly appear how well the testimony of the prophet agreeth with the present purpose. For God promiseth to restore the decayed tabernacle, wherein the Gentiles shall obey the kingdom of David, not only that they may pay tribute, or take [to arms] weapon at the king’s commandment, but that they may have one God, and that they may be one family to him. −

Yet there may a question be moved, why he had rather cite this prophecy, than many other which contain more plentiful proof of the matter which he hath in hand, of which sort Paul citeth many? ( Rom 15:9.) I answer, first, that the apostles were not ambitious in heaping up places of Scripture; but they did simply aim at this, which was sufficient for them, to wit, that they might prove that their doctrine was taken out of the word of God; secondly, I say that this prophecy of Amos is more plain than it is commonly taken to be. The prophet intreateth of the restoring of an house which was decayed; − ¹²⁴ he describeth the miserable ruin thereof. Therefore, the promise, which is added immediately, that the seat and throne shall be set up again, from of which kings of the posterity of David shall rule over the Gentiles, doth properly appertain unto Christ. Therefore, so soon as the kingdom of Christ is set up, that must needs follow which the prophet saith also, that the Gentiles shall call upon the name of God. Now, we see that James did not unadvisedly make choice of this place; for if the kingdom of Christ cannot be otherwise established, unless God be called upon everywhere throughout the whole world, and the Gentiles grow together to be one with his holy people, it is an absurd thing that they should be driven from hope of salvation, and the middle wall must fall to the ground, wherewith the one was separate from the other under the law, − ¹²⁵ ( Eph 2:14.) The first word, I will return, is not in the prophet, but the change of the state which he denounceth is very well expressed by this means. −

The tabernacle of David, which was decayed It is not without cause that that evil-favored wasteness and ruin of the king’s house is set before our eyes by the prophet; for unless the godly should have been persuaded that Christ should notwithstanding come, though the kingdom of David were brought to nought, who should not only restore to their old order things which were decayed, but should exalt even unto the heavens the glory of his kingdom with incomparable success, they should have despaired a hundred times in a day. After they were returned from the exile wherein they lived at Babylon, they were brought by continual destructions almost unto utter destruction. Afterward that which remained was consumed by little and little with civil − ¹²⁶ discord, yea, when God did relieve their miseries, that kind of help which they had was a certain matter of despair; − ¹²⁷ for that rule which the Maccabees took upon them was then taken away from the tribe of Juda. For these causes the Spirit of God doth diligently beat in [inculcate] this by the prophet, that Christ shall not come until the kingdom of David shall perish, that they may not despair of salvation even amidst greatest miseries. So Isaiah saith, that there shall a branch arise out of the contemptible and base stock, − ¹²⁸ ( Isa 11:1;) and let us also remember, that God doth observe this wonderful way in restoring the Church, that he doth build it up, − ¹²⁹ when it is decayed. −

Furthermore, this place teachers when the Church is best ordered, and what is the true and right constitution thereof, to wit, when the throne of David is set up, and Christ alone hath the preeminence, that all may meet together in his obedience. − ¹³⁰ −

Though the Pope have oppressed the Church with his sacrilegious tyranny, yet doth he make boast of the title of the Church; yea, he deceiveth men under the vain title of the Church, that he may put out the clear light of sound doctrine. But if we shall come thoroughly to examine the matter, we may easily refute such a gross mock, because he alone beareth rule, having deposed Christ. He doth in word confess that he is Christ’s vicar; but in very deed after that he hath by a beautiful banishment − ¹³¹ sent Christ into the heavens, he taketh to himself all his power; for Christ reigneth by the doctrine of his gospel alone, which is wickedly trodden under foot by this abominable idol. But let us remember that this shall be the lawful estate of the Church among us, if we do all in general − ¹³² obey Christ, the King of kings, that there may be one sheepfold and one Shepherd, ( Joh 10:16.) −

Calvin: Act 15:17

17.That those which remain may seek James added this word seek by way of exposition, which is not found nor read in the prophet; and yet it is not superfluous, because, to the end we may be numbered among the people of God, and that he may take us for his own, we must, on the other side, [in our turn,] be encouraged to seek him. And it is to be thought that Luke did summarily comprehend those things whereof James did dispute in his own language among the Jews; whereby it came to pass that the exposition of the matter was mixed with the words of the prophet. Instead of the relics of the Gentiles which Amos useth, Luke, out of the Greek translation, (which was more familiar,) putteth the rest of the men in the same sense, to wit, that there must go before the purging of the filthiness of the world a cutting, or paring, as it came to pass. And this doctrine must be also applied unto our time. For, because the corruption of the world is worse than that it can be wholly brought to obey Christ, he bloweth away, with diverse fans of tribulations, the chaff and weeds, that he may at length gather unto himself that which shall remain. −

Calvin: Act 15:18

18.Known from the beginning This is a prevention, − ¹³³ to put away the hatred which might have risen upon the novelty; for the sudden change might have been suspected, and therefore did it trouble weak minds. Therefore James preventeth, showing that this was no new thing with God, though it fell out suddenly otherwise than men thought; because God saw, before the world was created, what he would do, and the calling of the Gentiles was hidden in his secret counsel. Whereupon it followeth, that it must not be esteemed according to the sense of man. Furthermore, James hath respect unto the words of the prophet, when he affirmeth that God, who should do all these things, was also the author of the prophecy. Therefore, his meaning is, that, seeing God speaketh by his prophet, he saw then, yea, from the very beginning, − ¹³⁴ that neither uncircumcision nor anything else should let him, but that he would choose the Gentiles into his family. Nevertheless, there is comprehended under this a general exhortation, that men do not take upon them to measure, with the small measure of their wit, the works of God, the reason whereof is oftentimes known to none but to himself; but rather let them cry, being astonished, − ¹³⁵ that his ways are past finding out, and that his judgments are too deep a depth, ( Rom 11:33.)

Defender: Act 15:1

Possibly these men were some of the priests who had become obedient to the faith or at least they were of the Pharisees' sect (Act 15:5). At any rate, although these men believed in Jesus as the Messiah and in His substitutionary death and resurrection, they still felt that a convert must be either a Jew or Jewish proselyte to be eligible for salvation in Christ. They were called "Judaizers" and came to be a real problem in the early church. This particular form of legalism is not much of an issue today, but the problem of those who would add works to faith in Christ as a requirement for salvation is still very common. While genuine faith will surely produce obedience and good works (Eph 2:8-10), they follow saving faith as a result, not as a condition."

Defender: Act 15:13

James had, by this time, become a recognized leader (possibly a senior pastor) of the Jerusalem church, perhaps because the apostles themselves were often away preaching. He was the brother (or half-brother) of Jesus, but had not been among the disciples until after Jesus' death and resurrection. He later wrote the epistle of James (Jam 1:1; 1Co 15:7). He was presiding at this significant "Jerusalem conference.""

Defender: Act 15:14

"At the first" means "for the first time," probably referring to Peter's (Simeon's) experience at the house of Cornelius (Acts 10).

Defender: Act 15:14

Compare Rom 11:25; Luk 21:24."

Defender: Act 15:15

James specifically quotes Amo 9:11 here, but then paraphrases and extends Amo 9:12 beyond the original meaning of the prophet himself (although, James' use of it follows the Septuagint translation to some degree). In any case, no doubt by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, who inspired the prophecy of Amos in the first place, and who therefore can apply and extend it however He deems appropriate, James uses it to appropriate and summarize the words of other "prophets" (note the plural here in James' statement) to show that God had long ago planned that Gentiles as well as Jews should come under Messiah's reign (Psa 2:8; Isa 42:6; Isa 49:6; Isa 60:3; Dan 7:14; Zec 14:9)."

Defender: Act 15:16

The tabernacle of David - that is, the literal kingdom of Israel on earth - will indeed be restored under Messiah when He comes again, after the church, composed of both Jews and Gentiles, has been completed."

Defender: Act 15:18

No event on earth takes God by surprise. He is the God of all creation and, although He elected for a time to work through one chosen nation, His purpose had always been that of "reconciling the world unto himself" (2Co 5:19)."

TSK: Act 15:1

Cir, am 4057, ad 53

certain : Act 21:20; Gal 2:4, Gal 2:12, Gal 2:13

the brethren : Act 15:23

Except : Act 15:5; Rom 4:8-12; Gal 5:1-4; Phi 3:2, Phi 3:3; Col 2:8, Col 2:11, Col 2:12, Col 2:16

after : Gen. 17:10-27; Lev 12:3; Joh 7:22

ye : Act 15:24; 1Co 7:18, 1Co 7:19; Gal 2:1, Gal 2:3, Gal 5:6, Gal 6:13-16

TSK: Act 15:2

Paul : Act 15:7; Gal 1:6-10, Gal 2:5; Jud 1:3

they determined : Act 15:25; Exo 18:23; Gal 2:1, Gal 2:2

certain : Act 15:22, Act 15:27, Act 10:23, Act 11:12

should : Act 15:4, Act 15:22, Act 15:23; 1Sa 8:7; 1Co 9:19-23; Gal 2:2; Phm 1:8, Phm 1:9

the apostles : Act 15:6, Act 15:23, Act 21:18; 1Co 1:1; 2Co 11:5

TSK: Act 15:3

brought : Act 21:5, Act 28:15; Rom 15:24; 1Co 16:6, 1Co 16:11; Tit 3:13; 3Jo 1:6-8

passed : Act 8:14, Act 11:19

declaring : Act 15:12, Act 14:27, Act 21:19, Act 21:20

they caused : Act 11:18, Act 13:48, Act 13:52; Isa 60:4, Isa 60:5, Isa 66:12-14; Luk 15:5-10,Luk 15:23, Luk 15:24, Luk 15:32

TSK: Act 15:4

received : Act 18:27, Act 21:17; Mat 10:40; Rom 15:7; Col 4:10; 2Jo 1:10; 3Jo 1:8-10

all : Act 15:3, Act 15:12, Act 14:27, Act 21:19; Rom 15:18; 1Co 15:10; 2Co 5:19, 2Co 6:1

TSK: Act 15:5

rose up certain : or, rose up, said they

certain : the sect, Act 21:20, Act 26:5, Act 26:6; Phi 3:5-8

That it : Act 15:1, Act 15:24; Gal 5:1-3

TSK: Act 15:6

Act 15:25, Act 6:2, Act 21:18; Pro 15:22; Mat 18:20; Heb 13:7, Heb 13:17

TSK: Act 15:7

much : Act 15:2, Act 15:39; Phi 2:14

ye know : Act 10:5, Act 10:6, Act 10:20,32-48, Act 11:12-18; Mat 16:18, Mat 16:19

God : Act 1:24, Act 9:15, Act 13:2; 1Ch 28:4, 1Ch 28:5; Joh 3:27, Joh 15:16; Gal 2:7-9

by my : Act 1:16, Act 3:18, Act 4:25; Exo 4:12; Jer 1:9; Rom 10:17, Rom 10:18

TSK: Act 15:8

which : Act 1:24; 1Sa 16:7; 1Ki 8:39; 1Ch 28:9, 1Ch 29:17; Psa 44:21, Psa 139:1, Psa 139:2; Jer 11:20, Jer 17:10, Jer 20:12; Joh 2:24, Joh 2:25, Joh 21:17; Heb 4:13; Rev 2:23

bare : Act 14:3; Joh 5:37; Heb 2:4

giving : Act 2:4, Act 4:31, Act 10:44, Act 10:45, Act 11:15-17

TSK: Act 15:9

put : Act 14:1, Act 14:27; Rom 3:9, Rom 3:22, Rom 3:29, Rom 3:30, Rom 4:11, Rom 4:12, Rom 9:24, Rom 10:11-13; 1Co 7:18; Gal 3:28; Gal 5:6; Eph 2:14-22, Eph 3:6; Col 3:11

purifying : Act 10:15, Act 10:28, Act 10:43, Act 10:44; 1Co 1:2; Heb 9:13, Heb 9:14; 1Pe 1:22

TSK: Act 15:10

Why : Exo 17:2; Isa 7:12; Mat 4:7; Heb 3:9

put : Mat 11:28-30, Mat 23:4; Gal 5:1

which : Gal 4:1-5, Gal 4:9; Heb 9:9

TSK: Act 15:11

that : Rom 3:24, Rom 5:20,Rom 5:21, Rom 6:23; 1Co 16:23; 2Co 8:9, 2Co 13:14; Gal 1:6, Gal 2:16; Eph 1:6, Eph 1:7, Eph 2:7-9; Tit 2:11, Tit 3:4-7; Rev 5:9

TSK: Act 15:12

declaring : Act 15:4, Act 14:27, Act 21:19

TSK: Act 15:13

after : 1Co 14:30-33; Jam 1:19

James : Act 12:17, Act 21:18; Mar 15:40; Gal 1:19, Gal 2:9, Gal 2:12; Jam 1:1

Men : Act 2:14, Act 2:22, Act 2:29, Act 7:2, Act 22:1

TSK: Act 15:14

Simeon : 2Pe 1:1 *Gr.

declared : Act 15:7-9; Luk 1:68, Luk 1:78, Luk 2:31, Luk 2:32

to take : Isa 43:21, Isa 55:11-13; Rom 1:5, Rom 11:36; 1Pe 2:9, 1Pe 2:10

TSK: Act 15:15

Act 13:47; Rom 15:8-12

TSK: Act 15:16

this : Amo 9:11, Amo 9:12

build again the tabernacle : 2Sa 7:11-16; 1Ki 12:16; Psa 89:35-49; Isa 9:6, Isa 9:7; Jer 33:24-26; Eze 17:22-24; Zec 13:8; Mat 1:20-25; Luk 1:31-33, Luk 1:69, Luk 1:70

TSK: Act 15:17

the residue : Gen 22:18, Gen 49:10; Psa 22:26, Psa 22:27, Psa 67:1-3, Psa 72:17-19; Isa 2:2, Isa 2:3, Isa 11:10; Isa 19:23-25, Isa 24:15, Isa 24:16, Isa 49:6, Isa 49:7, Isa 66:18-21; Jer 16:19; Hos 2:23; Joe 2:32; Mic 4:1, Mic 4:2, Mic 5:7; Zec 2:11, Zec 8:20-23; Mal 1:11

the Gentiles : Gen 48:16; Num 6:27; Isa 43:7, Isa 65:1

who : Num 24:23; Isa 45:7, Isa 45:8; Dan 4:35

TSK: Act 15:18

Act 17:26; Num 23:19; Isa 41:22, Isa 41:23, Isa 44:7, Isa 46:9, Isa 46:10; Mat 13:35, Mat 25:34; Eph 1:4, Eph 1:11, Eph 3:9; 2Th 2:13; 1Pe 1:20; Rev 13:8, Rev 17:8

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Act 15:1

And certain men - These were undoubtedly men who had been Jews, but who were now converted to Christianity. The fact that they were willing to refer the matter in dispute to the apostles and elders Act 15:2 shows that they had professedly embraced the Christian religion. The account which follows is a record of the first internal dissension which occurred in the Christian church. Hitherto the church had been struggling against external foes. Violent persecutions had raged, and had fully occupied the attention of Christians. But now the churches were at peace. They enjoyed great external prosperity in Antioch, and the great enemy of souls took occasion then, as he has often done in similar circumstances since, to excite contentions in the church itself, so that when external violence could not destroy it, an effort was made to secure the same object by internal dissension and strife. This history, therefore, is particularly important, as it is the record of the first unhappy debate which arose in the bosom of the church. It is further important, as it shows the manner in which such controversies were settled in apostolic times, and as it established some very important principles respecting the perpetuity of the religious rites of the Jews.

Came down from Judea - To Antioch, and to the regions adjacent, which had been visited by the apostles, Act 15:23. Judea was a high and hilly region, and going from that toward the level countries adjacent to the sea was represented to be descending, or going down.

Taught the brethren - That is, Christians. They endeavored to convince them of the necessity of keeping the laws of Moses.

Except ye be circumcised - This was the leading or principal rite of the Jewish religion. It was indispensable to the name and privileges of a Jew. Proselytes to their religion were circumcised as well as native-born Jews, and they held it to be indispensable to salvation. It is evident from this that Paul and Barnabas had dispensed with this rite in regard to the Gentile converts, and that they intended to found the Christian church on the principle that the Jewish ceremonies were to cease. When, however, it was necessary to conciliate the minds of the Jews and to prevent contention, Paul did not hesitate to practice circumcision, Act 16:3.

After the manner of Moses - According to the custom which Moses commanded; according to the Mosaic ritual.

Ye cannot be saved - The Jews regarded this as indispensable to salvation. The grounds on which they would press it on the attention of Gentile converts would be very plausible, and such as would produce much embarrassment. For:

(1) It would be maintained that the laws of Moses were the laws of God, and were therefore unchangeable; and,

(2) It would doubtless be maintained that the religion of the Messiah was only a completing and perfecting of the Jewish religion that it was designed simply to carry out its principles according to the promises, and not to subvert and destroy anything that had been established by divine authority. It is usually not difficult to perplex and embarrass young converts with questions of modes, and rites, and forms of religion; and it is not uncommon that a revival is followed by some contention just like this. Opposing sects urge the claims of their special rites, and seek to make proselytes, and introduce contention and strife into an otherwise peaceful and happy Christian community.

Barnes: Act 15:2

Had no small dissension an disputation - The word rendered "dissension" στάσις stasis denotes sometimes "sedition"or "intestine war,"and sometimes "earnest and violent disputation or controversy,"Act 23:7, Act 23:10. In this place it clearly denotes that there was earnest and warm discussion; but it is not implied that there was any improper heat or temper on the part of Paul and Barnabas. Important principles were to be settled in regard to the organization of the church. Doctrines were advanced by the Judaizing teachers which were false, and which tended to produce great disorder in the church. Those doctrines were urged with zeal, were declared to be essential to salvation, and would therefore tend to distract the minds of Christians, and to produce great anxiety. It became, therefore, necessary to meet them with a determined purpose, and to establish the truth on an immovable basis. And the case shows that it is right to "contend earnestly for the faith"Jud 1:3; and, when similar cases occur, that it is proper to resist the approach of error with all the arguments which may be at our command, and with all the weapons which truth can furnish. It is further implied here that it is the duty of the ministers of the gospel to defend the truth and to oppose error. Paul and Barnabas regarded themselves as set for this purpose (compare Phi 1:17, "Knowing that I am set for the defense of the gospel"); and Christian ministers should be qualified to defend the truth, and should be willing with a proper spirit and with great earnestness to maintain the doctrines revealed.

They determined - There was no prospect that the controversy would be settled by contention and argument. It would seem, from this statement, that those who came down from Judea were also willing that the whole matter should be referred to the apostles at Jerusalem. The reason for this may have been:

(1) That Jerusalem would be regarded by them as the source of authority in the Christian church, as it had been among the Jews.

\caps1 (2) m\caps0 ost of the apostles and the most experienced Christians were there. They had listened to the instructions of Christ himself; had been long in the church; and were supposed to be better acquainted with its design and its laws.

\caps1 (3) t\caps0 hose who came from Judea would not be likely to acknowledge the authority of Paul as an apostle: the authority of those at Jerusalem they would recognize.

\caps1 (4) t\caps0 hey might have had a very confident expectation that the decision there would be in their favor. The question had not been agitated there. They had all been Jews, and it is certain that they continued as yet to attend in the temple service, and to conform to the Jewish customs. They might have expected, therefore, with great confidence, that the decision would be in their favor, and they were willing to refer it to those who resided at Jerusalem.

Certain other of them - Of the brethren; probably of each party. They did not go to debate, or to give their opinion, or to vote in the ease themselves, but to lay the question fairly before the apostles and elders.

Unto the apostles - The authority of the apostles in such a case would be acknowledged by all. They had been immediately instructed by the Saviour, and had the promise of infallible guidance in the organization of the church. See the notes on Mat 16:19; Mat 18:18.

And elders - See the note at Act 11:30. Greek: presbyters. See the notes on Act 14:23. Who these were, or what was their office and authority, is not easy now to determine. It may refer either to the aged men in the church at Jerusalem, or to those who were appointed to rule and to preach in connection with the apostles. As in the synagogue it was customary to determine questions by the advice of a bench of elders, there is no improbability in the supposition that the apostles would imitate that custom, and appoint a similar arrangement in the Christian church (Grotius). It is generally agreed that this is the journey to which Paul refers in Gal 2:1-10. If so, it happened fourteen years after his conversion, Gal 2:1. It was done in accordance with the divine command, "by revelation,"Gal 2:2. Among those who went with him was Titus, who was afterward so much distinguished as his companion, Gal 2:3.

About this question - The question whether the ceremonial laws of Moses were binding on Christian converts. In regard to the nature and design of this council at Jerusalem, see the notes on Act 15:30-31.

Barnes: Act 15:3

And being brought on their way by the church - Being attended and conducted by the Christian brethren. See the notes on Rom 15:24. It was customary for the Christians to attend the apostles in their travels. Compare 1Co 16:6, 1Co 16:11; 3Jo 1:6.

Through Phenice - See the note at Act 11:19.

And Samaria - These places were directly on their route to Jerusalem.

Declaring the conversion ... - Of the Gentiles in Antioch, and in the regions in Asia Minor through which they had traveled. These remarkable events they would naturally communicate with joy to the Christians with whom they would have contact in their journey.

Caused great joy - At the news of the extensive spread of the gospel. It was an indication of their deep feeling in the interests of religion that they thus rejoiced. Where Christians are themselves awake, and engaged in the service of Christ, they rejoice at the news of the conversion of sinners. Where they are cold, they hear such news with indifference, or with the utmost unconcern. One way of testing our feelings on the subject of religion is by the emotions which we have when we hear of extensive and glorious revivals of religion. Compare the notes on Act 8:8.

Barnes: Act 15:4

They were received of the church - By the church, in a hospitable and friendly manner. They were acknowledged as Christian brethren, and received with Christian kindness. See Gal 2:9.

And they declared - Paul and Barnabas, and those with them. That is, they stated the case; the remarkable conversion of the Gentiles, the evidence of their piety, and the origin of the present dispute.

Barnes: Act 15:5

But there rose up ... - It has been doubted whether these are the words of Paul and Barnabas, relating what occurred at Antioch, or whether they are the words of Luke recording what took place at Jerusalem. The correct exposition is probably what refers it to the latter. For:

(1) This seems to be the most obvious interpretation.

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 he use of the words "rose up"implies that. Those who disturbed the church at Antioch are said to have come down from Judea Act 15:1, and if this place referred to that occurrence, the same words would have been retained.

\caps1 (3) t\caps0 he particular specification here of "the sect of the Pharisees"looks as if this was an occurrence taking place at Jerusalem. No such specification exists respecting those who came down to Antioch; but it would seem here as if this party in Jerusalem resolved still to abide by the Law, and to impose those rites on the Christian converts. However, this interpretation is by no means certain.

Which believed - Who maintained or taught.

That it was needful ... - See the notes on Act 15:1.

Barnes: Act 15:6

And the apostles and elders ... - They came together in accordance with the authority in Mat 18:19-20. It would seem, also, that the whole church was convened on this occasion, and that the church concurred, at least, in the judgment expressed in this case. See Act 15:12, Act 15:22-23.

For to consider of this matter - Not to decide it arbitrarily, or even by authority, without deliberation; but to compare their views, and to express the result of the whole to the church at Antioch. It was a grave and difficult question, deeply affecting the entire constitution of the Christian church, and they therefore solemnly engaged in deliberation on the subject.

Barnes: Act 15:7

Much disputing - Or rather, much inquiry or deliberation. With our word disputing we commonly connect the idea of heat and anger. This is not necessarily implied in the word used here. It might have been calm, solemn, deliberate inquiry; and there is no evidence that it was conducted with undue warmth or anger.

Peter rose up and said - Peter was probably the most aged, and was most accustomed to speak, Act 2:14, etc.; Act 3:6, Act 3:12. Besides, there was a particular reason for his speaking here, as he had been engaged in similar scenes, and understood the case, and had had evidence that God had converted sinners without the Mosaic rites, and knew that it would have been inexpedient to have imposed these rites on those who had thus been converted.

A good while ago - See Acts 10: Some time since. So long since that there had been opportunity to ascertain whether it was necessary to observe the laws of Moses in order to the edification of the church.

God made choice ... - That is, of all the apostles, he designated me to engage in this work. Compare the notes on Mat 16:18, with Acts 10.

That the Gentiles - Cornelius, and those who were assembled with him at Caesarea. This was the first case that had occurred, and therefore it was important to appeal to it.

Barnes: Act 15:8

And God, which knoweth the hearts - Act 1:24. God thus knew whether they were true converts or not, and gave a demonstration that he acknowledged them as his.

Giving them the Holy Ghost ... - Act 10:45-46.

Barnes: Act 15:9

And put no difference ... - Though they had not been circumcised, and though they did not conform to the Law of Moses. Thus, God showed that the observance of these rites was not necessary in order to the true conversion of people, and to acceptance with him. He did not give us, who are Jews, any advantage over them, but justified and purified all in the same manner.

Purifying their hearts - Thus, giving the best evidence that he had renewed them, and admitted them to favor with him.

By faith - By believing on the Lord Jesus Christ. This demonstrated that the plan on which God was now about to show favor to people was not by external rites and ceremonies, but by a scheme which required faith as the only condition of acceptance. It is further implied here that there is no true faith which does not purify the heart.

Barnes: Act 15:10

Why tempt ye God? - Why provoke him to displeasure? Why, since he has shown his determination to accept them without such rites, do you provoke him by attempting to impose on his own people rites without his authority, and a against his manifest will? The argument is, that God had already accepted them. To attempt to impose these rites would be to provoke him to anger; to introduce observances which he had shown it was his purpose should now be abolished.

To put a yoke - That which would be burdensome and oppressive, or which would infringe on their just freedom as the children of God. It is called in Gal 5:1, "a yoke of bondage."Compare the notes on Mat 23:4. A "yoke"is an emblem of slavery or bondage 1Ti 6:1; or of affliction Lam 3:27; or of punishment Lam 1:14; or of oppressive and burdensome ceremonies, as in this place, or of the restraints of Christianity, Mat 11:29-30. In this place those rites are called a yoke, because:

(1) They were burdensome and oppressive; and,

(2) Because they would be an infringement of Christian freedom. One design of the gospel was to set people free from such rites and ceremonies.

Which neither our fathers ... - Which have been found burdensome at all times. They were expensive, and painful, and oppressive; and as they had been found to be so, it was not proper to impose them on the Gentile converts, but should rather rejoice at any evidence that the people of God might be delivered from them.

Were able to bear - Which are found to be oppressive and burdensome. They were attended with great inconvenience and many transgressions, as the consequence.

Barnes: Act 15:11

But we believe - We apostles, who have been with them, and have seen the evidences of their acceptance with God.

Through the grace ... - By the grace or mercy of Christ alone, without any of the rites and ceremonies of the Jews.

We shall be saved, even as they - In the same manner, by the mere grace of Christ. So far from being necessary to their salvation, they are really of no use in ours. We are to be saved, not by these ceremonies, but by the mere mercy of God in the Redeemer. They should not, therefore, be imposed on others.

Barnes: Act 15:12

Then all the multitude - Evidently the multitude of private Christians who were assembled on this occasion. That it does not refer to a synod of ministers and elders merely is apparent:

(1) Because the church, the brethren, are represented as having been present, and as concurring in the final opinion Act 15:22-23; and,

(2) Because the word "multitude" τὸ πλῆθος to plēthos would not have been used in describing the collection of apostles and elders merely. Compare Luk 1:10-11, Luk 1:13; Luk 5:6; Luk 6:17; Luk 19:37; Joh 5:3; Joh 21:6; Act 4:32; Act 6:2; Mat 3:7.

Gave audience - Heard, listened attentively to.

Barnabas and Paul - They were deeply interested in it, and they were qualified to give a fair statement of the facts as they had occurred.

Declaring what miracles and wonders ... - The argument here evidently is, that God had approved their work by miracles; that he gave evidence that what they did had his approbation; and that as all this was done without imposing on them the rites of the Jews, so it would follow that those were not now to be commanded.

Barnes: Act 15:13

James answered - James the Less, son of Alpheus. See the notes on Act 12:1.

Hearken unto me - This whole transaction shows that Peter had no such authority in the church as the papists pretend, for otherwise his opinion would have been followed without debate. James had an authority not less than that of Peter. It is possible that he might have been next in age (compare 1Co 15:7); and it seems morally certain that he remained for a considerable part of his life in Jerusalem, Act 12:17; Act 21:18; Gal 1:19; Gal 2:9, Gal 2:12.

Barnes: Act 15:14

Simeon - This is a Hebrew name. The Greek mode of writing it commonly was Simon. It was one of the names of Peter, Mat 4:18.

To take out of them a people - To choose from among the Gentries those who should be his friends.

Barnes: Act 15:15

The words of the prophets - Amo 9:11-12. It was a very material point with them, as Jews, to inquire whether this was in accordance with the predictions of the Scriptures. The most powerful revivals of religion, and the most striking demonstrations of the divine presence, will be in accordance with the Bible, and should be tested by them. This habit was always manifested by the apostles and early Christians, and should be followed by Christians at all times. Unless a supposed work of grace accords with the Bible, and can be defended by it, it must be false, and should be opposed. Compare Isa 8:20.

Barnes: Act 15:16

After this - This quotation is not made literally either from the Hebrew or the Septuagint, which differs also from the Hebrew. The 17th verse is quoted literally from the Septuagint, but in the 16th the general sense only of the passage is retained. The main point of the quotation, as made by James, was to show that, according to the prophets, it was contemplated that the Gentiles should be introduced to the privileges of the children of God; and on this point the passage has a direct bearing. The prophet Amos Amo 9:8-10 had described the calamities which would come upon the nation of the Jews by their being scattered and driven away. This implied that the city of Jerusalem, the temple, and the walls of the city would be destroyed. But after that (Heb: "on that day,"Amo 9:11, that is, the day when he should revisit them and recover them) he would restore them to their former privileges - would rebuild their temple, their city, and their walls, Amo 9:11. And not only so, not only would the blessing descend on the Jews, but it would also be extended to others. The "remnant of Edom,""the pagan upon whom"his "name would be called"Amo 9:12, would also partake of the mercy of God, and be subject to the Jewish people, and a time of general prosperity and of permanent blessings would follow, Amo 9:13-15. James understands this as referring to the times of the Messiah, and to the introduction of the gospel to the Gentiles. And so the passage Amo 9:12 is rendered in the Septuagint. See ver. 17.

I will return - When the people of God are subjected to calamities and trials, it is often represented as if God had departed from them. His returning, therefore, is an image of their restoration to his favor and to prosperity. This is not, however, in the Hebrew, in Amo 9:11.

I will build again - In the calamities that would come upon the nation Amo 9:8, it is implied that the temple and the city would be destroyed. To build them again would be a proof of his returning favor.

The tabernacle of David - The tent of David. Here it means the house or royal residence of David and the kings of Israel. That is, he would restore them to their former glory and splendor as his people. The reference here is not to the temple, which was the work of Solomon, but to the magnificence and splendor of the dwelling-place of David; that is, to the full enjoyment of their former high privileges and blessings.

Which is fallen down - Which would be destroyed by the King of Babylon, and by the long neglect and decay resulting from their being carried to a distant land,

The ruins thereof - Heb. "close up the breaches thereof."That is, it would be restored to its former prosperity and magnificence; an emblem of the favor of God, and of the spiritual blessings that would in future times descend on the Jewish people.

Barnes: Act 15:17

That the residue of men - This verse is quoted literally from the Septuagint, and differs in some respects from the Hebrew. The phrase, "the residue of men,"here is evidently understood, both by the Septuagint and by James, as referring to others than Jews, to the Gentiles the rest of the world - implying that many of them would be admitted to the friendship and favor of God. The Hebrew is, "that they may possess the remnant of Edom."This change is made in the Septuagint by a slight difference in the reading of two Hebrew words. The Septuagint, instead of the Hebrew וירשׁו w -y -r -sh -w , shall inherit, read ודרשׁו w -d -r -sh -w , shall seek of thee; and instead of אדום 'd -w -m , Edom, they read אדם'̇̀̇d -m , man, or mankind; that is, people. Why this variation occurred cannot be explained; but the sense is not materially different. In the Hebrew the word "Edom"has undoubted reference to another nation than the Jewish nation; and the expression means that, in the great prosperity of the Jews after their return, they would extend the influence of their religion to other nations; that is, as James applies it, the Gentiles might be brought to the privileges of the children of God.

And all the Gentiles - Heb. all the pagan; that is, all who were not Jews. This was a clear prediction that other nations were to be favored with the true religion, and that without any mention of their conforming to the rites of the Jewish people.

Upon whom my name is called - Who are called by my name, or who are regarded as my people.

Who doeth all these things - That is, who will certainly accomplish this in its time.

Barnes: Act 15:18

Known unto God ... - See the notes on Act 1:24. The meaning of this verse, in this connection, is this. God sees everything future; he knows what he will accomplish; he has a plan; all his works are so arranged in his mind that he sees everything distinctly and clearly. As he foretold these, it was a part of his plan; and as it was a part of his plan long since foretold, it should not be opposed and resisted by us.

Poole: Act 15:1

Act 15:1-4 Great dissensions arise about circumcising the

Gentiles: Paul and Barnabas are sent to consult the

apostles and elders at Jerusalem.

Act 15:5,6 The matter is debated in a council there,

Act 15:7-11 Peter declareth his opinion.

Act 15:12 Paul and Barnabas report the miracles they had

wrought among the Gentiles.

Act 15:13-21 James pronounceth sentence in favour of the Gentiles,

requiring of them abstinence only in a few

particulars.

Act 15:22-35 Letters are sent with the determination by messengers

to the churches, which are received with joy.

Act 15:36-41 Paul and Barnabas propose to visit together the

churches they had planted, but disagree, and travel

different ways.

Certain men these were such as did pretend to believe, but were false brethren; some think Cerinthus to have been of them.

The brethren the Gentiles who were converted unto the faith of Christ, or Proselytes of the gate (as they were called) who were not circumcised, and now professing the true faith. These the pharisaical professors would have excluded from any hopes of salvation, although circumcision was not commanded but unto the posterity of Abraham, Gen 17:10-13 , and Abraham himself was justified before he was circumcised, Rom 4:10 .

After the manner of Moses according unto the law of Moses: for God by him did renew and establish that ordinance unto that people, although it was long before his time both commanded and practised, Joh 7:22 .

Poole: Act 15:2

Paul that meek apostle, who was willing to become all things unto all men, yet he enters into a holy war with them that would introduce circumcision into the Christian church; because,

1. He would have no works of the law to be an ingredient into our salvation; but the free grace of God in Christ to be all in all.

2. That our freedom from all the ceremonial law, acquired by the death of Christ, might not be diminished.

3. That the spreading of the gospel might not be hindered, but that Christ might be accepted and honoured amongst all. Now if circumcision had been retained, it would have kept possession for all the other ceremonies to have continued, or re-entered, there being the same reason for the one as for the other, and the circumcised person was obliged by his circumcision to observe them all, Gal 5:3,4 .

They determined the church at Antioch, where this controversy was moved.

Unto the apostles James, Peter, and John who are thought to have been then at Jerusalem, the rest being probably gone to preach Christ in other parts.

Poole: Act 15:3

Brought on their way by the church the brethren or believers of Antioch, out of respect, went part of the way with them; as also thereby showing, that Paul and Barnabas did not go upon their own business or mind only, and that there was no dissension betwixt them and the church there.

The conversion of the Gentiles it is a conversion or turning indeed from error to truth, from impurity to holiness; that is, from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto the ever living God, Act 26:18 .

They caused great joy unto all the brethren nothing more rejoices a good man, than the bringing of souls unto God, and the enlarging of the kingdom of Jesus Christ.

Poole: Act 15:4

They were received of the church they were owned with respect and thankfulness, for their great work and labour in the Lord’ s vineyard.

All things that God had done with them: see Act 14:27 .

Poole: Act 15:5

If these words be taken for St. Luke’ s, the penman of this book, then they declare, that in the church of Jerusalem there were some that did abet the opinion of the necessity of circumcision; but if, (as most probably we may), we take them for the words of St. Paul, they then are part of his narrative to the church there, of what had happened at Antioch.

The sect of the Pharisees these Pharisees were a sect amongst the Jews, (so called from vrp separavit, and may be Englished, separatists), separating from converse with others, by reason of an opinion they had of their own holiness, Luk 18:11 .

Poole: Act 15:6

The apostles and elders unto whom Paul and Barnabas were sent about the decision of this question, Act 15:2 ,

came together for to consider of this matter they had been informed of it, and now they met to deliberate about it.

Poole: Act 15:7

Much disputing they argued on both sides, and considered what might be said for either opinion: some of them that met here seem at first to have been for the retaining of circumcision; for we know but in part, and from the collision of adverse parties such sparks fly out, that many a man hath lighted his candle at them.

A good while ago from the beginning of our having received our commission to preach, as Mat 28:19 ; or more particularly, from the time of Cornelius’ s conversion, Act 10:22 11:12 , which is thought to have been about fourteen or fifteen years before, that Peter preached Christ, by the command of God, unto the Gentiles.

Poole: Act 15:8

Which knoweth the hearts God knew the desires of the Gentiles, that they did sincerely desire to please God, and to see this salvation. This great attribute David improved, 1Ch 29:17 , and highly recommended his son Solomon to consider of, 1Ch 28:9 ; which, if believed, would make us also to serve God with a perfect heart and a willing mind. Giving them the Holy Ghost; God himself was a witness for these Gentiles beyond all exception, when he gave them the ordinary and extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost; by which he testified, that they belonged to Christ, whose Spirit this was. Thus the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy, Rev 19:10 ; and the Spirit, according to our Saviour’ s promise, Joh 15:26 , doth testify of him.

Poole: Act 15:9

God had now broken down the middle wall of partition betwixt Jew and Gentile, Eph 2:14 , and distributed his graces to these also, which was signified by the rending of the veil from the top to the bottom, Mat 27:51 , whereby such as were formerly without, might see and enjoy the benefit of those great things which had been hidden under those shadows and types.

Purifying their hearts, from idolatry, and other impieties in which they had lived which is the inward circumcision of the heart; and, whosoever is thus cleansed, ought not to be reputed amongst the unclean.

By faith faith is the instrument, God is the efficient cause, of our justification and renovation.

Poole: Act 15:10

Why tempt ye God? Why would you make a doubt of, and put it to a trial, whether God did in good earnest admit the Gentiles to his favour, and whether he remains firm and constant in such his kindness towards them? They did tempt God also, by disliking the calling of the Gentiles, and would have brought God’ s will, were it possible, unto theirs; not submitting their wills, as they ought, unto God’ s: for he that sins in any kind, does tempt God; that is, he tries God’ s patience, power, and righteousness.

A yoke so the law of ceremonies is called. Gal 5:1 , and was a yoke indeed, if we consider:

1. Their variety;

2. Their difficulty;

3. Their chargeableness;

4. Their inefficacy, being only shadows

of good things to come, Col 2:17 .

Poole: Act 15:11

The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ all saving grace may be well so called, it being purchased only by Christ, and bestowed upon us from the Father through Christ.

Even as they the Jews their fathers; these were saved through the grace of the Messiah which was to come; and the apostle urges this (against the imposing of the law) to the Jews, because neither their ancestors nor themselves could be justified by the law, but only by grace.

Poole: Act 15:12

All the multitude the apostles and elders themselves gave attention to what Barnabas and Paul declared, and by their silence did tacitly approve of what they had said.

Miracles and wonders the conversion of the Gentiles in itself, and not only the signs which did attend it, is truly wonderful: the saving of any one soul is a miraculous work.

Poole: Act 15:13

After they had held their peace Barnabas and Paul had finished their narrative.

James who was surnamed the Just, and was the son of Alpheus, and a kinsman to our Saviour, now being president of this council.

Answered that is, began to speak.

Poole: Act 15:14

Simeon or Simon, the name of Peter; but St. Luke, being himself a Hebrew, writes it according as they pronounced it, and not so contracted as the Greeks wrote it.

A people there were some at all times probably amongst the Gentiles who did fear God, as Job and his three friends; but they did not make a people, or such a number as is here spoken of.

For his name: God takes out of the world a people for his name, that is,

1. For himself; as, Pro 18:10 , the name of the Lord is put for the Lord himself.

2. For to call upon his name, as also for to be called by his name.

3. For his glory and honour, and to magnify his name.

Poole: Act 15:15

The prophets in the plural number, though only one cited: it is an ordinary enallage; but it also shows the harmony amongst the prophets, they all speaking by one Spirit; what one said is as if all had said it.

Poole: Act 15:16

After this in the days of the Messiah.

I will return: the word may be taken in both voices. If actively, it signifies God’ s returning uuto the Gentiles, from whom he had departed. If passively, it foreshows their returning unto God, whom they had forsaken.

The tabernacle the house, expressed by a tabernacle, (as frequently in Scripture), because that anciently they dwelt only in tabernacles; and here for the throne of David, who was a type of Christ, whose kingdom is over all. God does promise less than he does perform, for he did not only restore the tabernacle of David, in Christ, but raised it to a far greater splendour and glory in its spiritual state. And though St. James here does not exactly keep unto the words of the prophet, he speaks their sense and meaning.

Poole: Act 15:17

In the prophet it is the remnant of Edom, Amo 9:12 , which is here called the residue of men; for as Jacob, or Israel, shadowed out the church, so Edom, or Esau, (the other son of Isaac), represented those who were rejected, Rom 9:13 . The prophet also adds, by way of explication, all the heathen; as the apostle does here,

all the Gentiles. Upon whom my name is called who shall be mine, or appropriated unto me; also called by his name, they being called Christians from Christ, whom they believed in.

Saith the Lord, who doeth all these things the calling of the Gentiles was God’ s work, and therefore so far from being excepted against, that it ought to be marvellous in our eyes.

Poole: Act 15:18

This the apostle adds, that they might not be offended with the seeming novelty and surprise of the calling of the Gentiles, and abrogation of the ceremonies; for it was no other than what God had before determined to do, and therefore they ought to rest satisfied in the wise and holy appointments of God.

Haydock: Act 15:1

Unless you be circumcised. Many who had been converted from Judaism, held that none, not even converted from paganism, could be saved, unless they were circumcised, and observed the other ceremonies of the law of Moses. (Witham) ---

See Galatians v. 2.

Haydock: Act 15:2

To the apostles and priests, [1] where we find again presbyters in Greek, meaning bishops and priests. (Witham) ---

Paul...should go to...Jerusalem. We learn from Galatians ii. 2. 4. that St. Paul undertook this journey in consequence of a divine revelation, and was accompanied by Barnabas and Titus, the latter of whom he would not suffer to be circumcised. Such confidence had he in the rectitude of the opinion he defended. From the example of St. Paul and St. Barnabas, apostles, and men full of the Spirit of God, we learn, that as often as any contest arises about faith, recourse should be had to the supreme visible authority established by Jesus Christ, to have all differences adjusted. This is the order of divine Providence with regard to the Church; without it truth and unity could not be preserved; without it, the Church of God would be more defective and inefficient than any human government. Tell the Church: and if he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen and the publican. (Matthew xviii. 17.)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Greek: presbuterous; presbyteros. For the same Greek word we sometimes find in the vulgar Latin, presbyteros, sometimes seniores, sometimes majores natu: yet it is generally a word of dignity in the ministry of Christ, signifying those who were afterwards known by the name of bishops or priests. When mention is made of Greek: presbuteros, or seniores, of the old law, I have translated elders: but where the ministers of the new law are understood, when in the Latin we have presbyteri, I have put priests; when majores natu or seniores, I have put in English seniors, bishops or priests, being understood.

Haydock: Act 15:7

Former days. Literally, in the days of old; that is, at the conversion of Cornelius, many years ago, about the year 35; and it was now 51. (Witham) ---

St. Peter at the head of the Council, spoke first; St. James as Bishop of Jerusalem, spoke next, and all, as St. Jerome says, came into the sentence of Peter. (Ep. lxxxix. ad. S. Aug. chap. 2.)

Haydock: Act 15:10

Why tempt you God, by calling in question what he hath sufficiently attested, and approved, and by being incredulous to his promises of giving salvation to the Gentiles, and to all nations. (Witham)

Haydock: Act 15:11

In the historical sense he is speaking of the prosperity of the house of Juda, in the reign of Ezechias, or their return from captivity. But in this respect, it is certain that the prophecy never had its entire accomplishment. The passage in the text is cited from the Septuagint. The Hebrew is, "I will raise up the house of David...that it may possess all the nations," &c. Now it is true that the nations never were subject to the house of David, or known by the name of the people of God; but by their vocation to the gospel, as St. James explains it. (Calmet)

Haydock: Act 15:18

To the Lord was known his own work. He bringeth it to pass, as he hath decreed, though his decrees are to us unknown. (Witham)

Gill: Act 15:1

And certain men which came down from Judea,.... To Antioch; they were not sent by the apostles, they came down of "themselves"; who they were, is not certain; that they were "judaizing" Christians, and teachers among them, is plain from the following account: according to Epiphanius ^g they were Cerinthus, and some of his followers: these

taught the brethren; the Gentile converts at Antioch, who are styled "brethren", though they were Gentiles, because they were regenerated by the grace of God, and were of the same faith with the believing Jews, and in the same church state with them at Antioch: and said,

except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses; or custom of Moses, which had been used from the time of Abraham, and was revived and reinforced by Moses; wherefore the Syriac version renders it, "the law of Moses"; See Gill on Joh 7:19.

ye cannot be saved; these men were not only for retaining circumcision, which was now abolished, but they made it necessary to salvation; which was carrying the matter further than even the unbelieving Jews themselves did, at least some of them: for though indeed it is a notion with them, that no circumcised persons go to hell, but are all saved; and some of them say, that God rejects uncircumcised persons, and brings them down to hell ^h; yet others of them speak of the godly among the nations of the world, and of the proselytes of the gate, who keep the seven precepts of Noah, as persons that shall be saved; so Ananias the Jew, preceptor to King Izates, when he signified his great desire to be circumcised, in order to put him off of it, told him, that if he was determined to follow the customs of the Jews, he might worship God without circumcision, which was more peculiar to the Jews than to be circumcised ⁱ.

Gill: Act 15:2

When therefore Paul and Barnabas,.... Who were the ministers of the uncircumcision, and were just returned from preaching the Gospel among the Gentiles, with success, and were advocates for them, being witnesses of the grace that was bestowed on them, and therefore opposed the sentiments of these men:

and had no small dissension and disputation with them; which was attended with much heat and sharpness, and continued some time, and occasioned much disturbance and uneasiness; nor could the affair be decided and issued: wherefore

they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them; that is, the members of the church at Antioch, taking this matter into consideration, and finding that the difference could not be composed, for the peace of the church, wisely came to a resolution, and made an order, that Paul and Barnabas, with others, as Titus, who went with Paul at this time, as appears from Gal 2:1 and some others of the brethren, and it may be also certain, on, the other side of the question; that these

should go up to Jerusalem, unto the apostles and elders, about this question; concerning circumcision, and the necessity of it to salvation, that they might have the sense of James, and Peter, and John, who particularly were at Jerusalem at this time, as appears from Act 15:7 and other apostles that might be there; and also of other ministers of the word, who are called elders. And the church of Jerusalem being the most ancient church, and several of the apostles residing here, who had seen Christ in the flesh, and had received their mission and commission from him, and had been extraordinarily endowed with the Holy Ghost; and here being many other preachers of the Gospel, and there being in a multitude of counsellors safety, the church at Antioch judged it advisable to send to them for counsel and direction; and it becomes churches to assist each other in this way.

Gill: Act 15:3

And being brought on their way by the church,.... That is, either being accompanied by some of the brethren of the church some part of the way, out of respect unto them, or being provided by them with things necessary for their journey; see Tit 3:13

they passed through Phenice and Samaria; which both lay between Syria and Judea; in the former of which places those that were scattered upon the death of Stephen had preached, and a great number were converted and believed in Christ who were Jews, Act 11:19 and in the latter Philip the evangelist had preached with much success, Act 8:5 as therefore their way to Jerusalem lay through these places, they called upon the brethren as they passed;

declaring the conversion of the Gentiles; in the several places where they had been, as in Syria, Pisidia, Pamphylia, and Lycaonia, how by their ministry they were turned from darkness to light, from Satan unto God, from their superstition and idolatry to the worship of the true God, and to faith in Christ Jesus:

and they caused great joy unto all the brethren; the believing Jews in those parts, who being truly believers in Christ, rejoiced at the spread of his Gospel, and the increase of his interest, even among the Gentiles; for if angels rejoice, much more should saints rejoice at the conversion of sinners, let them be who or where they will; and where there is true grace, there will be joy when this is the case. There were churches in each of these places, of which "the brethren" here mentioned were members, and which continued for many ages afterwards: the foundation of the churches in Phenice was first laid by the converts made by them, who were scattered abroad through the persecution at the death of Stephen, Act 11:19. Quartus, mentioned in Rom 16:23 is said to be bishop of Berytus in this country. In the "second" century there were churches at Tyre and Ptolemais, two cities in Phoenicia; Cassius was bishop of the one, and Clarus of the other ^k: in the "third" century several Phoenician bishops suffered martyrdom, as Tyrannio, bishop of the church of Tyre, Zenobius, presbyter of that at Sidon, and Sylvanus, bishop of Emisa ^l: in the "fourth" century, at the beginning of it, there were present, at the council of Nice, the bishops of Ptolemais, Damascus, Tripolis, Paneas, and Emisa; as they were also at a synod held at Jerusalem in the same century, on account of the Arians, and at another at Antioch on the same account: in the fifth century there were churches in Phoenicia reformed by Chrysostom, by whose means also the temples of the idols were destroyed, and many were converted in these countries; and in this age lived several persons of note here, as Antiochus bishop of Ptolemais, Eustathius bishop of Berytus, Paulus bishop of Emisa, Pompeianus and Uranius of the same place, and Damianus bishop of Sidon, and other Phoenician bishops, who assisted at the council of Chalcedon; as Olympius bishop of Atrapolis, Theodorus bishop of Tripoils, Joseph bishop of Heliopolis, Valerius bishop of Laodicea, Thomas bishop of Euroma, and Theonas bishop of Enria or Enaria, all in Phoenicia: in the sixth century, mention is made of the bishops of Ptolemais, Tyre, Sidon, and Berytus, in the acts of the synod at Rome and Constantinople; and though Phoenicia was seized upon, and wasted by the Arabians and Persians, in the seventh century; yet we read, in the eighth century, of Adeodatus, a bishop of Berytus, who baptized many converted Jews ^m. As for Samaria, our Lord himself preached and converted many persons there; and after his resurrection he gave his apostles a commission and directions to go there; and here Philip preached with great success. Nicolaus, the deacon, is said to be the first bishop of Samaria; and though in after ages Heathenism very much prevailed in those parts; yet there were Christians and churches, more or less, for several centuries; even in the sixth century there was a bishop of Neapolis in Samaria, killed with the sword, and some presbyters who were taken and fried in a pan, with the remains of some martyrs, by the Samaritan Jews ⁿ.

Gill: Act 15:4

And when they were come to Jerusalem,.... Paul and Barnabas, and the rest that came from Antioch with them:

they were received of the church; that is, that was at Jerusalem, in a very kind and respectful manner; they were received into their houses, and accommodated with everything convenient for them:

and of the apostles; particularly James, and Cephas, and John, who gave to Paul and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, in token of their approbation of them, affection for them, and agreement with them:

and elders: the other ministers of the Gospel who preached in that place:

and they declared all things that God had done with them: just as they did to the church at Antioch, when they returned from their travels; see Gill on Act 14:27, the Arabic version here adds, as there, "and that God had opened to the Gentiles the door of faith."

Gill: Act 15:5

But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees,.... Which was the strictest sect of religion among the Jews:

which believed; that Jesus was the Messiah, and professed their faith in him, and were members of the church, though they still retained many of their pharisaical tenets, and are therefore said to be of that sect: these rose up in opposition to Paul and Barnabas, as they were relating their success among the Gentiles, and giving an account of the difference that had happened at Antioch, and their own sense of that matter:

saying, that it was needful to circumcise them: the Gentiles that believed:

and to command them to keep the law of Moses; both moral and ceremonial; the observance of which they reckoned was absolutely necessary to salvation. Some think these are not the words of Luke, relating what happened at Jerusalem, when Paul and Barnabas gave in their account of things to the apostles and elders; but that they are a continuation of their account, how that in the controversy raised at Antioch, certain Pharisees that came thither from Judea, rose up and asserted the necessity of the, Gentiles being circumcised, and of their keeping the law of Moses in order to their being saved; which is favoured by the Syriac version, especially by the Latin interpreter of it, who supplies the words thus, "but say they" (i.e. Paul and Barnabas) "there arose men", &c.

Gill: Act 15:6

And the apostles and elders came together,.... And also the brethren, or private members of the church, even the whole church, as appears from Act 15:22. Whether all the apostles were here present, is not certain; Peter, James, and John were; but who else, cannot be said: these met together

for to consider of this matter; to hear what was to be said on both sides of the question, and then to judge what advice was proper to be given to the Gentiles.

Gill: Act 15:7

And when there had been much disputing,.... Pro and con upon this subject; many had spoken; and much had been said, and a great deal of time had been taken up about the thing in controversy:

Peter rose up; not only out of respect to this venerable assembly, but to signify that he had something to say; and he stood up that he might be the better heard. Beza's ancient copy reads, "rose up in spirit";

and said unto them, men and brethren: an usual form of address with the Jews; Act 7:2

ye know how that a good while ago; or "from ancient days"; or "from the beginning", as the Ethiopic version renders it; from the beginning of the preaching of the Gospel, after the ascension of Christ; quickly after the effusion of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost: it is thought, by some, to be ten or eleven, and, by others, to be twenty years ago, or thereabout:

God made choice among us; the apostles; the Alexandrian copy reads, "among you"; the sense is the same, for Peter must be supposed as directing his discourse chiefly to the apostles:

that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the Gospel, and believe; referring to the case of Cornelius, and his family: and his sense is, that some years ago it pleased God, in his providence, to single him out from the rest of the apostles, and in a very extraordinary manner to call him to go to Caesarea, and preach the gospel to Cornelius, and those that were in his house, that hearing they might believe in Christ.

Gill: Act 15:8

And God which knoweth the hearts,.... Of all men; he being omniscient, the searcher of the hearts, and the trier of the reins of the children of men, knew with what sincerity Cornelius sent for Peter; and with what vehement desire and longing expectation he and his family and friends waited for his coming; and with what earnestness, diligence, and affection they attended to what he said:

bore them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; God bore a testimony, and showed his well pleasedness in the whole of this affair, by bestowing upon them not only the regenerating and sanctifying grace of the Spirit; but his extraordinary gifts, such as speaking with divers tongues, even in like manner as these were bestowed on the apostles themselves, on the day of Pentecost, though they were uncircumcised persons; for the drift of Peter's oration is to show, that circumcision was not necessary to salvation.

Gill: Act 15:9

And put no difference between us and them,.... Neither in the extraordinary gifts, nor special grace, of the Spirit; giving them the same graces of faith, hope, and love, admitting to the same privileges and immunities of the house of God, and giving them a right and title to the same inheritance of the saints in light, though the one were circumcised, and the other were not. God puts no difference as to matters of religion under the Gospel dispensation between Jews and Gentiles, neither on account of Abraham's seed, or of circumcision, or of the ceremonial law, or of national adoption; nor would he have any made with respect to conversation, civil or religious; all which Peter knew full well: nor has he made any difference in his eternal choice of persons to eternal salvation, on any of the above accounts, having ordained Gentiles to eternal life as Jews, who in consequence of it believe in Christ; nor in redemption, Christ having redeemed by his blood men out of every kindred, tongue, people, and nation; nor in the effectual calling, for they that were called in the first times of the Gospel, were not of the Jews only, but of the Gentiles also, to whom the Gospel was alike sent, and made effectual to saving purposes: these shared in the same blessings of pardon, justification, and adoption; their sins were forgiven through the same blood, their persons were justified by the same righteousness, and they were taken into the same family, and were no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens of the saints, and of the household of God; having the same access to God, being built on the same foundation, enjoying the same privileges, and having the same hope of eternal glory.

Purifying their hearts by faith; which was done by implanting faith in them, and leading that faith to the blood of Christ, which cleanses from all sin, original and actual, with which men are defiled; for faith has not this efficacy in itself, but as it has to do with the blood of Jesus: and this spiritual purification being what answered to circumcision, made that unnecessary; for this is the circumcision of the heart, of which the other was only typical. The hearts of men are filthy, and need purifying; they are originally polluted with sin; this is the case of all men; and this defilement reaches to all the members of the body, and the faculties of the soul; and especially the heart is the seat of this impurity, which God only can cleanse: he promises to do it, and does do it; and he only can do it, men cannot; for though, they are exhorted to it, in order to make them sensible of their pollution, and their need of cleansing, that they may apply where it is to be had, yet it is not in their power to effect it; to make a clean heart is a creation work, which is peculiar to God: the heart cannot be purified, neither by ceremonial ablutions, nor by works of moral righteousness, nor by humiliations and tears, nor by submission to Gospel ordinances, as water baptism, but only by the grace of God, and the blood of Christ; which the Spirit of God sprinkles upon the heart, and which faith looks to and deals with, and so it is freed from an evil conscience; and this blessing the believing Gentiles enjoyed in common with the believing Jews.

Gill: Act 15:10

Now therefore why tempt ye God,.... By hesitating about this matter, by disputing upon this point, and by seeking for further proof and evidence of the will of God in this affair; when it is so plain a case, that it has been his will that the Gospel should be preached to Gentiles, without obliging them to circumcision; that he has given his Spirit both in his extraordinary gifts, and special grace, to uncircumcised persons; particularly he has bestowed faith in Christ upon them, whereby they have been led to the blood of Christ, typified in circumcision, and are thereby purged from all their filth and pollution, and so are the true circumcision: wherefore it is no other than tempting God, a manifest opposition to him, and what must give him offence, to debate about a point so clear; and especially to attempt

to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear. It is common with the Jews to call the law a yoke; frequent mention is made of ניר פקידיא and מצות עול, "the yoke of the commandments" ^o, and עול התורה, "the yoke of the law" ^p: and by it here is meant, not circumcision only and barely, for that the Jewish fathers had been able to bear, and had bore it; nor the whole ceremonial law only, which consisted of a multitude of commands and ordinances very heavy and hard; but even the whole moral law, which circumcision obliged those who submitted to it to keep it perfectly; see Gal 5:3, which neither the apostles, nor their fathers, were ever able to do, nor any mere man whatever; and therefore this yoke was intolerable and insupportable, and not to be put upon the necks of the Gentile believers; who here are called disciples, being taught the doctrine of the Gospel, and the way of salvation; which was not by circumcision, nor by any works of the law, but by the grace of Christ, as in the following verse.

Gill: Act 15:11

But we believe,.... Who are circumcised; the Arabic version adds, "and are sure"; for what follows is a sure and certain article of faith:

that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ; not through circumcision, or by any works of the law, moral or ceremonial; but through the grace of Christ undertaking for them, assuming their nature, and dying in their room and stead; through his redeeming, justifying, and pardoning grace: salvation is by Christ; Jehovah the Father appointed him to be his salvation; he sent him, and he came to save sinners; and he has obtained salvation for them; and it is in him, and in no other: and this salvation is by "the grace" of Christ; it was grace moved him to engage in this work before the world began; it was good will to men that caused him to come down from heaven, and appear on earth in the form of a servant; it was pure love that influenced him to lay down his life for them; through the grace in his heart he did all this for them; and it is the fulness of grace in his hands, out of which they receive abundance, whereby they are entitled to, and are made meet for eternal glory:

we shall be saved, even as they; either as the disciples, the Gentile converts, who without circumcision, and the works of the law, were saved by the pure grace and love of Christ, in dying for them, and on which they alone depended for salvation; or else as the Jewish fathers were, for they were justified, pardoned, accepted, and saved in the same way, as the saints under the New Testament are: they could not keep the law perfectly, nor was there then, nor now, salvation by it, only by the grace of Christ; and in that way, and that only, Old and New Testament believers, Jews and Gentiles, whether circumcised or uncircumcised, are saved. The Gentiles were not saved by the light of nature, nor the Jews by the law of Moses; the one were not lost for want of circumcision, nor the other saved by it; the only way of salvation to both, and under all dispensations, is the Lord Jesus Christ; through whose sacrifice sin is atoned for, through whose blood it is pardoned, through whose righteousness men are justified before God, and are accepted with him; and through whom saints have communion with God; and by whom, and whose grace, and not by their own works, they shall be saved with an everlasting salvation, from sin, law, death, hell, and damnation: and the salvation of one and of another, even of all that are saved, Jews or Gentiles, is by grace; no one is deserving of it; they have all sinned, and come short of the glory of God; have done that which is abominable, and they themselves are abominable in the sight of God; they have destroyed, and cannot help themselves; nor have they anyone good thing but what they have received from the Lord, and therefore ought to ascribe all to his grace; it is by that they are what they are, have what they have, and do what they do. Salvation, in all its parts and branches, is owing to grace; and so it is with respect to all persons that are saved; some are not saved by their works, and others by the grace of Christ, but they are all saved by grace; and none have any room to boast of themselves against others.

Gill: Act 15:12

Then all the multitude kept silence,.... Upon this oration of Peter's, there was a profound silence in the whole assembly, among all the brethren of the church, who were come together on this occasion; they were all satisfied with, and by their silence acquiesced in, what Peter said; and waited to hear what might be further said about this matter, by other persons in the assembly; and even those who were on the other side of the question, were confounded and nonplussed, and knew not what to say, and the more so, when they perceived that the rest of the apostles and elders were of the same mind; for Beza's most ancient copy introduces this clause thus; "then the elders agreeing to the things that were said by Peter, the whole multitude was silent": and this gave Paul and Barnabas an opportunity of being heard; who, perhaps, could not so well be heard before, for the clamour of the people against them, who might not have so good an opinion of them, and of their practices:

and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul; Barnabas is mentioned first, he being most known to the Jews, and of whom they might have the better opinion; and who probably gave the account of their proceedings and success among the Gentiles:

declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them; what wonders of grace were wrought in the conversion of multitudes of them, wherever they came; and what miracles in nature were wrought for the confirmation of the Gospel, such as the striking blind Elymas the sorcerer, at Paphos in Cyprus, and curing the cripple at Lystra; and which they ascribe not to themselves but to God, whose instruments they only were.

Gill: Act 15:13

And after they had held their peace,.... Meaning not the multitude, but Paul and Barnabas; when they had finished their account, and had done speaking:

James answered; or rose up, as the Syriac version reads, he stood up and began to speak. This was James the son of Alphaeus, one of the twelve apostles, sometimes called the brother of the Lord; for the other James, the son of Zebedee and brother of John, was dead, being killed by Herod, Act 12:2 but this was the brother of Jude, and the same that wrote the epistle that bears his name: whether he was now bishop or pastor of the church at Jerusalem, is not certain; nor whether he was president in this council; the speeches made in it do not appear to be directed to him: he began his oration thus,

saying, men and brethren, hearken to me; the titles he uses, and the manner of desiring audience, were what were common with the Jews; see Act 2:14.

Gill: Act 15:14

Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles,.... James begins with taking notice of Peter's speech, and agrees to it, and confirms it; for by Simeon is not meant, as some have thought, the Simeon that took Christ in his arms, Luk 2:25 who had been dead long ago; but Simon Peter, who had spoken before. Simon and Simeon are one and the same name; the former is only a contraction of the latter in the Syriac language; Simeon was his pure Hebrew name, and James speaking to an assembly of Hebrews, uses it; and observes, that he had given a very clear and distinct narrative, how God at the first preaching of the Gospel, quickly after the day of Pentecost, was pleased to look upon the Gentiles, and show favour to them, and visit them in a way of grace and mercy, by sending the Gospel to them, and his Spirit to make it effectual: this was a gracious visit; he came and looked upon them, quickened them, and spoke comfortably to them, and bestowed special favours upon them; the set time for such a visit being come: the Arabic version renders it, "how God first promised"; referring to the promises concerning the calling of the Gentiles, which James afterwards confirms by citing a passage out of the prophets to the same purpose: the Syriac version, "how God began to choose out of the Gentiles": that is, by calling them by his grace; and the Ethiopic version, "how God first had mercy on the Gentiles"; who before had not obtained mercy:

to take out of them a people for his name; for himself, for his own glory, to call upon his name, and to be called by his name, to bear his name, and support his Gospel, cause and interest: the distinguishing grace of God may be seen herein; it was grace to visit them, to look upon them, when for many hundreds of years he had overlooked them, he had taken no notice of them; and it was distinguishing grace to take some out of them, to be a special and peculiar people to himself; to separate them from the rest by his powerful and efficacious grace, and form them into a church state, that they might show forth his praise and glorify him.

Gill: Act 15:15

And to this agree the words of the prophets,.... In several of the prophecies of the Old Testament, which plainly speak of the calling of the Gentiles; though James thought it sufficient to produce only one instead of many:

as it is written; in Amo 9:11 and this is agreeably to the Jewish way of citing Scriptures, as Surenhusius observes; so it is said ^q, in twenty four places the priests are called Levites, and this is one of them, Eze 44:15 where only one place is mentioned, instead of the twenty four.

Gill: Act 15:16

After this I will return,.... That is, after the Lord had destroyed the sinful kingdom from off the face of the earth, and had sifted the house of Israel among all nations, and the sinners of his people were slain with the sword; after all this he promises to return and show favour to them: this is the sense of the prophet which James gives; for these words are not at length in Amos; there it is only said, "in that day"; upon which Jarchi's note is,

"after all these things shall have come upon them, that day shall come which is appointed for redemption;''

which well agrees with James here, and the manner in which he introduces this passage:

and will build again the tabernacle of David, that is fallen down: that is, as the Jewish ^r writers themselves interpret it, the kingdom of the house of David, though in a temporal sense, which was now in a most ruinous condition; the sceptre was departed from Judah; all; power and authority were falling off apace from the Jews, into the hands of the Romans; David's family were quite sunk, and almost gone, and had no share at all in the civil government; Jesus, who was descended from him, and was of the blood royal, and right heir to his throne, was born of a poor virgin; and his supposed father was a carpenter; and he himself the King of the Jews, was crucified by them; yet notwithstanding all this, David's tabernacle was to be rebuilt, and his kingdom to be restored by the Messiah, but in a spiritual way; for the tabernacle of David designs the spiritual kingdom or church of Christ, who is here called David, as in Eze 34:23 and of whom David was an eminent type: and the church may be called a tabernacle, being in the present state of things, as to its place, uncertain and moveable, though ere long it will be a tabernacle that will not be taken down, Isa 33:20 and Christ's tabernacle, being of his building, and where he dwells and keeps his court, as King of saints; see Isa 16:5 and which was in a fallen ruinous condition when he came on earth, through the corrupt principles of the Pharisees and Sadducees, the bigotry and superstition of the one, and the deism of the other; and through the great decay of spiritual worship and powerful godliness, and the bad lives of professors, and the small number of truly godly persons: the Jews ^s themselves refer this prophecy to the times of the Messiah, yea, one of the names by which they call the Messiah is taken from hence ^t: it is asked,

"who is Bar Naphli? it is replied, the Messiah; the Messiah is called Bar Naphli (the son fallen, or of the fallen); is it not written, "in that day I will raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen down?"''

one of their own commentators ^u on this text, has this note,

"if we interpret this of the Messiah, the matter is clear:''

but then this must be understood in a spiritual sense, for Christ's kingdom is not a worldly one; the raising up and rebuilding of this tabernacle, must design the reviving of true religion, the doctrine and practice of it, the enlargement of the church of God, by the conversion both of Jews and Gentiles:

and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up; which has been done by breaking down the middle wall of partition between Jews and Gentiles, and letting in the latter into the Gospel church with the former, whereby it grows up to be an holy temple in the Lord; see Isa 54:2 and to this sense the Jews themselves ^w interpret it;

"the holy blessed God will raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, as it is said, Amo 9:11 in that day I will raise up the tabernacle of David; for all the world shall be אגודה אחת, "one bundle"; as it is said, Zep 3:9''

Gill: Act 15:17

That the residue of men might seek after the Lord,.... The rebuilder and proprietor of this tabernacle, and who dwells in it; that is, attend his worship, pray unto him, and seek unto him for life and salvation: in Amos these are called, "the remnant of Edom": and design the remnant according to the election of grace among the Gentiles; the Jews generally call all other nations, and especially the Roman empire, Edom:

and all the Gentiles upon whom my name is called; for God is the God of the whole earth, of the Gentiles as well as of the Jews; and his Gospel was now spread among them, and many of them were converted and called Christians, and the children and people of God: the Jews ^x understand this of the people of Israel, who are called by the name of the Lord, or on whom his name is called; and some think the words are to be transposed ^y thus,

"that Israel on whom my name is called might possess the remnant of Edom, and all the people;''

and is true of their possessing or enjoying them in a Gospel church state:

saith the Lord, who doth all these things; raises up the tabernacle of David, revives the interest of religion, resettles the church, and increases it, calls and converts the Gentiles, causes them to seek after the Lord, and unites them in one church state with the Jews; the word "all" is left out in the Alexandrian copy, and in the Vulgate Latin and Ethiopic versions, and is not in Amos.

Gill: Act 15:18

Known unto God are all his works,.... These are the words of James, and not of Amos; all the things which God does in the church and in the world, they were all foreknown and predetermined by him: from the beginning of the world; or from eternity; even all his works of creation, providence and grace: the Alexandrian copy, and Beza's most ancient copy, and the Vulgate Latin version, read in the singular number, "his work"; the work of the conversion of the Gentiles; this was fixed and resolved on by God in eternity; he knew it would be, because he had determined it should be; and accordingly he foretold it, and spoke of it in various periods of time before it came to pass; and therefore it should not be looked upon as some new and strange thing, that was never known, spoken or heard of: and this holds true of every other work of God, and agrees with what the Jews sometimes say ^z, that

"every work which is renewed in the world, the holy blessed God has commanded (or ordered) it from the day the world was created.''

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Act 15:1

¹ sn That is, they came down from Judea to Antioch in Syria.

² tc Codex Bezae (D) and a few other witnesses have “and walk” here (i.e., instead of τῷ ἔθει τῷ Μωϋσέως [tw eqei tw Mwu>sew"] they read καὶ τῷ ἔθει τῷ Μωϋσέως περιπατῆτε [kai tw eqei tw Mwu>sew" peripathte]). This is a decidedly stronger focus on obedience to the Law. As well, D expands vv. 1-5 in various places with the overall effect of being “more sympathetic to the local tradition of the church at Jerusalem” while the Alexandrian witnesses are more sympathetic to Paul (TCGNT 377). Codex D is well known for having a significantly longer text in Acts, but modern scholarship is generally of the opinion that the text of D expands on the original wording of Acts, with a theological viewpoint that especially puts Peter in a more authoritarian light. The expansion in these five verses is in keeping with that motif even though Peter is not explicitly in view.

sn Unless you are circumcised. These teachers from Judea were teaching that Gentiles could not be saved unless they kept the law of Moses in regard to circumcision. Thus according to them a Gentile had first to become a proselyte to Judaism, including circumcision, before one could become a Christian. This party is sometimes known (collectively) as Judaizers. They did not question that Gentiles could come into the community, but disagreed with Paul and Barnabas on what basis they could do so.

NET Notes: Act 15:2

¹ tn Grk “no little argument and debate” (an idiom).

² tn Grk “they”; the referent (the church, or the rest of the believers at Antioch) has been specified to avoid confusion with the Judaizers mentioned in the preceding clause.

³ tn Grk “go up to,” but in this context a meeting is implied.

⁴ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

⁵ tn Or “point of controversy.” It is unclear whether this event parallels Gal 2:1-10 or that Gal 2 fits with Acts 11:30. More than likely Gal 2:1-10 is to be related to Acts 11:30.

NET Notes: Act 15:3

¹ sn Phoenicia was an area along the Mediterranean coast north of Palestine in ancient Syria.

² tn L&N 33.201 indicates that ἐκδιηγέομαι (ekdihgeomai) means to provide detailed information in a systematic manner, “to inform, to relate, to tell fully.” “Relating at length” conveys this effectively in the present context.

³ tn For ἐποίουν (epoioun) in this verse BDAG 839 s.v. ποιέω 2.c has “they brought joy to the members.”

NET Notes: Act 15:4

¹ tn BDAG 761 s.v. παραδέχομαι 2 has “receive, accept” for the meaning here.

² tn Or “announced.”

³ tn “They reported all the things God had done with them” – an identical phrase occurs in Acts 14:27. God is always the agent.

NET Notes: Act 15:5

¹ sn See the note on Pharisee in 5:34.

² sn The Greek word used here (δεῖ, dei) is a strong term that expresses divine necessity. The claim is that God commanded the circumcision of Gentiles.

³ tn Grk “them”; the referent (the Gentiles) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

⁴ tn Or “keep.”

NET Notes: Act 15:6

¹ tn The translation for ἰδεῖν (idein) in this verse is given by BDAG 279-80 s.v. εἶδον 3 as “deliberate concerning this matter.” A contemporary idiom would be to “look into” a matter.

NET Notes: Act 15:7

¹ tn Or “discussion.” This term is repeated from v. 2.

² tn Or “long ago” (an idiom, literally “from ancient days”). According to L&N 67.26, “this reference to Peter having been chosen by God sometime before to bring the gospel to the Gentiles can hardly be regarded as a reference to ancient times, though some persons understand this to mean that God’s decision was made at the beginning of time. The usage of ἀφ᾿ ἡμερῶν ἀρχαίων is probably designed to emphasize the established nature of God’s decision for Peter to take the gospel to the Gentiles beginning with the centurion Cornelius. The fact that this was relatively early in the development of the church may also serve to explain the use of the idiom.”

³ sn God chose. The theme of God’s sovereign choice is an important point, because 1st century Jews believed Israel’s unique position and customs were a reflection of God’s choice.

⁴ tn Or “word.”

⁵ tn Or “of the good news.”

⁶ tn Grk “God chose among you from my mouth the Gentiles to hear the message of the gospel and to believe.” The sense of this sentence in Greek is difficult to render in English. The Greek verb ἐκλέγομαι (eklegomai, “choose”) normally takes a person or thing as a direct object; in this verse the verb has neither clearly stated. The translation understands the phrase “from my mouth,” referring to Peter, as a description of both who God chose and the task to be done. This coupled with the following statement about Gentiles hearing the message of the gospel leads to the more dynamic rendering in the translation.

NET Notes: Act 15:8

¹ sn The expression who knows the heart means “who knows what people think.”

² tn Or “has borne witness.”

³ sn By giving them…just as he did to us. The allusion is to the events of Acts 10-11, esp. 10:44-48 and Peter’s remarks in 11:15-18.

NET Notes: Act 15:9

¹ tn BDAG 231 s.v. διακρίνω 1.b lists this passage under the meaning “to conclude that there is a difference, make a distinction, differentiate.”

² tn Or “purifying.”

NET Notes: Act 15:10

¹ tn According to BDAG 793 s.v. πειράζω 2.c, “In Ac 15:10 the πειράζειν τὸν θεόν consists in the fact that after God’s will has been clearly made known through granting of the Spirit to the Gentiles (v. 8), some doubt and make trial to see whether God’s will really becomes operative.” All testing of God in Luke is negative: Luke 4:2; 11:16.

² sn A yoke is a wooden bar or frame that joins two animals like oxen or horses so that they can pull a wagon, plow, etc. together. Here it is used figuratively of the restriction that some in the early church wanted to place on Gentile converts to Christianity of observing the law of Moses and having males circumcised. The yoke is a decidedly negative image: Matt 23:4, but cf. Matt 11:29-30.

³ tn Or “forefathers”; Grk “fathers.”

NET Notes: Act 15:11

¹ tn Or “by.”

² tn Or “Jesus, just as they are.” BDAG 1016-17 s.v. τρόπος 1 translates καθ᾿ ὃν τρόπον (kaq’ Jon tropon) here as “in the same way as.”

sn In the same way as they are. Here is an interesting reversal of the argument. Jews are saved by grace (without law), as Gentiles are.

NET Notes: Act 15:12

¹ tn BDAG 922 s.v. σιγάω 1.a lists this passage under the meaning “say nothing, keep still, keep silent.”

² tn Here in connection with τέρατα (terata) the miraculous nature of these signs is indicated.

NET Notes: Act 15:13

¹ tn BDAG 922 s.v. σιγάω 1.b lists this passage under the meaning “stop speaking, become silent.”

² tn Grk “answered, saying”; the redundant participle λέγων (legwn) has not been translated.

NET Notes: Act 15:14

¹ sn Simeon is a form of the apostle Peter’s Aramaic name. James uses Peter’s “Jewish” name here.

² tn Or “reported,” “described.”

³ tn BDAG 378 s.v. ἐπισκέπτομαι 3 translates this phrase in Acts 15:14, “God concerned himself about winning a people fr. among the nations.”

⁴ tn Grk “to take,” but in the sense of selecting or choosing (accompanied by the preposition ἐκ [ek] plus a genitive specifying the group selected from) see Heb 5:1; also BDAG 584 s.v. λαμβάνω 6.

⁵ sn In the Greek text the expression “from among the Gentiles” is in emphatic position.

NET Notes: Act 15:15

¹ tn Grk “And the.” Because of the difference between Greek style, which often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” and English style, which generally does not, καί (kai) has not been translated here.

² sn The term agree means “match” or “harmonize with.” James’ point in the introduction argues that many of the OT prophets taught this. He gives one example (which follows).

NET Notes: Act 15:16

¹ tn Grk “After these things.”

² sn The first person pronoun I refers to God and his activity. It is God who is doing this.

³ tn Or more generally, “dwelling”; perhaps, “royal tent.” According to BDAG 928 s.v. σκηνή the word can mean “tent” or “hut,” or more generally “lodging” or “dwelling.” In this verse (a quotation from Amos 9:11) BDAG refers this to David’s ruined kingdom; it is possibly an allusion to a king’s tent (a royal tent). God is at work to reestablish David’s line (Acts 2:30-36; 13:32-39).

⁴ tn BDAG 86 s.v. ἀνορθόω places this verb under the meaning “to build someth. up again after it has fallen, rebuild, restore,” but since ἀνοικοδομέω (anoikodomew, “rebuild”) has occurred twice in this verse already, “restore” is used here.

NET Notes: Act 15:17

¹ tn Or “so that all other people.” The use of this term follows Amos 9:11 LXX.

² tn Here καί (kai) introduces an explanatory clause that explains the preceding phrase “the rest of humanity.” The clause introduced by καί (kai) could also be punctuated in English as a parenthesis.

³ tn Or “all the nations” (in Greek the word for “nation” and “Gentile” is the same).

sn Note the linkage back to v. 14 through the mention of Gentiles. What Simeon explained is what the OT text says would happen.

⁴ tn Grk “all the Gentiles on whom my name has been called.” Based on well-attested OT usage, the passive of ἐπικαλέω (epikalew) here indicates God’s ownership (“all the Gentiles who belong to me”) or calling (“all the Gentiles whom I have called to be my own”). See L&N 11.28.

⁵ sn A quotation from Amos 9:11-12 LXX. James demonstrated a high degree of cultural sensitivity when he cited a version of the text (the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament) that Gentiles would use.

NET Notes: Act 15:18

¹ sn Who makes these things known. The remark emphasizes how God’s design of these things reaches back to the time he declared them.

² sn An allusion to Isa 45:21.

Geneva Bible: Act 15:1

And ^{( 1 ) ( a )} certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, [and said], Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.

^{( 1 )} The Church is at length troubled with dissension within itself, and the trouble rises from the proud and stubborn intellects of certain evil men. The first strife was concerning the office of Christ, whether we are saved only by his righteousness apprehended by faith, or if we also have need to observe the Law.

^{( a )} Epiphanius is of the opinion that this was Cerinthus.

Geneva Bible: Act 15:2

^{( 2 )} When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.

^{( 2 )} Meetings of congregations were instituted to suppress heresies, to which certain were sent by common consent on behalf of all.

Geneva Bible: Act 15:3

And ^{( b )} being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren.

^{( b )} Courteously and lovingly brought on their way by the Church, that is, by certain ones appointed by the Church.

Geneva Bible: Act 15:6

^{( 3 )} And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.

^{( 3 )} The matter is first handled, both parts being heard, in the assembly of the apostles and elders, and after is communicated to the people.

Geneva Bible: Act 15:7

And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, ^{( 4 )} Men [and] brethren, ye know how that a ^{( c )} good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.

^{( 4 )} God himself, in the calling of the Gentiles who are uncircumcised, taught that our salvation consists in faith, without the worship appointed by the Law.

^{( c )} Literally, "of old time", that is, even from the first time that we were commanded to preach the Gospel, and immediately after that the Holy Spirit came down upon us.

Geneva Bible: Act 15:9

And put no ^{( d )} difference between us and them, purifying their hearts ^{( e )} by faith.

^{( d )} He put no difference between us and them, with regard to the benefit of his free favour.

^{( e )} Christ proclaims those blessed who are pure of heart: and here we are plainly taught that men are made pure of heart by faith.

Geneva Bible: Act 15:10

^{( 5 )} Now therefore why ^{( f )} tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

^{( 5 )} Peter, passing from the ceremonies to the Law itself in general, shows that no one could be saved, if salvation were to be sought for by the Law, and not by grace alone in Jesus Christ; and this is because no man could ever fulfil the Law, neither the patriarch nor the apostle.

^{( f )} Why do you tempt God, as though he could not save by faith?

Geneva Bible: Act 15:12

^{( 6 )} Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them.

^{( 6 )} A true pattern of a lawful council, where God's truth alone reigns.

Geneva Bible: Act 15:13

And after they had held their peace, ^{( g )} James answered, saying, Men [and] brethren, hearken unto me:

^{( g )} The son of Alphaeus, who is also called the Lord's brother.

Geneva Bible: Act 15:14

^{( 7 )} Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.

^{( 7 )} James confirms the calling of the Gentiles out of the word of God, in this agreeing with Peter.

Geneva Bible: Act 15:18

^{( h )} Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.

^{( h )} And therefore nothing comes to pass by chance, but only by God's appointment.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Act 15:1-41

1 Great dissensions arise touching circumcision.

5 The apostles consult about it,

22 and send their determination by letters to the churches.

36 Paul and Barnabas, thinking to visit the brethren together, disagree, and travel different ways.

Combined Bible: Act 15:1

1. At this point in the narrative our historian makes a sudden transition from the conflicts of the disciples with the unbelieving world to one almost as serious among themselves. There never was a national antipathy more intense than that felt by the Jews to the whole Gentile world. It was the more intense, from the fact that it was imbedded in their deepest religious sentiments, and was cultivated in all the devotions. In the hearts of the disciples this feeling had, by this time, been so far overcome, that they had admitted the propriety of receiving uncircumcised Gentiles into the Church. But they found it more difficult to convince themselves that Gentiles were to be admitted into social and domestic intimacy. Hence, when Peter returned from the house of Cornelius to Jerusalem, the chief objection urged against him was, not that he had immersed Gentiles, but "Thou didst go into the house of men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them."This was the full extent to which the judaizing party in the Church were prepared, at that time, to push their objections. But when men take an unreasonable and obstinate stand against any cause, they frequently assume more extravagant ground as the cause they are opposing advances. While but a few Gentiles had come into the Church, the pharisaic party objected only to domestic association with them; but now that Paul and Barnabas had succeeded in opening a door of faith to the whole Gentile world, and it was likely that the Jews, who had hitherto constituted almost the whole body of the Church, were soon to become only a small element in its constituency, their fears were excited, and their demands became more exorbitant. Paul and Barnabas were still in Antioch. (1) " And certain men came down from Judea, and taught the brethren, Unless you are circumcised according to the law of Moses, you can not be saved."As we learn from a subsequent part of this chapter, they were not content with merely enjoining circumcision, but also exacted the observance of all the law of Moses, to which circumcision was only preliminary. The success of this party would have perpetuated Judaism, and forever have neutralized those philanthropic principles of the gospel which the experience of the world and the wisdom of God alike had shown to be necessary to the moral renovation of the human race.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:2

If Paul and Barnabas had ever been, since their conversion, blinded by these narrow views, their labors among the Gentiles would have wrought a change in their feelings, and prepared them to see the subject in a better light. They opposed the new propositions with all their powers; and though they did not succeed in silencing their opponents, they brought the discussion to a fortunate conclusion. (2) " When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain others of them, should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders about this question. "  

If the brethren in Antioch had estimated at its proper value the authority of an inspired apostle, they would have yielded implicitly to Paul's decision without this mission to Jerusalem. But they were as yet too little accustomed to reflection upon the profound mystery of apostolic infallibility to properly accredit it; and their deep prejudices on the subject under discussion was a serious obstacle in the way of clear thought. It is probable that apostolic authority is more highly appreciated now than it was then; yet the prejudices of sect and party are so intense, that even now the dictum of a living apostle would prove insufficient, in millions of cases, to convince men of their errors. Like the disciples in Antioch, who had the testimony of Paul, men now are not easily satisfied with a single inspired statement upon a point in dispute, or with the statements of a single apostle, but demand an accumulation of even divine testimonies.  

It is probable that Paul would have objected to making this appeal to the other apostles, on the ground of its apparent inconsistency with his own claims to inspired authority, had not the proposition been sustained by an express revelation of the divine will. In the second chapter of Galatians, where Mr. Howson very clearly proves that Paul has reference to this journey, he says: "I went up by revelation and communicated to them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles." It was the divine purpose to settle the question, not for the Church in Antioch alone, but for all the world and for all time.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:3

Their journey to Jerusalem, which was accomplished by land, lay through two sections of country which had already been evangelized to a considerable extent. (3) " Being sent forward by the Church, they passed through Phenicia and Samaria, relating the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy to all the brethren. " The Churches in Samaria did not, of course, sympathize with the Jewish prejudices, and although in Phenicia there were doubtless many Jews, yet the Gentile element sufficiently predominated to enable the brethren there, like the Samaritans, to rejoice that the gospel was spreading into the heathen world.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:4

After a pleasant journey among rejoicing Churches, they reached Jerusalem. (4) " And when they arrived in Jerusalem, they were received by the Church, and by the apostles and elders, and they declared all that God had done with them. " They proceeded, in Jerusalem, as they had upon their return to Antioch, to give a history of their missionary tour. This was done in the presence of the Church, the apostles also being present.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:5

The Judaizers did not hesitate to declare fully their own position. (5) " But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed, rose up, saying, It was necessary to circumcise them and to command them to keep the law of Moses. " This party is here identified as converts from the old sect of the Pharisees. We have had no account hitherto of any large accessions to the Church from this party; but this incidental remark shows that some of these obstinate opposers of the truth had yielded, and were now occupying positions of influence in the congregation. Paul now once more meets some of his companions in the persecution of the disciples, not to harmonize with them, nor to dispute with them in the synagogues concerning the claims of Christ; but to contend, within the Church itself, against that same disposition to perpetuate the law which had made them formerly fight against the gospel. He had a bad opinion of some of them, which must have been well-founded, or he would not have given the public utterance to it which he did at a subsequent period. He styles them, in the Epistle to the Galatians, "False brethren, unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage." Having witnessed a rapid increase of the congregations under the pressure of the persecutions and disputations to which they had formerly resorted, these wily enemies of the truth determined at length to corrupt and destroy, under the guise of friendship, a cause whose progress they could not impede by open enmity. They well knew, what some of the brethren had failed to discover, that the doctrine of Christ would be rendered powerless if it could only be hampered by bondage to the law. Even to this day the mass of religious teachers have failed to learn this lesson, though the experience of ages has demonstrated its truth. The essential issue between Paul and the Pharisees had reference to the perpetuation of the law of Moses in the Church of Christ, and the same issue has been in debate, under various aspects, from that day to this. Paul defeated the attempt of these Judaizers to fasten circumcision on the Church; but subsequent Judaizers imposed infant immersion, and finally, infant sprinkling as a substitute. What the early Pharisees failed to accomplish in the face of apostolic opposition, the later Pharisees did accomplish under a thin disguise. The unsuccessful attempt of those Pharisees to "spy out the liberty which the disciples had in Christ Jesus, and bring them into bondage" under the law, has been successfully accomplished by these, in teaching men that the Church of Christ originated in Abraham's family, and that the Jewish tribes and the Christian congregations constitute but one identical Church. The Roman apostasy perpetuates the pompous ritual and daily sacrifice of the old temple; religious zealots slaughter Canaanites in the form of modern heretics; professed Christians go to war under the old battle-cry of "The sword of the Lord and of Gideon;" the Latter-day Saints emulate the Turks in the multiplication of wives; and for all these corruptions authority is found in the laws and customs of ancient Israel. The intelligent reader of the New Testament knows scarcely which of these errors is most repugnant to the truth; but must, like Paul, struggle with untiring energy and ceaseless vigilance to uproot them all from the minds of men.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:6

After the Pharisees had stated their position, distinctly affirming that the Gentiles should be circumcised and keep the law, it seems that the assembly adjourned to meet up again at another hour. The next meeting is then announced in these words: (6) " Now the apostles and elders came together to consider this matter. " Neither this nor the former meeting was composed exclusively of the apostles and elders, for we have seen, from verse fifth Ac 15:5> , that the messengers were received by the Church, and we learn, from the twenty-second verse below Ac 15:22> , that at this second meeting the whole Church were present. There had been, however, previous to either of these, a private interview between Paul and the chief men of the Church, for the purpose of coming to some distinct understanding of the subject before it was laid before the multitude. This we learn from Paul himself, who says: "I communicated to them that gospel which I preached among the Gentiles, but privately to them who were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run in vain." This language implies that his course was approved by these brethren of reputation, who were, doubtless, the apostles and other inspired men. Their approval of his course shows that the objections afterward urged were preferred by another class of men. The public discussion was not for the purpose of bringing about an agreement among inspired men, for they really did not differ after the facts were stated by Paul and Barnabas. But it was an effort, on the part of the apostles, to bring the other brethren to the same conclusion in which they themselves had already united.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:7

Luke does not report all that was said, but only those speeches that were decisive, and that brought the controversy to a close. Merely alluding, therefore, to the first part of the discussion, he says: (7) " And when there had been much discussion, Peter arose and said to them, Brethren, you know that, a good while ago, God made choice among us that the Gentiles through my mouth should hear the word of the gospel and believe. (8) And God, who knows the heart, bore witness for them, giving to them the Holy Spirit even as he did to us. (9) He made no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. (10) Now, then, why do you put God to the proof, by putting a yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? (11) But we believe that we shall be saved through the favor of the Lord Jesus Christ, in the same manner as they. " The position of the Pharisees not only condemned the course of Paul and Barnabas, but also involved a censure of Peter, who was the first of all the apostles, as he here asserts, to preach the Word to Gentiles. When arraigned once before for his conduct in the case of Cornelius, he had vindicated his procedure by relating the miraculous evidences of God's will which had been his guide; and now, to accomplish the same end with these brethren, he adduces the most decisive of those miracles, the gift of the Holy Spirit to uncircumcised Gentiles. Having given to them the same gift as to the apostles on Pentecost, and having imposed upon them none of the purifying rites of the law, but simply purifying their hearts by faith, he assumes that God had made no difference between them and the Jewish brethren. Now, to attempt to impose the law upon them, in the face of these evidences of God's will to the contrary, would be putting God to the proof of his determination to maintain his own authority. It would, moreover, be imposing a yoke which the Jews themselves had never been able to bear successfully. This yoke is not circumcision, for there is no difficulty in submitting to that; but it was the law, under whose provisions no man could live without incurring its condemnation. His concluding statement, that " We believe that we shall be saved through the favor of the Lord Jesus, in the same manner as they," involves two important conclusions: First, That it is not through the merit of obedience to the law that we are to be saved, but through the favor of the Lord Jesus Christ. This favor is extended in the pardon of sins. Second, That the Gentiles are saved in the same manner as the Jews. By using the plural we believe, instead of I believe, he doubtless intended to express not only the conviction of his own mind, but that of the party with whom he acted, including the other apostles. It was a decision of the inspired teachers against the Pharisees.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:8

notes on verse 7  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:9

notes on verse 7  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:10

notes on verse 7  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:11

notes on verse 7  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:12

This brief statement of facts had so good an effect upon the multitude, that Barnabas and Paul determined to follow it by a rehearsal of similar facts in the history of their own labors among the Gentiles. (12) " Then all the multitude kept silence, and listened to Barnabas and Paul relating what signs and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles through them. " Their remarks on this occasion were not a repetition of what they had said in the former meeting, when they had set forth "all that God had done with them," but were confined to the "signs and wonders" by which God had indicated his approbation of their ministry. The reversal of the order in which Luke now habitually names these two brethren indicates that Barnabas, whose name is first, was the first speaker. This gave Paul the closing argument on those events.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:13

So far as recent indications of God's will were concerned, the argument was now complete and unanswerable; but the Jewish mind was prone to an underestimate of passing events, while they looked back with superior reverence to the law and the prophets. The Apostle James, knowing that they would reject all possible cotemporaneous evidences, if they appeared to conflict with the written word, determined to close up this avenue of escape from the argument already presented by sustaining it with the authority of the prophets. (13) " And, after they were silent, James answered, saying, Brethren, hear me. (14) Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name, (15) and to this agree the words of the prophets, as it is written, (16) After this I will return and will rebuild the tabernacle of David which has fallen down. I will rebuild its ruins, and set it upright, (17) that the residue of men may seek after the Lord, even all the Gentiles upon whom my name is called, says the Lord, who does all these things. (18) Known to God from eternity are all his works. (19) Therefore, my judgment is, not to trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God; (20) but to write to them that they abstain from the pollutions of idols. and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. (21) For Moses, for generations past, has in every city those who preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath. " In this speech James shows that God, who knows from eternity what his own works would be, had foretold, through the prophet, the work which he was then performing through the labors of Peter, Barnabas, and Paul. He had said that he would rebuild the tabernacle of David, in order that the residue of men, who had not known the Lord before, "even all the Gentiles, upon whom his name is called," should seek after the Lord; and now, he had, through these apostles, selected from among the Gentiles "a people for his name." The prophesy clearly covered all the ground claimed for it, and made the argument complete.  

There was room for no other conclusion than the one which James deduced, that they should impose on the Gentiles, so far as the class of restrictions under consideration were concerned, only those necessary things which were necessary independent of the Mosaic law. Idolatry, with all the pollutions connected with it, was known to be sinful before the law of Moses was given; and so was fornication. The eating of blood, and, by implication, of strangled animals, whose blood was still in them, was forbidden to the whole world in the family of Noah. In the restrictions here proposed by James, therefore, there is not the slightest extension of the law of Moses, but a mere enforcement upon the Gentiles of rules of conduct which had ever been binding, and were to be perpetual. They are as binding to-day as they were then. To deny this would be to despise the combined authority of all the apostles, when enjoining upon the Gentile world, of which we form a part, restrictions which they pronounce necessary. One would be surprised that it was thought necessary to mention to Gentiles, who had turned to the Lord, the sinfulness of fornication, did we not know that among heathen nations of antiquity it was deemed innocent, and even sometimes virtuous.  

The controversy now pending, in reference to the identity of the Jewish Church with the Church of Christ, renders it necessary that we should here pay some special attention to one remark made by James in this speech. He applies the prophesy concerning the rebuilding of the "tabernacle of David" to the reception of the Gentiles into the Church, and it is hence argued that this prophesy contemplated a reconstruction and extension of the dilapidated Jewish Church, and not the construction of a new one. The whole argument turns upon the meaning of the expression "tabernacle of David." If the metaphorical word tabernacle here means the Jewish Church, the argument would have force. But the Mosaic institution never sustained such a relation to David that it could, with propriety, be styled the " tabernacle of David. " If such had been the reference, the expression would undoubtedly have been, the tabernacle of Moses, which would have been unambiguous. But David was a king, and had a promise from God, that his " throne should be established forever;" that there should not fail him a man on the throne of Israel. This promise God confirmed with an oath, saying, "I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn to David my servant, Thy seed will I establish forever, and build up thy throne to all generations." According to the apparent meaning of this promise, it had long since failed; for it had been many generations since a descendant of David had occupied his throne. It was during this period, in which the royal house of David was in ruins, that Amos uttered the prophesy, "I will return, and build again the tabernacle of David which is fallen down; I will build again the ruins thereof, and set it upright." The term tabernacle, therefore, must be put for the family who dwell in the tabernacle, and the reconstruction of it the re-establishment of the royal dignity which the family had lost. Hence, when the birth of Jesus was announced to Mary, the angel said: "The Lord shall give to him the throne of his father David, and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there shall be no end." Thus, the promise, when properly understood, is seen to refer neither to a continuous line of Jewish kings, descended from David, nor to a reconstruction of the Jewish Church, but to the perpetual reign of Jesus, the "seed of David according to the flesh." When, therefore, Jesus sat down upon his throne in heaven, the tabernacle of David was rebuilt, and now, by the labors of Peter, Barnabas, and Paul, the remainder of the prophesy of Amos was being fulfilled, by the extension of his kingdom among the Gentiles.  

The closing paragraph of this speech appears, at first glance, to have no immediate connection with the preceding argument. But it was, doubtless, designed to anticipate an objection. The Pharisees might object, If you thus ignore the statue of Moses, his writings will fall into contempt, or be neglected by the people. No danger of this, says the speaker, for Moses is preached in every city, and read in the synagogues every Sabbath, and has been for generations past.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:14

notes on verse 13  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:15

notes on verse 13  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:16

notes on verse 13  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:17

notes on verse 13  

  

Combined Bible: Act 15:18

notes on verse 13  

  

Maclaren: Act 15:1-6

The Breaking Out Of Discord

And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. 2. When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and eiders about this question. 3. And being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren. 4. 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. 5. But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. 6. And the apostles and eiders came together for to consider of this matter.'--Acts 15:1-6.

THE question as to the conditions on which Gentiles could be received into Christian communion had already been raised by the case of Cornelius, but it became more acute after Paul's missionary journey. The struggle between the narrower and broader views was bound to come to a head. Traces of the cleft between Palestinian and Hellenist believers had appeared as far back as the murmuring' about the unfair neglect of the Hellenist widows in the distribution of relief, and the whole drift of things since had been to widen the gap.

Whether the certain men' had a mission to the Church in Antioch or not, they had no mandate to lay down the law as they did. Luke delicately suggests this by saying that they came down from Judaea,' rather than from Jerusalem. We should be fair tot these men, and remember how much they had to say in defence of their position. They did not question that Gentiles could be received into the Church, but kept on teaching' (as the word in the Greek implies) that the divinely appointed ordinance of circumcision was the door' of entrance. God had prescribed it, and through all the centuries since Moses, all who came into the fold of Israel had gone in by that gate. Where was the commandment to set it, aside? Was not Paul teaching men to climb up some other way, and so blasphemously abrogating a divine law?

No wonder that honest believers in Jesus as Messiah shrank with horror from such a revolutionary procedure. The fact that they were Palestinian Jews, who had never had their exclusiveness rubbed off, as Hellenists like Paul and Barnabas had had, explains, and to some extent excuses, their position. And yet their contention struck a fatal blow at the faith, little as they meant it. Paul saw what they did not see--that if anything else than faith was brought in as necessary to knit men to Christ, and make them partakers of salvation, faith was deposed from its place, and Christianity sank back to be a religion of works.' Experience has proved that anything whatever introduced as associated with faith ejects faith from its place, and comes to be recognised as the means of salvation. It must be faith or circumcision, it cannot be faith and circumcision. The lesson is needed to-day as much as in Antioch. The controversy started then is a perennial one, and the Church of the present needs Paul's exhortation, Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.'

The obvious course of appealing to Jerusalem was taken, and it is noteworthy that in Acts 15:2 the verb appointed' has no specified subject. Plainly, however, it was the Church which acted, and so natural did that seem to Luke that he felt it unnecessary to say so. No doubt Paul concurred, but the suggestion is not said to have come from him. He and Barnabas might have asserted their authority, and declined to submit what they had done by the Spirit's guidance to the decision of the Apostles, but they seek the things that make for peace.

No doubt the other side was represented in the deputation. Jerusalem was the centre of unity, and remained so till its fall. The Apostles and elders were the recognised leaders of the Church. Elders here appear as holding a position of authority; the only previous mention of them is in Acts 11:30, where they receive the alms sent from Antioch. It is significant that we do not hear of their first appointment. The organisation of the Church took shape as exigencies prescribed.

The deputation left Antioch, escorted lovingly for a little way by the Church, and, journeying by land, gladdened the groups of believers in Phenicia and Samaria' with the news that the Gentiles were turning to God. We note that they are not said to have spoken of the thorny question in these countries, and that it is not said that there was joy in Judaea. Perhaps the Christians in it were in sympathy with the narrower view.

The first step taken in Jerusalem was to call a meeting of the Church to welcome the deputation. It is significant that the latter did not broach the question in debate, but told the story of the success of their mission. That was the best argument for receiving Gentile converts without circumcision. God had received them; should not the Church do so? Facts are stronger than theories. It was Peter's argument in the case of Cornelius: they have received the Holy Ghost as well as we,' who was I, that I could withstand God?' It is the argument which shatters all analogous narrowing of the conditions of Christian life. If men say, Except ye be' this or that ye cannot be saved,' it is enough to point to the fruits of Christian character, and say, These show that the souls which bring them forth are saved, and you must widen your conceptions of the possibilities to include these actualities.' It is vain to say Ye cannot be' when manifestly they are.

But the logic of facts does not convince obstinate theorists, and so the Judaising party persisted in their It is needful to circumcise them.' None are so blind as those to whom religion is mainly a matter of ritual. You may display the fairest graces of Christian character before them, and you get no answer but the reiteration of It is needful to circumcise you.' But on their own ground, in Jerusalem, the spokesmen of that party enlarged their demands. In Antioch they had insisted on circumcision, in Jerusalem they added the demand for entire conformity to the Mosaic law. They were quite logical; their principle demanded that extension of the requirement, and was thereby condemned as utterly unworkable. Now that the whole battery was unmasked the issue was clear--Is Christianity to be a Jewish sect or the universal religion? Clear as it was, few in that assembly saw it. But the parting of the ways had been reached.

Maclaren: Act 15:12-29

The Charter Of Gentile Liberty

Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them. 13. And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me: 14. Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for His name. 15. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, 16. After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: 17. That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom My name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things. 18. Known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world. 19. Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from" among the Gentiles are turned to God: 20. But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. 21. For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach Him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day. 22. Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren: 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: 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: 25. It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26. Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27. We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by month. 28. For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; 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.'--Acts 15:12-29.

MUCH was at stake in the decision of this gathering of the Church. If the Jewish party triumphed, Christianity sank to the level of a Jewish sect. The question brought up for decision was difficult, and there was much to be said for the view that the Mosaic law was binding on Gentile converts. It must have been an uprooting of deepest beliefs for a Jewish Christian to contemplate the abrogation of that law, venerable by its divine origin, by its hoary antiquity, by its national associations. We must not be hard upon men who clung to it; but we should learn from their final complete drifting away from Christianity how perilous is the position which insists on the necessity to true discipleship of any outward observance.

Our passage begins in the middle of the conference. Peter has, with characteristic vehemence, dwelt upon the divine attestation of the genuine equality of the uncircumcised converts with the Jewish, given by their possession of the same divine Spirit, and has flung fiery questions at the Judaisers, which silenced them. Then, after the impressive hush following his eager words, Barnabas and Paul tell their story once more, and clinch the nail driven by Peter by asserting that God had already by signs and wonders' given His sanction to the admission of Gentiles without circumcision. Characteristically, in Jerusalem Barnabas is restored to his place above Paul, and is named first as speaking first, and regarded by the Jerusalem Church as the superior of the missionary pair.

The next speaker is James, not an Apostle, but the bishop of the Church in Jerusalem, of whom tradition tells that he was a zealous adherent to the Mosaic law in his own person, and that his knees were as hard as a earners through continual prayer. It is singular that this meeting should be so often called the Apostolic council,' when,, as a fact, only one Apostle said a word, and he not as an Apostle, but as the chosen instrument to preach to the Gentiles. The elders,' of whose existence we now hear for the first time in this wholly incidental manner, were associated with the Apostles (Acts 15:6), and the multitude' (Acts 15:12) is most naturally taken to be the whole Church' (Acts 15:22). James represents the eldership, and as bishop in Jerusalem and an eager observer of legal prescriptions, fittingly speaks. His words practically determined the question. Like a wise man, he begins with facts. His use of the intensely Jewish form of the name Simeon is an interesting reminiscence of old days. So he had been accustomed to call Peter when they were all young together, and so he calls him still, though everybody else named him by his new name. What God had done by him seems to James to settle the whole question; for it was nothing else than to put the Gentile converts without circumcision on an equality with the Jewish part of the Church.

Note the significant juxtaposition of the words Gentiles' and people'--the former the name for heathen, the latter the sacred designation of the chosen nation. The great paradox which, through Peter's preaching at Caesarea, had become a fact was that the people of God' were made up of Gentiles as well as Jews--that His name was equally imparted to both. If God had made Gentiles His people, had He not thereby shown that the special observances of Israel were put aside, and that, in particular, circumcision was no longer the condition of entrance? The end of national distinction and the opening of a new way of incorporation among the people of God were clearly contained in the facts. How much Christian narrowness would be blown to atoms if its advocates would do as James did, and let God's facts teach them the width of God's purposes and the comprehensiveness of Christ's Church! We do wisely when we square our theories with facts; but many of us go to work in the opposite way, and snip down facts to the dimension of our theories.

James's next step is marked equally by calm wisdom and open-mindedness. He looks to God's word as interpreted by God's deeds, to throw light in turn on the deeds and to confirm the interpretation of these Two things are to be noted in considering his quotation from Amos, its bearing on the question in hand, and its divergence from the existing Hebrew text. As to the former, there seems at first sight nothing relevant to James's purpose in the quotation, which simply declares that the Gentiles will seek the Lord when the fallen tabernacle of David is rebuilt. That period of time has at least begun, thinks James, in the work of Jesus, in whom the decayed dominion of David is again in higher form established. The return of the Gentiles does not merely synchronise with, but is the intended issue of, Christ's reign. Lifted from the earth, He will draw all men unto Him, and they shall' seek the Lord,' and on them His name will be called.

Now the force of this quotation lies, as it seems, first in the fact that Peter's experience at Caesarea is to be taken as an indication of how God means the prophecy to be fulfilled, namely, without circumcision; and secondly, in the argumentum a silentio, since the prophet says nothing about ritual or the like, but declares that moral and spiritual qualifications--on the one hand a true desire after God, and on the other receiving the proclamation of His name and calling themselves by it--are all that are needed to make Gentiles God's people. Just because there is nothing in the prophecy about observing Jewish ceremonies, and something about longing and faith, James thinks that these are the essentials, and that the others may he dropped by the Church, as God had dropped them in the case of Cornelius, and as Amos had dropped them in his vision of the future kingdom. God knew what He meant to do when He spoke through the prophet, and what He has done has explained the words, as James says in Acts 15:18.

The variation from the Hebrew text requires a word of comment. The quotation is substantially from the Septuagint, with a slight alteration. Probably James quoted the version familiar to many of his hearers. It seems to have been made from a somewhat different Hebrew text in Acts 15:17, but the difference is very much slighter than an English reader would suppose. Our text has Edom' where the Septuagint has men'; but the Hebrew words without vowels are identical but for the addition of one letter in the former. Our text has inherit' where the Septuagint has seek after'; but there again the difference in the two Hebrew words would be one letter only, so that there may well have been a various reading as preserved in the Septuagint and Acts. James adds to the Septuagint seek' the evidently correct completion the Lord.'

Now it is obvious that, even if we suppose his rendering of the whole verse to be a paraphrase of the same Hebrew text as we have, it is a correct representation of the meaning; for the inheriting of Edom' is no mere external victory, and Edom is always in the Old Testament the type of the godless man. The conquest of the Gentiles by the restorer of David's tabernacle is really the seeking after the Lord, and the calling of His name upon the Gentiles.

The conclusion drawn by James is full of practical wisdom, and would have saved the Church from many a sad page in its history, if its spirit had been prevalent in later councils.' Note how the very designation given to the Gentile converts in Acts 15:19 carries argumentative force. They turn to God from among the Gentiles '--if they have done that, surely their new separation and new attachment are enough, and make insistence on circumcision infinitely ridiculous. They have the thing signified; what does it matter about the sign, which is good for us Jews, but needless for them?

If Church rulers had always been as open-eyed as this bishop in Jerusalem, and had been content if people were joined to God and parted from the world, what torrents of blood, what frowning walls of division, what scandals and partings of brethren would have been spared!

The observances suggested are a portion of the precepts enjoined by Judaism on proselytes. The two former were necessary to the Christian life; the two latter were not, but were concessions to the Jewish feelings of the stricter party. The conclusion may be called a compromise, but it was one dictated by the desire for unity, and had nothing unworthy in it. There should be giving and taking on both sides. If the Jewish Christians made the, to them, immense concession of waiving the necessity of circumcision, the Gentile section might surely make the small one of abstinence from things strangled and from blood. Similarities in diet would daily assimilate the lives of the two parties, and would be a more visible and continuous token of their oneness than the single act of circumcision.

But what does the reason in Acts 15:21 mean? Why should the reading of Moses every Sabbath be a reason for these concessions? Various answers are given: but the most natural is that the constant promulgation of the law made respect for the feelings (even if mistaken) of Jewish Christians advisable, and the course suggested the most likely to win Jews who were not yet Christians. Both classes would be flung farther apart if there were not some yielding. The general principle involved is that one cannot be too tender with old and deeply rooted convictions even if they be prejudices, and that Christian charity, which is truest wisdom, will consent to limitations of Christian liberty, if thereby any little one who believes in Him shall be saved from being offended, or any unbeliever from being repelled.

The letter embodying James's wise suggestion needs little further notice. We may observe that there was no imposing and authoritative decision of the Ecclesia, but that the whole thing was threshed out in free talk, and then the unanimous judgment of the community, Apostles, elders and the whole Church,' was embodied in the epistle. Observe the accurate rendering of Acts 15:25 (.R.V.) having come to one accord,' gives a lively picture of the process. Note too that James's proposal of a letter was mended by the addition of a deputation, consisting of an unknown Judas called Barsabas' (perhaps a relative of Joseph called Barsabas,' the unsuccessful nominee for Apostleship in Acts 1.), and the well-known Silas or Silvanus, of whom we hear so much in Paul's letters. That journey was the turning-point in his life, and he henceforward, attracted by the mass and magnetism of Paul's great personality, revolved round him, and forsook Jerusalem.

Probably James drew up the document, which has the same somewhat unusual greeting' as his Epistle.

The sharp reference to the Judaising teachers would be difficult for their sympathisers to swallow, but charity is not broken by plain repudiation of error and its teachers. Subverting your souls' is a heavy charge. The word is only here found in the New Testament, and means to unsettle, the image in it being that of packing up baggage for removal. The disavowal of these men is more complete if we follow the Revised Version in reading (Acts 15:24) no commandment' instead of no such commandment.'

These unauthorised teachers went'; but, in strong contrast with them, Judas and Silas are chosen out and sent. Another thrust at the Judaising teachers is in the affectionate eulogy of Paul and Barnabas as beloved,' whatever disparaging things had been said about them, and as having hazarded their lives,' while these others had taken very good care of themselves, and had only gone to disturb converts whom Paul and Barnabas had won at the peril of their lives.

The calm matter-of-course assertion that the decision which commended itself to us' is the decision of the Holy Ghost' was warranted by Christ's promises, and came from the consciousness that they had observed the conditions which He had laid down. They had brought their minds to bear upon the question, with the light of facts and of Scripture, and had come to a unanimous conclusion. If they believed their Lord's parting words, they could not doubt that His Spirit had guided them. If we lived more fully in that Spirit, we should know more of the same peaceful assurance, which is far removed from the delusion of our own infallibility, and is the simple expression of trust in the veracious promises of our Lord.

The closing words of the letter are beautifully brotherly, sinking authority, and putting in the foreground the advantage to the Gentile converts of compliance with the injunctions. Ye shall do well,' rightly and conformably with the requirements of brotherly love to weaker brethren. And thus doing well, they will fare well,' and be strong. That is not the way in which lords over God's heritage' are accustomed to end their decrees. Brotherly affection, rather than authority imposing its will, breathes here. Would that all succeeding Councils' had imitated this as well as it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us'!

MHCC: Act 15:1-6

Some from Judea taught the Gentile converts at Antioch, that they could not be saved, unless they observed the whole ceremonial law as given by Moses; and thus they sought to destroy Christian liberty. There is a strange proneness in us to think that all do wrong who do not just as we do. Their doctrine was very discouraging. Wise and good men desire to avoid contests and disputes as far as they can; yet when false teachers oppose the main truths of the gospel, or bring in hurtful doctrines, we must not decline to oppose them.

MHCC: Act 15:7-21

We see from the words " purifying their hearts by faith," and the address of St. Peter, that justification by faith, and sanctification by the Holy Ghost, cannot be separated; and that both are the gift of God. We have great cause to bless God that we have heard the gospel. May we have that faith which the great Searcher of hearts approves, and attests by the seal of the Holy Spirit. Then our hearts and consciences will be purified from the guilt of sin, and we shall be freed from the burdens some try to lay upon the disciples of Christ. Paul and Barnabas showed by plain matters of fact, that God owned the preaching of the pure gospel to the Gentiles without the law of Moses; therefore to press that law upon them, was to undo what God had done. The opinion of James was, that the Gentile converts ought not to be troubled about Jewish rites, but that they should abstain from meats offered to idols, so that they might show their hatred of idolatry. Also, that they should be cautioned against fornication, which was not abhorred by the Gentiles as it should be, and even formed a part of some of their rites. They were counselled to abstain from things strangled, and from eating blood; this was forbidden by the law of Moses, and also here, from reverence to the blood of the sacrifices, which being then still offered, it would needlessly grieve the Jewish converts, and further prejudice the unconverted Jews. But as the reason has long ceased, we are left free in this, as in the like matters. Let converts be warned to avoid all appearances of the evils which they formerly practised, or are likely to be tempted to; and caution them to use Christian liberty with moderation and prudence.

Matthew Henry: Act 15:1-5

Even when things go on very smoothly and pleasantly in a state or in a church, it is folly to be secure, and to think the mountain stands strong and cannot be moved; some uneasiness or other will arise, which is not foreseen, cannot be prevented, but must be prepared for. If ever there was a heaven upon earth, surely it was in the church at Antioch at this time, when there were so many excellent ministers there, and blessed Paul among them, building up that church in her most holy faith. But here we have their peace disturbed, and differences arising. Here is,

I. A new doctrine started among them, which occasioned this division, obliging the Gentile converts to submit to circumcision and the ceremonial law, Act 15:1. Many that had been proselytes to the Jewish religion became Christians; and they would have such as were proselyted to the Christian religion to become Jews.

1. The persons that urged this were certain men who came down from Judea; some think such as had been of the Pharisees (Act 15:5), or perhaps of those priests who were obedient to the faith, Act 6:7. They came from Judea, pretending perhaps to be sent by the apostles at Jerusalem, at least to be countenanced by them. Having a design to spread their notions, they came to Antioch, because that was the head-quarters of those that preached to the Gentiles, and the rendezvous of the Gentile converts; and, if they could but make an interest there, this leaven would soon be diffused to all the churches of the Gentiles. They insinuated themselves into an acquaintance with the brethren, pretended to be very glad that they had embraced the Christian faith, and congratulated them on their conversion; but tell them that yet one thing they lack, they must be circumcised. Note, Those that are ever so well taught have need to stand upon their guard that they be not untaught again, or ill taught.

2. The position they laid down, the thesis they gave, was this, that except the Gentiles who turned Christians were circumcised after the manner of Moses, and thereby bound themselves to all the observances of the ceremonial law, they could not be saved. As to this, (1.) Many of the Jews who embraced the faith of Christ, yet continued very zealous for the law, Act 21:20. They knew it was from God and its authority was sacred, valued it for its antiquity, had been bred up in the observance of it, and it is probable had been often devoutly affected in their attendance on these observances; they therefore kept them up after they were by baptism admitted into the Christian church, kept up the distinction of meats, and used the ceremonial purifyings from ceremonial pollutions, attend the temple service, and celebrated the feasts of the Jews. Herein they were connived at, because the prejudices of education are not to be overcome all at once, and in a few years the mistake would be effectually rectified by the destruction of the temple and the total dissolution of the Jewish church, by which the observance of the Mosaic ritual would become utterly impracticable. But it did not suffice them that they were herein indulged themselves, they must have the Gentile converts brought under the same obligations. Note, There is a strange proneness in us to make our opinion and practice a rule and a law to every body else, to judge of all about us by our standard, and to conclude that because we do well all do wrong that do not just as we do. (2.) Those Jews who believed that Christ was the Messiah, as they could not get clear of their affection to the law, so they could not get clear of the notions they had of the Messiah, that he should set up a temporal kingdom in favour of the Jewish nation, should make this illustrious and victorious; it was a disappointment to them that there was as yet nothing done towards this in the way they expected. But now that they hear the doctrine of Christ is received among the Gentiles, and his kingdom begins to be set up in the midst of them, if they can but persuade those that embrace Christ to embrace the law of Moses too they hope their point will be gained, the Jewish nation will be made as considerable as they can wish, though in another way; and "Therefore by all means let the brethren be pressed to be circumcised and keep the law, and then with our religion our dominion will be extended, and we shall in a little time be able to shake off the Roman yoke; and not only so, but to put it on the necks of our neighbours, and so shall have such a kingdom of the Messiah as we promised ourselves."Note, It is no wonder if those who have wrong notions of the kingdom of Christ take wrong measures for the advancement of it, and such as really tend to the destruction of it, as these do. (3.) The controversy about the circumcising of the Gentile proselytes had been on foot among the Jews long before this. This is observed by Dr. Whitby out of Josephus - Antiq. 20.38-45: "That when Izates, the son of Helen queen of Adiabene, embraced the Jews' religion, Ananias declared he might do it without circumcision; but Eleazar maintained that it was a great impiety to remain uncircumcised."And when two eminent Gentiles fled to Josephus (as he relates in the history of his own life) "the zealots among the Jews were urgent for their circumcision; but Josephus dissuaded them from insisting upon it."Such has been the difference in all ages between bigotry and moderation. (4.) It is observable what a mighty stress they laid upon it; they do not only say, " You ought to be circumcised after the manner of Moses, and it will be good service to the kingdom of the Messiah if you be; it will best accommodate matters between you and the Jewish converts, and we shall take it very kindly if you will, and shall converse the more familiarly with you;"but, " Except you be circumcised you cannot be saved. If you be not herein of our mind and way, you will never go to heaven, and therefore of course you must go to hell."Note, it is common for proud impostors to enforce their own inventions under pain of damnation; and to tell people that unless they believe just as they would have them believe, and do just as they would have them do, they cannot be saved, it is impossible they should; not only their case is hazardous, but it is desperate. Thus the Jews tell their brethren that except they be of their church, and come into their communion, and conform to the ceremonies of their worship, though otherwise good men and believers in Christ, yet they cannot be saved; salvation itself cannot save them. None are in Christ but those that are within their pale. We ought to see ourselves well warranted by the word of God before we say, "Except you do so and so, you cannot be saved."

II. The opposition which Paul and Barnabas gave to this schismatical notion, which engrossed salvation to the Jews, now that Christ has opened the door of salvation to the Gentiles (Act 15:2): They had no small dissension and disputation with them. They would by no means yield to this doctrine, but appeared and argued publicly against it. 1. As faithful servants of Christ, they would not see his truths betrayed. They knew that Christ came to free us from the yoke of the ceremonial law, and to take down that wall of partition between Jews and Gentiles and unite them both in himself; and therefore could not bear to hear of circumcising the Gentile converts, when their instructions were only to baptize them. The Jews would unite with the Gentiles, that is, they would have them to conform in every thing to their rites, and then, and not till then they will look upon them as their brethren; and no thanks to them. But, this not being the way in which Christ designed to unite them, it is not to be admitted. 2. As spiritual fathers to the Gentile converts, they would not see their liberties encroached upon. They had told the Gentiles that if they believed in Jesus Christ they should be saved; and now to be told that this was not enough to save them, except they were circumcised and kept the law of Moses, this was such a discouragement to them at setting out, and would be such a stumbling-block in their way, as might almost tempt them to think of returning into Egypt again; and therefore the apostles set themselves against it.

III. The expedient pitched upon for preventing the mischief of this dangerous notion, and silencing those that vented it, as well as quieting the minds of the people with reference to it. They determined that Paul and Barnabas, and some others of their number, should go to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders, concerning this doubt. Not that the church at Antioch had any doubt concerning it: they knew the liberty wherewith Christ had made them free; but they sent the case to Jerusalem, 1. Because those who taught this doctrine came from Jerusalem, and pretended to have directions from the apostles there to urge circumcision upon the Gentile converts; it was therefore very proper to send to Jerusalem about it, to know if they had any such direction from the church there. And it was soon found to be all wrong, which yet pretended to be of apostolical right. It was true that these went out from them (Act 15:24), but they never had any such orders from them. 2. Because those who were taught this doctrine would be the better confirmed in their opposition to it, and in the less danger of being shocked and disturbed by it, if they were sure that the apostles and elders at Jerusalem (which was the Christian church that of all others retained the most affection to the law of Moses) were against it; and, if they could but have this under their hands, it would be the likeliest means to silence and shame these incendiaries, who had pretended to have it from them. 3. Because the apostles at Jerusalem were fittest to be consulted in a point not yet fully settled; and being most eminent for an infallible spirit, peculiar to them as apostles, their decision would be likely to end the controversy. It was owing to the subtlety and malice of the great enemy of the church's peace (as it appears by Paul's frequent complaints of these judaizing teachers, these false apostles, these deceitful workers, these enemies of the cross of Christ ), that it had not this effect.

IV. Their journey to Jerusalem upon this errand, Act 15:3. Where we find, 1. That they were honoured at parting: They were brought on their way by the church, which was then much used as a token of respect to useful men, and is directed to be done after a godly sort, 3Jo 1:6. Thus the church showed their favour to those who witnessed against these encroachments on the liberties of the Gentile converts, and stood up for them. 2. That they did good as they went along. They were men that would not lose time, and therefore visited the churches by the way; they passed through Phenice and Samaria, and as they went declared the conversion of the Gentiles, and what wonderful success the gospel had had among them, which caused great joy to all the brethren. Note, The progress of the gospel is and ought to be a matter of great joy. All the brethren, the faithful brethren in Christ's family, rejoice when more are born into the family; for the family will be never the poorer for the multitude of its children. In Christ and heaven there is portion enough, and inheritance enough for them all.

V. Their hearty welcome at Jerusalem, Act 15:4. 1. The good entertainment their friends gave them: They were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, were embraced as brethren, and had audience as messengers of the church at Antioch; they received them with all possible expressions of love and friendship. 2. The good entertainment they gave their friends: They declared all things that God had done with them, gave them an account of the success of their ministry among the Gentiles, not what they had done, but what God had done with them, what he had by his grace in them enabled them to do, and what he had by his grace in their hearers enabled them to receive. As they went they had planted, as they came back they had watered; but in both they were ready to own it was God that gave the increase. Note, It is a great honour to be employed for God, to be workers for him; for those that are so have him a worker with them, and he must have all the glory.

VI. The opposition they met with from the same party at Jerusalem, Act 15:5. When Barnabas and Paul gave an account of the multitude of the Gentiles, and of the great harvest of souls gathered in to Christ there, and all about them congratulated them upon it, there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees, who received the tidings very coldly, and, though they believed in Christ, yet were not satisfied in the admission of these converts, but thought it was needful to circumcise them. Observe here, 1. That those who have been most prejudiced against the gospel yet have been captivated by it; so mighty has it been through God to the pulling down of strong-holds. When Christ was here upon earth, few or none of the rulers and of the Pharisees believed on him; but now there are those of the sect of the Pharisees who believed, and many of them, we hope, in sincerity. 2. That it is very hard for men suddenly to get clear of their prejudices: those that had been Pharisees, even after they became Christians, retained some of the old leaven. All did not so, witness Paul, but some did; and they had such a jealousy for the ceremonial law, and such a dislike of the Gentiles, that they could not admit the Gentiles into communion with them, unless they would be circumcised, and thereby engage themselves to keep the law of Moses. This was, in their opinion, needful; and for their parts they would not converse with them unless they submitted to it.

Matthew Henry: Act 15:6-21

We have here a council called, not by writ, but by consent, on this occasion (Act 15:6): The apostles and presbyters came together, to consider this matter. They did not give their judgment separately, but came together to do it, that they might hear one another's sense in this matter; for in the multitude of counsellors there is safety and satisfaction. They did not give their judgment rashly, but considered of this matter. Though they were clear concerning it in their own minds, yet they would take time to consider of it, and to hear what might be said by the adverse party. Nor did the apostles give their judgment concerning it without the elders, the inferior ministers, to whom they thus condescended, and on whom they thus put an honour. Those that are most eminent in gifts and graces, and are in the most exalted stations in the church, ought to show respect to their juniors and inferiors; for, though days should speak, yet there is a spirit in man, Job 32:7, Job 32:8. Here is a direction to the pastors of the churches, when difficulties arise, to come together in solemn meetings for mutual advice and encouragement, that they may know one another's mind, and strengthen one another's hands, and may act in concert. Now here we have,

I. Peter's speech in this synod. He did not in the least pretend to any primacy or headship in this synod. He was not master of this assembly, nor so much as chairman or moderator, pro hac vice - on this occasion; for we do not find that either he spoke first, to open the synod ( there having been much disputing before he rose up ), nor that he spoke last, to sum up the cause and collect the suffrages; but he was a faithful, prudent zealous member of this assembly, and offered that which was very much to the purpose, and which would come better from him than from another, because he had himself been the first that preached the gospel to the Gentiles. There had been much disputing, pro and con, upon this question, and liberty of speech allowed, as ought to be in such cases; those of the sect of the Pharisees were some of them present, and allowed to say what they could in defence of those of their opinion at Antioch, which probably was answered by some of the elders; such questions ought to be fairly disputed before they are decided. When both sides had been heard, Peter rose up, and addressed himself to the assembly, Men and brethren, as did James afterwards, Act 15:13. And here,

1. He put them in mind of the call and commission he had some time ago to preach the gospel to the Gentiles; he wondered there should be any difficulty made of a matter already settled: You know that aph' hēmerōn archaiōn - from the beginning of the days of the gospel, many years ago, God made choice among us apostles of one to preach the gospel to the Gentiles, and I was the person chosen, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word, and believe, Act 15:7. You know I was questioned about it and cleared myself to the universal satisfaction; every body rejoiced that God had granted to the Gentiles repentance unto life, and nobody said a word of circumcising them, nor was there any thought of such a thing. See Act 11:18. "Why should the Gentiles who hear the word of the gospel by Paul's mouth be compelled to submit to circumcision, any more than those that heard it by my mouth? Or why should the terms of their admission now be made harder than they were then?"

2. He puts them in mind how remarkably God owned him in preaching to the Gentiles, and gave testimony to their sincerity in embracing the Christian faith (Act 15:8): " God, who knows the hearts, and therefore is able to judge infallibly of men, bore them witness that they were his indeed, by giving them the Holy Ghost; not only the graces and comforts, but the extraordinary miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us apostles."See Act 11:15-17. Note, The Lord knows those that are his, for he knows men's hearts; and we are as our hearts are. Those to whom God gives the Holy Ghost, he thereby bears witness to that they are his; hence we are said to be sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise - marked for God. God had bidden the Gentiles welcome to the privilege of communion with him, without requiring them to be circumcised and to keep the law; and therefore shall not we admit them into communion with us but upon those terms? "God has put no difference between us and them (Act 15:9); they, though Gentiles, are as welcome to the grace of Christ and the throne of grace as we Jews are; why then should we set them at a distance, as if we were holier than they?"Isa 65:5. Note, We ought not to make any conditions of our brethren's acceptance with us but such as God has made the conditions of their acceptance with him, Rom 14:3. Now the Gentiles were fitted for communion with God, in having their hearts purified by faith, and that faith God's own work in them; and therefore why should we think them unfit for communion with us, unless they will submit to the ceremonial purifying enjoined by the law to us? Note, (1.) By faith the heart is purified; we are not only justified, and conscience purified, but the work of sanctification is begun and carried on. (2.) Those that have their hearts purified by faith are therein made so nearly to resemble one another, that, whatever difference there may be between them, no account is to be made of it; for the faith of all the saints is alike precious, and has like precious effects (2Pe 1:1), and those that by it are united to Christ are so to look upon themselves as joined to one another as that all distinctions, even that between Jew and Gentile, are merged and swallowed up in it.

3. He sharply reproves those teachers (some of whom, it is likely, were present) who went about to bring the Gentiles under the obligation of the law of Moses, Act 15:10. The thing is so plain that he cannot forbear speaking of it with some warmth: " Now therefore, since God has owned them for his, why tempt you God to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, of the believing Gentiles and their children"(for circumcision was a yoke upon their infant seed, who are here reckoned among the disciples), " a yoke which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? "Here he shows that in this attempt, (1.) They offered a very great affront to God: "You tempt him, by calling that in question which he has already settled and determined by no less an indication than that of the gift of the Holy Ghost; you do, in effect, ask, 'Did he know what he did? Or was he in earnest in it? Or will he abide by his own act?' Will you try whether God, who designed the ceremonial law for the people of the Jews only, will now, in its last ages, bring the Gentiles too under the obligation of it, to gratify you?"Those tempt God who prescribe to him, and say that people cannot be saved but upon such and such terms, which God never appointed; as if the God of salvation must come into their measures. (2.) They offered a very great wrong to the disciples: Christ came to proclaim liberty to the captives, and they go about to enslave those whom he has made free. See Neh 5:8. The ceremonial law was a heavy yoke; they and their fathers found it difficult to be borne, so numerous, so various, so pompous, were the institutions of it. The distinction of meats was a heavy yoke, not only as it rendered conversation less pleasant, but as it embarrassed conscience with endless scruples. The ado that was made about even unavoidable touch of a grave or a dead body, the pollution contracted by it, and the many rules about purifying from that pollution, were a heavy burden. This yoke Christ came to ease us of, and called those that were weary and heavy laden under it to come and take his yoke upon them, his easy yoke. Now for these teachers to go about to lay that yoke upon the neck of the Gentiles from which he came to free even the Jews was the greatest injury imaginable to them.

4. Whereas the Jewish teachers had urged that circumcision was necessary to salvation, Peter shows it was so far from being so that both Jews and Gentiles were to be saved purely through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in no other way (Act 15:11): We believe to be saved through that grace only; pisteuomen sōthēnai - We hope to be saved; or, We believe unto salvation in the same manner as they - kath' hon tropon kakeinoi̇ "We that are circumcised believe to salvation, and so do those that are uncircumcised; and, as our circumcision will be no advantage to us, so their uncircumcision will be no disadvantage to them; for we must depend upon the grace of Christ for salvation, and must apply that grace by faith, as well as they. There is not one way of salvation for the Jews and another for the Gentiles; neither circumcision avails any thing nor uncircumcision (that is neither here nor there), but faith which works by love, Gal 5:6. Why should we burden them with the law of Moses, as necessary to their salvation, when it is not that, but the gospel of Christ, that is necessary both to our salvation and theirs?"

II. An account of what Barnabas and Paul said in this synod, which did not need to be related, for they only gave in a narrative of what was recorded in the foregoing chapters, what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them, Act 15:12. This they had given in to the church at Antioch (Act 14:27), to their brethren by the way (Act 15:3), and now again to the synod; and it was very proper to be given in here. That which was contended for was that the Gentiles ought to submit to the law of Moses; now, in opposition to this, Paul and Barnabas undertake to show, by a plain relation of matters of fact, that God owned the preaching of the pure gospel to them without the law, and therefore to press the law upon them now was to undo what God had done. Observe, 1. What account they gave; they declared, or opened in order, and with all the magnifying and affecting circumstances, what glorious miracles, what signs and wonders, God had wrought among the Gentiles by them, what confirmation he had given to their preaching by miracles wrought in the kingdom of nature, and what success he had given to it by miracles wrought in the kingdom of grace. Thus God had honoured these apostles whom Jewish teachers condemned, and had thus honoured the Gentiles whom they contemned. What need had they of any other advocate when God himself pleaded their cause? The conversion of the Gentiles was itself a wonder, all things considered, no less than a miracle. Now if they received the Holy Ghost by the hearing of faith, why should they be embarrassed with the works of the law? See Gal 3:2. 2. What attention was given to them: All the multitude (who, though they had not voted, yet came together to hear what was said) kept silence, and gave audience to Paul and Barnabas; it should seem they took more notice of their narrative than they did of all the arguments that were offered. As in natural philosophy and medicine nothing is so satisfactory as experiments, and in law nothing is so satisfactory as cases adjudged, so in the things of God the best explication of the word of grace is the accounts given of the operations of the Spirit of grace; to these the multitude will with silence give audience. Those that fear God will most readily hear those that can tell them what God has done for their souls, or by their means, Psa 66:16.

III. The speech which James made to the synod. He did not interrupt Paul and Barnabas, though, it is likely, he had before heard their narrative, but let them go on with it, for the edification of the company, and that they might have it from the first and best hand; but, after they had held their peace, then James stood up. You may all prophesy one by one, 1Co 14:31. God is the God of order. He let Paul and Barnabas say what they had to say, and then he made the application of it. The hearing of variety of ministers may be of use when one truth does not drive out, but clench, another.

1. He addresses himself respectfully to those present: " Men and brethren, hearken unto me. You are men, and therefore, it is to be hoped, will hear reason; you are my brethren, and therefore will hear me with candour. We are all brethren, and equally concerned in this cause that nothing be done to the dishonour of Christ and the uneasiness of Christians."

2. He refers to what Peter had said concerning the conversion of the Gentiles (Act 15:14): " Simeon "(that is, Simon Peter) " hath declared, and opened the matter to you - how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, in Cornelius and his friends, who were the first-fruits of the Gentiles-how, when the gospel began first to spread, presently the Gentiles were invited to come and take the benefit of it;"and James observes here, (1.) That the grace of God was the origin of it; it was God that visited the Gentiles; and it was a kind visit. Had they been left to themselves, they would never have visited him, but the acquaintance began on his part; he not only visited and redeemed his people, but visited and redeemed those that were lo ammi - not a people. (2.) that the glory of God was the end of it: it was to take out of them a people for his name, who should glorify him, and in whom he would be glorified. As of old he took the Jews, so now the Gentiles, to be to him for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory, Jer 13:11. Let all the people of God remember that therefore they are thus dignified in God, that God may be glorified in them.

3. He confirms this with a quotation out of the Old Testament: he could not prove the calling of the Gentiles by a vision, as Peter could, nor by miracles wrought by his hand, as Paul and Barnabas could, but he would prove that it was foretold in the Old Testament, and therefore it must be fulfilled, Act 15:15. To this agree the words of the prophets; most of the Old Testament prophets spoke more or less of the calling in of the Gentiles, even Moses himself, Rom 10:19. It was the general expectation of the pious Jews that the Messiah should be a light to enlighten the Gentiles (Luk 2:32): but James waives the more illustrious prophecies of this, and pitches upon one that seemed more obscure: It is written, Amo 9:11, Amo 9:12, where is foretold, (1.) The setting up of the kingdom of the Messiah (Act 15:16): I will raise up the tabernacle of David, that is fallen. The covenant was made with David and his seed; but the house and family of David are here called his tabernacle, because David in his beginning was a shepherd, and dwelt in tents, and his house, that had been as a stately palace, had become a mean and despicable tabernacle, reduced in a manner to its small beginning. This tabernacle was ruined and fallen down; there had not been for many ages a king of the house of David; the sceptre had departed from Judah, the royal family was sunk and buried in obscurity, and, as it should seem, not enquired after. But God will return, and will build it again, raise it out of its ruins, a phoenix out of its ashes; and this was now lately fulfilled, when our Lord Jesus was raised out of that family, had the throne of his father David given him, with a promise that he should reign over the house of Jacob for ever, Luk 1:32, Luk 1:33. And, when the tabernacle of David was thus rebuilt in Christ, all the rest of it was, not many years after, wholly extirpated and cut off, as was also the nation of the Jews itself, and all their genealogies were lost. The church of Christ may be called the tabernacle of David. This may sometimes be brought very low, and may seem to be in ruins, but it shall be built again, its withering interests shall revive; it is cast down, but not destroyed: even dry bones are made to live. (2.) The bringing in of the Gentiles as the effect and consequence of this (Act 15:17): That the residue of men might seek after the Lord; not the Jews only, who thought they had the monopoly of the tabernacle of David, but the residue of men, such as had hitherto been left out of the pale of the visible church; they must now, upon this re-edifying of the tabernacle of David, be brought to seek after the Lord, and to enquire how they may obtain his favour. When David's tabernacle is set up, they shall seek the Lord their God, and David their king, Hos 3:5; Jer 30:9. Then Israel shall possess the remnant of Edom (so it is in the Hebrew); but the Jews called all the Gentiles Edomites, and therefore the Septuagint leave out the particular mention of Edom, and read it just as it is here, that the residue of men might seek (James here adds, after the Lord ), and all the Gentiles, or heathen, upon whom my name is called. The Jews were for many ages so peculiarly favoured that the residue of men seemed neglected; but now God will have an eye to them, and his name shall be called upon by the Gentiles; his name shall be declared and published among them, and they shall be brought both to know his name and to call upon it: they shall call themselves the people of God, and he shall call them so; and thus, by consent of both parties, his name is called upon them. This promise we may depend upon the fulfilling of in its season; and now it begins to be fulfilled, for it is added, saith the Lord, who doeth this; who doeth all these things (so the Seventy); and the apostle here: he saith it who doeth it, who therefore said it because he was determined to do it; and who therefore does it because he hath said it; for though with us saying and doing are two things they are not so with God. The uniting of Jews and Gentiles in one body, and all those things that were done in order to it, which were here foretold, were, [1.] What God did: This was the Lord's doing, whatever instruments were employed in it: and, [2.] It was what God delighted in, and was well pleased with; for he is the God of the Gentiles, as well as the Jews, and it is his honour to be rich in mercy to all that call upon him.

4. He resolves it into the purpose and counsel of God (Act 15:18): Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. He not only foretold the calling of the Gentiles many ages ago by the prophets (and therefore it ought not to be a surprise or stumbling-block to us), but he foresaw and foreordained it in his eternal counsels, which are unquestionably wise and unalterably firm. It is an excellent maxim here laid down concerning all God's works, both of providence and grace, in the natural and spiritual kingdom, that they were all known unto him from the beginning of the world, from the time he first began to work, which supposes his knowing them (as other scriptures speak) from before the foundation of the world, and therefore from all eternity. Note, Whatever God does, he did before design and determine to do; for he works all, not only according to his will, but according to the counsel of his will: he not only does whatever he determined (Psa 135:6), which is more than we can do (our purposes are frequently broken off, and our measures broken), but he determined whatever he does. Whatever he may say, to prove us, he himself knows what he will do. We know not our works beforehand, but must do as occasion shall serve, 1Sa 10:7. What we shall do in such or such a case we cannot tell till it comes to the setting to; but known unto God are all his works; in the volume of his book (called the scriptures of truth, Dan 10:21) they are all written in order, without any erasure or interlining (Psa 40:7); and all God's works will, in the day of review, be found to agree exactly with his counsels, without the least error or variation. We are poor short-sighted creatures; the wisest men can see but a little way before them, and not at all with any certainty; but this is our comfort, that, whatever uncertainty we are at, there is an infallible certainty in the divine prescience: known unto God are all his works.

5. He gives his advice what was to be done in the present case, as the matter now stood with reference to the Gentiles (Act 15:19): My sentence is; egō krinō - I give it as my opinion, or judgment; not as having authority over the rest, but as being an adviser with them. Now his advice is,

(1.) That circumcision and the observance of the ceremonial law be by no means imposed upon the Gentile converts; no, not so much as recommended nor mentioned to them. "There are many from among the Gentiles that are turned to God in Christ, and we hope there will be many more. Now I am clearly for using them with all possible tenderness, and putting no manner of hardship or discouragement upon them," mē parenochlein - " not to give them any molestation nor disturbance, nor suggest any thing to them that may be disquieting, or raise scruples in their minds, or perplex them."Note, Great care must be taken not to discourage nor disquiet young converts with matters of doubtful disputation. Let the essentials of religion, which an awakened conscience will readily receive, be first impressed deeply upon them, and these will satisfy them and make them easy; and let not things foreign and circumstantial be urged upon them, which will but trouble them. The kingdom of God, in which they are to be trained up, is not meat and drink, neither the opposition nor the imposition of indifferent things, which will but trouble them; but it is righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost, which we are sure will trouble nobody.

(2.) That yet it would be well that in some things, which gave most offence to the Jews, the Gentiles should comply with them. Because they must not humour them so far as to be circumcised, and keep the whole law, it does not therefore follow that they must act in a continual contradiction to them, and study how to provoke them. It will please the Jews (and, if a little thing will oblige them, better do so than cross them) if the Gentile converts abstain, [1.] From pollutions of idols, and from fornication, which are two bad things, and always to be abstained from; but writing to them particularly and expressly to abstain from them (because in these things the Jews were jealous of the Gentile converts, lest they should transgress) would very much gratify the Jews; not but that the apostles, both in preaching and writing to the Gentiles that embraced Christianity, were careful to warn against, First, Pollutions of idols, that they should have no manner of fellowship with idolaters in their idolatrous worships, and particularly not in the feasts they held upon their sacrifices. See 1Co 10:14, etc.; 2Co 6:14, etc. Secondly, Fornication, and all manner of uncleanness. How large, how pressing, is Paul in his cautions against this sin! 1Co 6:9-15; Eph 5:3, etc. But the Jews, who were willing to think the worst of those they did not like, suggested that these were things in which the Gentiles, even after conversion, allowed themselves, and the apostle of the Gentiles connived at it. Now, to obviate this suggestion, and to leave no room for this calumny, James advises that, besides the private admonitions which were given them by their ministers, they should be publicly warned to abstain from pollutions of idols and from fornication - that herein they should be very circumspect, and should avoid all appearances of these two evils, which would be in so particular a manner offensive to the Jews. [2.] From things strangled, and from blood, which, though not evil in themselves, as the other two, nor designed to be always abstained fRom. as those were, had been forbidden by the precepts of Noah (Gen 9:4.), before the giving of the law of Moses; and the Jews had a great dislike to them, and to all those that took a liberty to use them; and therefore, to avoid giving offence, let the Gentile converts abridge themselves of their liberty herein, 1Co 8:9, 1Co 8:13. Thus we must become all things to all men.

6. He gives a reason for his advice - that great respect ought to be shown to the Jews for they have been so long accustomed to the solemn injunctions of the ceremonial law that they must be borne with, if they cannot presently come off from them (Act 15:21): For Moses hath of old those that preach him in every city, his writings (a considerable part of which is the ceremonial law) being read in the synagogues every sabbath day. "You cannot blame them if they have a great veneration for the law of Moses; for besides that they are very sure God spoke to Moses,"(1.) "Moses is continually preached to them, and they are called upon to remember the law of Moses, "Mal 4:4. Note, Even that word of God which is written to us should also be preached: those that have the scriptures have still need of ministers to help them to understand and apply the scriptures. (2.) "His writings are read in a solemn religious manner, in their synagogues, and on the sabbath day, in the place and at the time of their meetings for the worship of God; so that from their childhood they have been trained up in a regard to the law of Moses; the observance of it is a part of their religion."(3.) "This has been done of old time; they have received from their fathers an honour for Moses; they have antiquity for it."(4.) "This had been done in every city, wherever there are any Jews, so that none of them can be ignorant what stress that law laid upon these things: and therefore, though the gospel has set us free from these things, yet they cannot be blamed if they are loth to part with them, and cannot of a sudden be persuaded to look upon those things as needless and indifferent which they, and their fathers before them, had been so long taught, and taught of God too, to place religion in. We must therefore give them time, must meet them half-way; they must be borne with awhile, and brought on gradually, and we must comply with them as far as we can without betraying our gospel liberty."Thus does this apostle show the spirit of a moderator, that is, a spirit of moderation, being careful to give no offence either to Jew or Gentile, and contriving, as much as may be, to please both sides and provoke neither. Note, We are not to think it strange if people be wedded to customs which they have had transmitted to them from their fathers, and which they have been educated in an opinion of as sacred; and therefore allowances must be made in such cases, and not rigour used.

Barclay: Act 15:1-5

The influx of Gentiles into the Church produced a problem which had to be solved. The mental background of the Jew was founded on the fact that he belonged to the chosen people. In effect they believed that not only were the Jews the peculiar possession of God but also that God was the peculiar possession of the Jews. The problem was this. Before a Gentile became a member of the Christian Church was it necessary that he should be circumcised and take upon himself the Law of Moses? In other words--must the Gentile, before he became a Christian, first become a Jew? Or, could a Gentile be received into the Church as such?

Even were that question settled there arose another problem. The strict Jew could have no intercourse with a Gentile. He could not have him as guest nor be his guest. He would not, as far as possible, even do business with him. So then, even if Gentiles were allowed into the Church, how far could Jews and Gentiles associate in the ordinary social life of the Church?

These were the problems which had to be solved. The solution was not easy. But in the end the Church took the decision that there should be no difference between Jew and Gentile at all. Ac 15 tells of the Council of Jerusalem whose decisions were the charter of freedom for the Gentiles.

Barclay: Act 15:1-5

It was almost by accident that the most epoch-making things were happening in Antioch so that the gospel was being preached to Jew and Gentile alike and they were living together as brethren. There were certain Jews to whom all this was quite unthinkable. They could never forget the position of the Jews as the chosen people. They were quite willing that the Gentiles should come into the Church but on the condition that first they became Jews. If this attitude had prevailed, Christianity would have become nothing other than a sect of Judaism. Some of these narrower Jews came down to Antioch and tried to persuade the converts that they would lose everything unless they first accepted Judaism. Paul and Barnabas argued strongly against this and matters were at a deadlock.

There was only one way out. An appeal must be made to Jerusalem, the headquarters of the Church, for a ruling. The case which Paul and Barnabas put forward was simply the story of what had happened. They were prepared to let the facts speak for themselves. But certain of the Pharisees who had become Christians insisted that all converts must be circumcised and keep the Law.

The principle at stake was quite simple and completely fundamental. Was the gift of God for the select few or for all the world? If we possess it ourselves are we to look on it as a privilege or as a responsibility? The problem may not meet us nowadays in precisely the same way; but there still exist divisions between class and class, between nation and nation, between colour and colour. We fully realize the true meaning of Christianity only when all middle walls of partition are broken down.

Barclay: Act 15:6-12

In answer to the stricter Jews Peter reminded them how he himself had been responsible for the reception of Cornelius into the Church ten years before this. The proof that he had acted rightly was that God had granted his Holy Spirit to these very Gentiles who had been received. As far as the Law's claims went they might have been ceremonially unclean; but God had by his Spirit cleansed their hearts. The attempt to obey the Law's multifarious commands and so to earn salvation was a losing battle which left every man in default. There was only one way--the acceptance of the free gift of the grace of God in an act of self-surrendering faith.

Peter went right to the heart of the question. In this whole dispute the deepest of principles was involved. Can a man earn the favour of God? Or must he admit his own helplessness and be ready in humble faith to accept what the grace of God gives? In effect, the Jewish party said, "Religion means earning God's favour by keeping the Law." Peter said, "Religion consists in casting ourselves on the grace of God." Here is implicit the difference between a religion of works and a religion of grace. Peace will never come to a man until he realizes that he can never put God in his debt; and that all he can do is take what God in his grace gives. The paradox of Christianity is that the way to victory is through surrender; and the way to power is through admitting one's own helplessness.

Barclay: Act 15:13-21

We may well believe that the matter of the reception of the Gentiles hung in the balance; then James spoke. He was the leader of the Jerusalem church. His leadership was not a formal office; it was a moral leadership conceded to him because he was an outstanding man. He was the brother of Jesus. He had had a special resurrection appearance all to himself (1Co 15:7). He was a pillar of the Church (Gal 1:19). His knees were said to be as hard as a camel's because he knelt in prayer so often and so long. He was so good a man that he was called James the Just. Further--and this was all-important--he himself was a rigorous observer of the Law. If such a man should come down on the side of the Gentiles then all was well; and he did, declaring that the disciples should be allowed into the Church without let or hindrance.

Even then the matter of ordinary social intercourse came in. How could a strict Jew consort with a Gentile? To make things easier James suggested certain regulations that Gentiles ought to keep.

They must abstain from the contamination of idols. One of the great problems of the early Church was that of meat offered to idols. Paul deals with it at length in 1Cor 8-9. When a heathen sacrificed in a temple, often only a small part of the meat was sacrificed. Most of the rest was given back to him to make a feast for his friends, often in the temple precincts, sometimes in his own house. The priests received the remainder which was then sold for ordinary purposes. No Christian must risk pollution by eating such meat for it had been offered to an idol.

They must abstain from fornication. It has been said that chastity was the only completely new virtue that Christianity brought into the world. In an impure world the Christian had to be pure.

They must abstain from things strangled and from blood. To the Jew the blood was the life and the life belonged to God alone. They so argued because when the blood flowed away life ebbed away too. Therefore all Jewish meat was killed and treated in such a way that the blood was drained off. The heathen practice of not draining the blood from a slaughtered animal was obnoxious to the strict Jew. So was the method of killing by strangulation. So the Gentile is ordered to eat only meat prepared in the Jewish way.

Had these simple regulations not been observed there could have been no intercourse between Jew and Gentile; but their observance destroyed the last barrier. Within the Church the principle was established that Jew and Gentile were one.

Constable: Act 9:32--Rom 1:1

III. THE WITNESS TO THE UTTERMOST PART OF THE EARTH 9:32--28:31

Luke next recorded the church's expansion beyond Palestine to the uttermost parts of the earth (1:8). The Ethiopian eunuch took the gospel to Africa, but he became a Christian in Judea. Now we begin to read of people becoming Christians in places farther from Jerusalem and Judea.

Constable: Act 12:25--16:6

B. The extension of the church to Cyprus and Asia Minor 12:25-16:5

Luke recorded that Jesus came to bring deliverance to the Jews and to the whole world (Luke 4:14-30). In his Gospel, Luke told the story of Jesus' personal ministry, primarily to the Jews. In Acts the emphasis is mainly on Jesus' ministry, through His apostles, to the Gentile world. As the mission to the Gentiles unfolds in Acts we can see that Luke took pains to show that the ministry to the Gentiles paralleled the ministry to the Jews. He did this by relating many things that the missionaries to the Gentiles did that were very similar to what the missionaries to the Jews did. This demonstrates that God was indeed behind both missions and that they are really two aspects of His worldwide plan to bring the gospel to all people and to build a worldwide church.

The present section of text (12:25-16:5) does more than just present the geographical expansion of the church into Asia Minor (modern western Turkey). Primarily it shows the legitimacy of dealing with Gentiles as Gentiles rather than through Judaism before and after their conversion. It becomes increasingly clear that the church and Judaism are two separate entities. God was not renewing the remnant in Israel and refreshing it with Gentile's who believed in Jesus. He was creating a new body: the church. This section culminates in the Jerusalem Council (ch. 15) in which the issue of the Gentiles' relationship to the church came to a head. The last verse (16:5) summarizes these events and issues.

Constable: Act 15:1-35

4. The Jerusalem Council 15:1-35

The increasing number of Gentiles who were becoming Christians raised a problem within the church. What was the relationship of the church to Judaism? Some Christians, especially the more conservative Jewish believers, argued that Christianity was a party within Judaism, the party of true believers. They assumed that Gentile Christians, therefore, needed to become Jewish proselytes, which involved being circumcised and obeying the Mosaic Law. Other Christians, the more broad-minded Jewish believers and the Gentile converts, saw no need for these restrictions. They viewed the church not as a party within Judaism but as a distinct group separate from Judaism that incorporated both believing Jews and believing Gentiles. This difference of viewpoint led to the meeting Luke recorded in this section. He described it at length to explain the issues involved and to emphasize their importance.

Constable: Act 15:1-5

Paul and Barnabas' return to Jerusalem 15:1-5

15:1 The men from Judea who came down to Antioch appear to have been Jewish Christians who took the former view of Christianity described above. They believed a person could not become a Christian without first becoming a Jew, which included circumcision. Perhaps they based their theology on texts such as Genesis 17:14 and Exodus 12:48-49. Their claim was essentially a denial of the sufficiency of faith in Christ for salvation. They evidently claimed that James, the Lord's half brother and the leader of the Jerusalem church, endorsed their position (cf. 15:24; Gal. 2:12). Peter, who was in Antioch at this time, compromised with these men by withdrawing from eating with the Gentile Christians there. Barnabas also inclined to do so. Paul, however, saw the inconsistency and danger in this practice and rebuked Peter (Gal. 2:11, 13-14).

This situation posed the fourth crisis in the history of the early church. The first was selfishness (Ananias and Sapphira, ch. 5), and the second was murmuring (over the treatment of the Hellenistic widows, ch. 6). The third was simony (Simon Magus, ch. 8), and now doctrinal controversy raised its ugly head (the "Galatian heresy," ch. 15). This was the most serious problem thus far both in terms of the issue itself and its potential consequences. It involved the correct interpretation of the facts of the gospel.

15:2 This situation led to hot debate among the Christians generally. It ended with a decision to move the discussion to Jerusalem and to place the whole matter before the apostles and elders there for a verdict. Men from Antioch accompanied Paul and Barnabas as witnesses undoubtedly to protect Paul and Barnabas from accusations of distorting the facts.

15:3 On the way to Jerusalem the missionaries recounted what God had done in Cyprus and Asia Minor to the Christians in Phoenicia and Samaria. These believers rejoiced because they saw a continuation of what had happened to them.

"This undoubtedly means that Gentiles were converted on a direct basis apart from any necessary commitment to Judaism, because the presence of proselytes and God-fearing' Gentiles in the church was hardly newsworthy in A.D. 49."⁶⁰⁵

15:4 When Paul's party arrived in Jerusalem, the leaders there received them and listened to their story. Note again that Luke stressed the Lord's initiative in spreading the gospel (cf. 14:27).

15:5 Some in that meeting, converted Pharisees who had a high view of the Mosaic Law, repeated the same objection Paul and Barnabas had encountered in Antioch.⁶⁰⁶

". . . it is possible that nationalist pressure [against Rome] was increasing in Judea, and that [Jewish] Christians were having to tread carefully to avoid being thought of as disloyal to their Jewish heritage."⁶⁰⁷

Unsaved Jews also believed that law-keeping is essential for acceptance by God (cf. 1 Thess. 2:14-16).

The Old Testament taught that Gentiles would share in the promises made to Israel (Gen. 22:18; 26:4; 28:14; Isa. 49:6; 55:5-7; Zeph. 3:9-10; Zech. 8:22). The Old Testament prophets also spoke of Gentile salvation as happening in the last days (Isa. 2:2; 11:10; 25:8-9; Zech. 8:23) through the witness of a restored Israel (Isa. 2:3; 60:2-3; Zech. 8:23).

"It [the revelation stated above] was the underlying presupposition for Jewish proselytizing (cf. M[ishnah] Pirke Aboth 1:12; Matt 23:15) and was implicit in the sermons of Peter at Pentecost (2:39) and in the house of Cornelius (10:35). But the correlative conviction of Judaism was that Israel was God's appointed agent for the administration of these blessings--that only through the nation and its institutions could Gentiles have a part in God's redemption and share in his favor."⁶⁰⁸

Constable: Act 15:6-11

Peter's testimony 15:6-11

15:6 Evidently a large group of people observed the meeting that the church convened to debate the issue (vv. 12, 22).⁶⁰⁹

15:7-9 First, spokesmen for each side presented arguments pro and con. Then Peter rose and reminded those assembled that several years earlier God had chosen him as the person from whom Gentiles (i.e., Cornelius and his friends) should hear the gospel. Then God gave them His Spirit as soon as they believed in Jesus Christ. They did nothing but believe and they received the Holy Spirit, the sign of their acceptance by God. This is the same thing that had taken place among the Jews on the day of Pentecost.

15:10 Requiring that Gentiles become Jews before God would save them would test God in that it would question the rightness of His action in giving the Spirit to Cornelius. When a Gentile became a Jewish proselyte, the Jew in charge of the ceremony said the Gentile now took up the yoke of the kingdom of heaven (cf. Matt. 23:4; Gal. 5:1).⁶¹⁰ Peter said this yoke, the Mosaic Covenant, was a burden that was both unbearable and improper (cf. Matt. 11:29-30).

15:11 By referring to the Jews being saved in the same manner as the Gentiles, instead of vise versa, Peter repudiated any thought of Jewish superiority. Clearly he had recovered from his temporary lapse at Syrian Antioch (Gal. 2:11-14). Salvation is by grace (v. 11) through faith (v. 9) plus nothing.

Constable: Act 15:12

Barnabas and Paul's testimony 15:12

The old order of these two names recurs here. Barnabas, as a respected member of this church (4:36-37; 11:22), took the lead in relating the experiences he and Paul had undergone in ministering to Gentiles. Barnabas emphasized the signs and wonders God had performed because these would have persuaded the Jews that God had been at work in their ministry (cf. 1 Cor. 1:22).

"It was a report not of their successes but of how God had acted, and its implication was that by his acts God had revealed his will."⁶¹¹

Constable: Act 15:13-21

James' testimony 15:13-21

15:13-14 James was Jesus' half brother, the writer of the Epistle of James, and the leading figure in the Jerusalem church (12:17; Gal. 1:19; 2:9, 12).⁶¹² "Simeon" was Peter's older Jewish name. James' use of it would have emphasized Peter's Jewishness as well as implying affection for him. Peter had related the salvation experience of Cornelius, and James' reference to "first" was to that experience near the beginning of the church.

". . . he showed how he felt about the question at issue by speaking of believing Gentiles as a people' (laos) whom God had taken for himself' (to onomati autou; lit., for his name')--thus (1) applying to Gentile Christians a designation formerly used of Israel alone and (2) agreeing with Peter that in the conversion of Cornelius God himself had taken the initiative for a direct Gentile ministry."⁶¹³

15:15 James reminded his hearers that the Old Testament prophets supported the salvation of Gentiles apart from Judaism. Note that James did not say the salvation of Gentiles then was the fulfillment of these prophecies. He said the prophets' predictions of future Gentile salvation harmonized with the present salvation of Gentiles apart from Judaism (cf. 2:16).⁶¹⁴ James then quoted Amos 9:11-12 as a representative prophecy.⁶¹⁵ Neither Amos nor any other prophet said Gentiles had to become Jews to enjoy the blessings of salvation (cf. Rom. 11:12).

"James's major contribution to the decision of the council was to shift the discussion of the conversion of Gentiles from a proselyte model to an eschatological one. . . . James is saying, God's people will consist of two concentric groups. At their core will be restored Israel (i.e., David's rebuilt tent); gathered around them will be a group of Gentiles (i.e., the remnant of men') who will share in the messianic blessings but will persist as Gentiles without necessarily becoming Jewish proselytes."⁶¹⁶

15:16-18 Amos predicted the (second) advent of Messiah after "these things" (i.e., the Tribulation, Amos 9:8-10). Messiah would set up His kingdom on the earth and restore the nation Israel (during the Millennium) under which the Gentiles would seek the Lord. We should understand the "and" in verse 17 in the sense of "even" (the epexegetical use of this conjunction).

"A close examination of this passage [vv. 14-17] reveals that there is a progression of thought leading to James' conclusion. First, God visits the Gentiles, taking from them a people for His name. In other words, God has promised to bless the Gentiles as well as Israel, but each in his own order. The Gentile blessing is first. Second, Christ will return--after the outcalling of the people for His name. Third, as a result of the coming of the Lord, the tabernacle of David will be built again; that is, the kingdom will be established exactly as promised in the Davidic Covenant. Amos clearly declared that this rebuilding will be done as it used to be' (Amos 9:11); that is, the blessings will be earthly and national and will have nothing to do with the church. Fourth, the residue of men will seek the Lord; that is, all the Gentiles will be brought to a knowledge of the Lord after the kingdom is established. This same truth is taught in passages like Isaiah 2:2; 11:10; 40:5; and 66:23."⁶¹⁷

There have been three main interpretations of James' use of Amos' prophecy (Amos 9:11-12).⁶¹⁸ Some interpreters believe James meant that the inclusion of Gentiles in the church fulfilled God's promise through Amos.⁶¹⁹ These (generally amillennial) interpreters see the church as fulfilling God's promises to Israel. This view seems to go beyond what Amos said since his prophecy concerns the tabernacle of David, which literally interpreted would involve Israel, not the church. A second group of interpreters believe James meant that God would include Gentiles when He fulfilled this promise to Israel in the future.⁶²⁰ However there was no question among the Jews that God would bless the Gentiles through Israel in the future. The issue was whether He would do this apart from Judaism, and this interpretation contributes nothing to the solution of that problem. This view does not seem to go far enough. A third view is that James meant that the present inclusion of Gentiles in the church is consistent with God's promise to Israel through Amos.⁶²¹ The present salvation of Gentiles apart from Judaism does not contradict anything Amos said about future Gentile blessing. This seems to be the best interpretation.

"In other words, James says, God is working out His own plan: Israel, His covenant people have been set aside nationally because of their rejection of the Messiah. God is now taking out a people, Jew and Gentile, to constitute the Church of God. When He completes this work, the Lord is coming back the second time. That will be the time of blessing for the whole world [i.e., the millennial reign of Christ]."⁶²²

James added the quotation from Isaiah 45:21 in verse 18b probably to add authority to the Amos prophecy.

"The thought that the church was the divinely intended replacement for the temple is probably to be seen in 15:16-18."⁶²³

The non-dispensational understanding of this text is that James was saying that the messianic kingdom had come and Amos' prediction was completely fulfilled. Progressive dispensationalists believe he meant that the first stage of the messianic kingdom had come and that Amos' prediction was partially fulfilled.⁶²⁴ Normative dispensationalists view the messianic kingdom as entirely future. They believe Amos was predicting the inclusion of Gentiles in God's plan and that James was saying that the present situation was in harmony with God's purpose. Thus the Amos prediction has yet to be fulfilled. Deciding between these options depends on whether or not one believes the church replaces Israel in God's plan. If it does, one will side with non-dispensationalists here. If one believes the church and Israel are distinct in the purpose of God, then one has to decide if there is better evidence that Jesus has begun to rule over David's kingdom now (progressive dispensationalism) or not (normative dispensationalism). I believe the evidence points to the fact that David's kingdom is an earthly kingdom and that Jesus will begin reigning over it when He returns to earth at His second coming.

James would have quoted a version of the Old Testament text that would have been acceptable to his audience, which included strict Jews. His quotation from Amos differs from the Hebrew Text in meaning and the Septuagint in form, but it is identical to the text of 4QFlorilegium (1:12), an Essene rendering.⁶²⁵

15:19 Troubling the Gentiles meant imposing the requirements of Jewish proselytes on them, namely circumcision and observance of the Mosaic Law.

15:20 To help Gentile converts not put a stumbling block in the path of Jews, James recommended that Christian teachers encourage their disciples to avoid four things. These were the things (food, etc.) associated with idolatry (cf. 1 Cor. 10:14-22), and fornication (Gr. porneias, all kinds of sexual aberrations). They were also to avoid eating strangled animals rather than those with the blood drained out, and blood (the essence of life; cf. Gen. 9; Lev. 17:11). These were ethical and moral issues, not just matters of ceremonial defilement.⁶²⁶

15:21 The reason for these restrictions was this. In the weekly synagogue Scripture readings, teachers of the Mosaic Law had stressed Jewish scruples regarding these matters for generations. Consequently the Jews regarded them as extremely important. If Gentile Christians disregarded the convictions of these Jews, they would only alienate those they hoped to bring to faith in Jesus Christ or to growth in Christ (cf. 1 Cor. 8:13).

"If there was ever a good opportunity to say that the Gentiles were under the law this was it; for that would have settled the matter simply and quickly. But the apostles, who were Jews themselves, recognized that the law had no force any longer, and they did not try to impose it."⁶²⁷

James was not putting Gentile converts under the Mosaic Law by imposing these restrictions. He was urging them to limit their exercise of Christian liberty to make their witness to unsaved Jews more effective and their fellowship with saved Jews more harmonious (cf. 1 Cor. 9:19-23).

"To sum up, we may say that two types of necessary' questions were raised at the Jerusalem Council. The first had to do with the theological necessity of circumcision and the Jewish law for salvation, and that was rejected. The second had to do with the practical necessity of Gentile Christians abstaining from certain practices for the sake of Jewish-Gentile fellowship within the church and for the sake of the Jewish Christian mission throughout the Diaspora, and that was approved."⁶²⁸

College: Act 15:1-41

ACTS 15

B. THE COUNCIL AT JERUSALEM (15:1-35)

1. The Visit of Judaizers to Antioch (15:1-2)

¹ Some men came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the brothers: " Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved." ² This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question.

Luke now reports on the event which paves the way for the rest of the Book of Acts. The conference at Jerusalem makes it possible for the mission efforts of Paul. These efforts dominate the rest of Luke's report on the spread of the gospel. He has related how the interest in converting Gentiles began with the conversion of Cornelius (10:1-11:18) and the outreach of Antioch (11:19-24). Then came the first missionary journey with its concentration on Gentiles (13:1-14:28). Appropriately enough, Luke now turns to some of the dissension caused by the entrance of Gentiles into the church and how it was handled.

Thus Acts 15 is central, not only because of its position in the book, but because of its role in the story of the early church. What should be done about Gentile converts and their relationship to the Law of Moses? Should they be circumcised? Should they enter the church in the same way that Jewish proselytes entered the synagogue? Once accepted as believers, should they be taught to keep the regulations in the Law? Finally, should Jewish Christians eat with Gentile Christians?

Though these questions seem alien to modern theological concerns, they were burning questions in the first century. The Gentile mission had shown no inclination to force converts to be circumcised or to keep the regulations of the Law. Now questions were being raised about this policy.

Acts 15 has become the most controversial chapter in the book. New Testament scholars have spent reams of paper comparing Acts 15 with what Paul writes in Galatians 2:1-10. The traditional view is that the two passages discuss the same conference in Jerusalem. But differences between the passages have forced many to doubt that they are the same conference (details of which will be noticed later). In some cases scholars have used the differences to indict Luke's accuracy. But the similarities between the passages seem to outweigh the differences, and it is not necessary to conclude that Luke has reported the incident inaccurately.

The trouble began when " some men" arrived in Antioch from Judea. Luke's language here carefully keeps us from assuming that the view of these teachers represented the Jerusalem apostles in any official way. Their position took issue with the policy of evangelism in Antioch. Gentiles must be taught to be " circumcised according to the custom taught by Moses." For them the conversion of Cornelius was not the final word as it had been for Peter and the apostles (see 10:47; 11:17-18). They insisted that the issue was more than a matter of table fellowship; unless Gentiles were circumcised they " cannot be saved."

Not only was this perspective a rejection of the conversion of Cornelius, it was also a direct attack on the mission efforts of the church in Antioch through Paul and Barnabas in Acts 13-14. Perhaps these teachers hoped to convince the church, Paul, and Barnabas to alter their approach in future evangelistic efforts. These teachers may be the ones Paul refers to when he speaks of " false brothers" who " infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves" (Gal 2:4).

Paul and Barnabas came into " sharp dispute and debate with them." Paul's position was that this teaching amounted to an enslavement of believers who had been set free in Christ (see Gal 5:1). He refused to " give in to them for a moment" (Gal 2:5). The gospel was meant for the Gentiles, as well as the Jews. Imposing the Jewish Law would mean excluding Gentiles from salvation.

Thus Paul and Barnabas " were appointed" by the church at Antioch to go with " some other believers" to Jerusalem, a delegation which may have included Titus (Gal 2:3). The issue of circumcision would not be settled until the whole church, including the apostles in Jerusalem, met to consider the matter.

2. The Journey of Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem (15:3-5)

³ The church sent them on their way, and as they traveled through Phoenicia and Samaria, they told how the Gentiles had been converted. This news made all the brothers very glad. ⁴ When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done through them. 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."

On this journey of some 250 miles to Jerusalem it was natural for Paul and Barnabas to visit churches in " Phoenicia and Samaria." This is the first time the presence of Christians in Phoenicia is revealed, and reminds us of how much evangelism occurred which is not recorded in Acts.

Paul and Barnabas described for them " how the Gentiles had been converted," a reference no doubt to their mission tour (Acts 13-14), and this news " made all the brothers very glad." These believers were the result of mission efforts by the Hellenists who fled Jerusalem after the martyrdom of Stephen (11:19). Their sympathy to the Gentile mission emphasizes that those who came to Antioch (15:1) did not represent everyone in the vicinity.

When Paul and Barnabas arrived in Jerusalem they were greeted warmly by " the church and the apostles and elders." The conference in Jerusalem would include a wide representation of the church. As Paul and Barnabas had done in Antioch (14:27), in Phoenicia and Samaria, they also did in Jerusalem. God had worked " through them" to open the door of salvation to the Gentiles.

Yet this report was not met with universal happiness. Those who " belonged to the party of the Pharisees" were not pleased. Because of their connections with Pharisaic doctrine, they insisted on the role of circumcision, even among Gentiles. These Jewish Christians argued that Gentiles must add something more to their conversion to Christ. They must also become Jews in terms of obedience to the Law, beginning with circumcision.

Some commentators see 15:4 as the first of two meetings on the question. This position has the advantage of harmonizing with Paul's statement in Galatians 2:2 that he met " privately" with the apostles. In this view the private meeting is reflected in 15:4 and the public meeting in 15:6-29.

Paul disagreed with the Pharisaic element not because he promoted permissive morals among the Gentiles, but because the law could never inspire holiness among the Gentiles anyway. Indeed, he argues in Romans 6:1-14 that believers have every motivation to eject sin out of their lives. But he also argues in Romans 7:1-25 that the law could not eradicate sin in the lives of believers. As far as Paul was concerned, when the Gentiles were baptized " into Christ" they could fulfill " the righteous requirements of the Law" (Rom 8:4) without being circumcised or living by the regulations of the law.

3. The Convening of the Council (15:6)

⁶ The apostles and elders met to consider this question.

As leaders of the church, " the apostles and elders" served as moderators of the conference. Though the apostles were the recognized authorities in matters of doctrine in the church, their practice was to include other recognized leaders in important decisions of the church.

The convening of this council marks the final achievement in Acts of the apostles in Jerusalem as a group. From this point on, the focus will shift away from Jerusalem to the missionary journeys in the far stretches of the Roman world. The apostle who will get Luke's attention from now on will be Paul.

It must be remembered that Luke's summary of the discussion is quite abbreviated. The number and the content of the speeches are not given in their entirety, but only a rough outline of remarks is given.

4. The Address of Peter (15:7-11)

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."

A lively discussion by all the participants kept the crowd buzzing at the beginning of the conference. " After much discussion" the leaders brought the meeting to order.

Peter was first to speak in presenting the case for rejecting the effort to impose circumcision on the Gentile converts. To some modern scholars this portrait of Peter has seemed unlikely. But his experience with Cornelius had left an impression on him.

This experience was what Peter called attention to when he said " you know that some time ago." The time lapse might have been as much as ten years. Peter's understanding of the event was that " God made a choice among us" in that the Holy Spirit directed Peter to the house of Cornelius. After reading Acts 10 this interpretation of the event is obvious. God decided that from the lips of Peter the Gentiles were to hear the gospel.

God " who knows the heart," and therefore the spiritual condition, accepted the Gentiles. The language Peter used at this point corresponds closely to the language used in Acts 10-11. Phrases like " giving the Holy Spirit," " just as he did to us," and " purified their hearts" came directly from Peter's encounter with Cornelius (see 10:15,47; 11:8,9,17). God determined to make " no distinction between us (Jewish believers) and them (the Gentile believers)," said Peter, a conclusion which he drew immediately from his visit to Cornelius (see 10:34-35). No other verdict was possible for him than to say that the Gentiles had been purified " by faith."

If this was so, Peter argued there was no reason to add to their obligations. In fact, said Peter, to do so would be " to test God," since it would mean calling into question matters already settled by the Lord's hand.

Peter's argument was that the council should not seek to put on the " necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear." Peter's point is not that the fathers considered the law to be burdensome. Indeed the words of the Psalmist rang in the ears of first-century Jews: " Oh, how I love your law! I meditate on it all day long. Your commands make me wiser than my enemies, for they are ever with me" (Ps 11119:97-98). Peter's rejection of the law had to do with its necessity for salvation, especially among the Gentiles. " Neither we nor our fathers," he says, were able to count on our obedience to the law as a means for salvation.

The " yoke" did not refer to an intolerable burden. The " yoke of the law" was a common rabbinic phrase to speak of becoming a child of the covenant. Thus the expression " taking up the yoke of the kingdom of heaven" had a very positive connotation because a believer who had the yoke of the law was closely bound to the will of the Lord.

Rather than the law, said Peter, it is " through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved." Nothing could sound more like Paul (see 13:38ff; Eph 2:8-10). Peter's point was that if salvation comes through the grace of Jesus, why should the council impose on the Gentile converts the regulations of the law?

5. The Address of Paul and Barnabas (15:12)

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.

Peter's address brought silence to the crowd. Next on the agenda were reports by Paul and Barnabas of the powerful work of God in their missionary tour. At this point the reader may remember such detailed incidents as the healing of the crippled man in Lystra. Luke has provided enough information about the journey that when Paul and Barnabas reflected on the " miraculous signs and wonders" there can be little doubt what the missionaries described. Their testimony also made the point that God demonstrated his acceptance of Gentiles without benefit of circumcision.

6. The Summation by James (15:13-21)

¹³ When they finished, James spoke up: " Brothers, listen to me. ¹⁴ Simon ^a 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: ¹⁶ 'After this I will return and rebuild David's fallen tent. Its ruins I will rebuild, and I will restore it, 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' ^{b 18} that have been known for ages. ^{c 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. ²¹ For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath."

^a 14 Greek Simeon , a variant of Simon ; that is, Peter ^b 17 Amos 9:11,12 ^c 17,18 Some manuscripts things'- ¹⁸ known to the Lord for ages is his work

The final address was delivered by James, the brother of the Lord. Not one of the original apostles, James nevertheless had gained a prominent place as a church leader as is indicated in 12:17. He is also mentioned by Paul in his description of the Jerusalem conference (Gal 2:9).

In addressing the assembly, James refers to Peter as Simon, his original Jewish name, which would suit those of the Pharisaic group quite well. The contention of James was that God wanted to take " from the Gentiles a people (laov", laos )," a word used throughout the Old Testament to describe God's chosen people. In other words, James was saying that God decided to find a " chosen people" from among the Gentiles. His point seems to be that both Jewish and Gentile believers were now counted as God's people. James is referring to what God had done in the case of Cornelius.

To support this conclusion, James cited Amos 9:11-12. His quotation comes from the Septuagint, a fact which causes many scholars to doubt James could have said it. How could a Jewish Christian make his argument to Pharisaic elements in Jerusalem by quoting the Greek Old Testament rather than the Hebrew Old Testament?

But the point of the argument by James is found in both versions of the Old Testament. His major emphasis was that " David's fallen tent" would be rebuilt, a reference to the restoration of the kingdom over which David ruled to its former glory. He also focused on the phrase " the Gentiles who bear my name," a concept which could also have been drawn from the Hebrew text.

Whether James quoted the Septuagint version in the meeting to benefit Greek visitors, or Luke drew the Scripture James quoted from the Septuagint, therefore makes little difference. Either way, these verses reflect accurately the line of argument used by James.

Declaring his conclusion, James argues that there is no reason to " make it difficult" for Gentile converts by imposing the law of Moses, and circumcision in particular. But if Gentiles need not be circumcised, still remaining was the question of how Jewish Christians could share meals with Gentile converts without becoming defiled. James thus proposed a solution to this problem.

The solution listed four things which were important to Jews. Each of these items were commonly associated with the idolatrous Gentile world, and were thus considered to have universal application to Gentile converts. The items also were associated with pagan worship in a Gentile context.

First, Gentile converts were to " abstain from food polluted by idols," a clear reference to pagan sacrifices and the meals often eaten at the pagan temple. " Sexual immorality" (porneiva, porneia ) may refer to the sexual activities which defile a person as listed in Leviticus 18:6-18, or more likely the sexual immorality often associated with pagan religious festivals. The third item was abstaining from " meat of strangled animals," a reference to animals killed so that the blood remained in the meat. Because the Old Testament required that animal sacrifices were drained of their blood (Lev 17:10-14), Jews did not eat such meat because of the threat of being defiled. The last item belongs in the same category (Gen 9:4; Lev 3:17), though in some pagan practices blood was drunk apart from the meat.

These proposals by James may be traced to the Old Testament. As a matter of fact they were originally applied to aliens dwelling among the congregation of Israel, an application very appropriate in reference to Gentile converts.

To conclude, James stated that Moses " has been preached (khruvssonta", kçryssontas) in every city" and " is read (ajnaginwskovmeno", anaginôskomenos) in the synagogues on every Sabbath." His point was that all other points of the law were readily accessible to Gentile converts, including the moral principles of the law, which no one doubted were essential to the Christian faith.

7. The Apostolic Letter to Gentile Christians (15:22-29)

²² Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, two men who were leaders among the brothers. ²³ With them they sent the following letter: The apostles and elders, your brothers, To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia: Greetings. ²⁴ We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. ²⁵ So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul- ²⁶ men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. ²⁷ Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. ²⁸ It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: ²⁹ You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell.

After approving the content of the proposals by James the decision was made to state in a letter to the churches the conclusions of the council. " Some of their own men" were chosen, including Judas (called Barsabbas, or " son of the Sabbath" ) and Silas who later became the companion of Paul in his mission work (15:40; 2 Cor 1:19; 1 Thess 1:1; 2 Thess 1:1). These men, with Paul and Barnabas, were sent " to Antioch," out of respect for the ministry of this church and the fact that the question had become urgent first in this church.

The letter was addressed to " the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia," areas over which Antioch was the leading city. The style of the letter is very formal, especially in its opening " greetings" (caivrein, chairein ) and its " farewell" (e[rrwsqe, errôsthe). Another indication of formality is its long sentence structure running from 15:24-26.

Believers in Antioch were told in the letter that the teachers who came from Judea arrived without " authorization" from the apostles. The letter even apologized that these teachers " disturbed" the disciples, " troubling" (ajnaskeuavzw, anaskeuazô) them by what they said. The idea is that they were " plundering," or " tearing down" the disciples as an advancing army does.

Paul and Barnabas were described as " men who have risked (paradivdomai, paradidomai ) their lives" in service for Christ, a phrase which reflects on the dangers they experienced on their mission tour. Judas and Silas were present to " confirm by word of mouth" that the proceedings had occurred in such a manner that these conclusions came about. The role of " the Holy Spirit" was mentioned, demonstrating again the sense that all of the efforts to take the gospel to the Gentiles were directed by the hand of God's Spirit (see 10:44-47; 11:12,15-17; 13:1-4; 15:8).

Finally the letter summarized the same four requirements as mentioned in v. 20, with a slight change in order. The phrase " food sacrificed to idols" (eijdwloquvtwn, eidôlothytôn) replaced " food polluted by idols" in v. 20. One more time in Acts this list of demands will be mentioned (21:25) and the churches addressed in Revelation apparently knew of them, as well (Rev 2:14,20).

Frequently the question has been raised as to why Paul never mentions these decrees in his letters. Some critics have charged that he does not mention them because he did not know about them, thus impugning the credibility of Luke's account in Acts 15. But this ignores the places in Paul's letters where he speaks to the issues given in the " apostolic decrees." In 1 Corinthians 5-10, for example, he first deals with the issue of immorality (5-7) and then with the issue of eating meat offered to idols (8-10). Also Romans 14-15 reflects on some of these principles.

8. The Reception of the Apostolic

Letter by the Church in Antioch (15:30-35)

³⁰ The men were sent off and went down to Antioch, where they gathered the church together and delivered the letter. ³¹ The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message. ³² Judas and Silas, who themselves were prophets, said much to encourage and strengthen the brothers. ³³ After spending some time there, they were sent off by the brothers with the blessing of peace to return to those who had sent them. ^{a 35} But Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, where they and many others taught and preached the word of the Lord.

^a 33 Some manuscripts them, ³⁴ but Silas decided to remain there

The decrees from the council in Jerusalem were received with genuine happiness because of their " encouraging message." For the disciples at Antioch the decision of the council was a victory, confirming their policy toward Gentile converts who were not forced to be circumcised. The four requirements were viewed as a measure to ease the fellowship of Jewish and Gentile believers.

The prophetic ministry of Judas and Silas also contributed to the encouragement of the believers in Antioch. New Testament prophets often used their gifts to challenge the church in matters of meeting the present needs of the congregation. After their ministry was completed " they were sent off by the brothers with the blessing of peace." The pronoun " they" refers to Silas and Barsabbas and their return to Jerusalem. The " blessing of peace" was the Jewish farewell " shalom," which can be translated " peace."

A textual problem exists with 15:34. One of the readings from the Western text includes the statement that Silas remained in Antioch. The verse lacks solid manuscript support, and may have been penned by a scribe who was trying to establish harmony with v. 40 where Silas is in Antioch when Paul chooses him for the journey. In so doing the scribe set up a conflict with v. 33, which says " they were sent off."

C. THE SECOND MISSIONARY JOURNEY (15:36-18:22)

1. The Proposal and the Debate about John Mark (15:36-39)

³⁶ Some time later Paul said to Barnabas, " Let us go back and visit the brothers in all the towns where we preached the word of the Lord and see how they are doing." ³⁷ Barnabas wanted to take John, also called Mark, with them, ³⁸ but Paul did not think it wise to take him, because he had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not continued with them in the work. ³⁹ They had such a sharp disagreement that they parted company. Barnabas took Mark and sailed for Cyprus,

After spending some time in Antioch, Paul approached Barnabas regarding a return to the churches they had established. Paul's policy was not to abandon the churches he founded (see 1 Thess 2:17-20; 2 Cor 13:1). He looked forward to strengthening these congregations.

A major disagreement developed, however, when Barnabas wanted to take John Mark along. He was the mission helper who had abandoned the effort during the first journey (see 13:13). Barnabas was the cousin of John Mark and wanted to give him another chance, probably because he saw some potential in him. But Paul remembered too clearly how Mark had abandoned the work at a crucial moment. The difference of opinion became " a sharp disagreement." There was no reconciliation on the issue. Possibly the matter of the withdrawal by Barnabas from eating with Gentiles also entered into this conflict (Gal 2:11-13).

So " they parted company," but the result to the kingdom was two mission teams instead of one. Barnabas and Mark visited the churches on the island of Cyprus.

2. The Journey through Syria and Cilicia (15:40-41)

⁴⁰ but Paul chose Silas and left, commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord. ⁴¹ He went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches.

While Barnabas and Mark were visiting Cyprus, Paul chose Silas to accompany him " through Syria and Cilicia." By now Paul had gained enough confidence in Silas to see in him a potential mission partner. They departed from Antioch, being " commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord." This phrase does not imply that Barnabas and Mark were considered renegades by the church at Antioch, but simply serves Luke's purpose of keeping the focus on Paul throughout the remainder of Acts. Paul and Silas (called Silvanus in Paul's letters) would be traveling through the same cities as had been visited in the first journey.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

McGarvey: Act 15:1

XV: 1. At this point in the narrative our historian makes a sudden transition from the conflicts of the disciples with the unbelieving world to one almost as serious among themselves. There never was a national antipathy more intense than that felt by the Jews to the whole Gentile world. It was the more intense, from the fact that it was imbedded in their deepest religious sentiments, and was cultivated in all the devotions. In the hearts of the disciples this feeling had, by this time, been so far overcome, that they had admitted the propriety of receiving uncircumcised Gentiles into the Church. But they found it more difficult to convince themselves that Gentiles were to be admitted into social and domestic intimacy. Hence, when Peter returned from the house of Cornelius to Jerusalem, the chief objection urged against him was, not that he had immersed Gentiles, but " Thou didst go into the house of men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them." This was the full extent to which the judaizing party in the Church were prepared, at that time, to push their objections. But when men take an unreasonable and obstinate stand against any cause, they frequently assume more extravagant ground as the cause they are opposing advances. While but a few Gentiles had come into the Church, the pharisaic party objected only to domestic association with them; but now that Paul and Barnabas had succeeded in opening a door of faith to the whole Gentile world, and it was likely that the Jews, who had hitherto constituted almost the whole body of the Church, were soon to become only a small element in its constituency, their fears were excited, and their demands became more exorbitant. Paul and Barnabas were still in Antioch. (1) " And certain men came down from Judea, and taught the brethren, Unless you are circumcised according to the law of Moses, you can not be saved." As we learn from a subsequent part of this chapter, they were not content with merely enjoining circumcision, but also exacted the observance of all the law of Moses, to which circumcision was only preliminary. The success of this party would have perpetuated Judaism, and forever have neutralized those philanthropic principles of the gospel which the experience of the world and the wisdom of God alike had shown to be necessary to the moral renovation of the human race.

McGarvey: Act 15:2

2. If Paul and Barnabas had ever been, since their conversion, blinded by these narrow views, their labors among the Gentiles would have wrought a change in their feelings, and prepared them to see the subject in a better light. They opposed the new propositions with all their powers; and though they did not succeed in silencing their opponents, they brought the discussion to a fortunate conclusion. (2) " When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain others of them, should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders about this question. "

If the brethren in Antioch had estimated at its proper value the authority of an inspired apostle, they would have yielded implicitly to Paul's decision without this mission to Jerusalem. But they were as yet too little accustomed to reflection upon the profound mystery of apostolic infallibility to properly accredit it; and their deep prejudices on the subject under discussion was a serious obstacle in the way of clear thought. It is probable that apostolic authority is more highly appreciated now than it was then; yet the prejudices of sect and party are so intense, that even now the dictum of a living apostle would prove insufficient, in millions of cases, to convince men of their errors. Like the disciples in Antioch, who had the testimony of Paul, men now are not easily satisfied with a single inspired statement upon a point in dispute, or with the statements of a single apostle, but demand an accumulation of even divine testimonies.

It is probable that Paul would have objected to making this appeal to the other apostles, on the ground of its apparent inconsistency with his own claims to inspired authority, had not the proposition been sustained by an express revelation of the divine will. In the second chapter of Galatians, where Mr. Howson very clearly proves that Paul has reference to this journey, he says: "I went up by revelation and communicated to them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles." It was the divine purpose to settle the question, not for the Church in Antioch alone, but for all the world and for all time.

McGarvey: Act 15:3

3. Their journey to Jerusalem, which was accomplished by land, lay through two sections of country which had already been evangelized to a considerable extent. (3) " Being sent forward by the Church, they passed through Phenicia and Samaria, relating the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy to all the brethren. " The Churches in Samaria did not, of course, sympathize with the Jewish prejudices, and although in Phenicia there were doubtless many Jews, yet the Gentile element sufficiently predominated to enable the brethren there, like the Samaritans, to rejoice that the gospel was spreading into the heathen world.

McGarvey: Act 15:4

4. After a pleasant journey among rejoicing Churches, they reached Jerusalem. (4) " And when they arrived in Jerusalem, they were received by the Church, and by the apostles and elders, and they declared all that God had done with them. " They proceeded, in Jerusalem, as they had upon their return to Antioch, to give a history of their missionary tour. This was done in the presence of the Church, the apostles also being present.

McGarvey: Act 15:5

5. The Judaizers did not hesitate to declare fully their own position. (5) " But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed, rose up, saying, It was necessary to circumcise them and to command them to keep the law of Moses. " This party is here identified as converts from the old sect of the Pharisees. We have had no account hitherto of any large accessions to the Church from this party; but this incidental remark shows that some of these obstinate opposers of the truth had yielded, and were now occupying positions of influence in the congregation. Paul now once more meets some of his companions in the persecution of the disciples, not to harmonize with them, nor to dispute with them in the synagogues concerning the claims of Christ; but to contend, within the Church itself, against that same disposition to perpetuate the law which had made them formerly fight against the gospel. He had a bad opinion of some of them, which must have been well-founded, or he would not have given the public utterance to it which he did at a subsequent period. He styles them, in the Epistle to the Galatians, "False brethren, unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage." Having witnessed a rapid increase of the congregations under the pressure of the persecutions and disputations to which they had formerly resorted, these wily enemies of the truth determined at length to corrupt and destroy, under the guise of friendship, a cause whose progress they could not impede by open enmity. They well knew, what some of the brethren had failed to discover, that the doctrine of Christ would be rendered powerless if it could only be hampered by bondage to the law. Even to this day the mass of religious teachers have failed to learn this lesson, though the experience of ages has demonstrated its truth. The essential issue between Paul and the Pharisees had reference to the perpetuation of the law of Moses in the Church of Christ, and the same issue has been in debate, under various aspects, from that day to this. Paul defeated the attempt of these Judaizers to fasten circumcision on the Church; but subsequent Judaizers imposed infant immersion, and finally, infant sprinkling as a substitute. What the early Pharisees failed to accomplish in the face of apostolic opposition, the later Pharisees did accomplish under a thin disguise. The unsuccessful attempt of those Pharisees to "spy out the liberty which the disciples had in Christ Jesus, and bring them into bondage" under the law, has been successfully accomplished by these, in teaching men that the Church of Christ originated in Abraham's family, and that the Jewish tribes and the Christian congregations constitute but one identical Church. The Roman apostasy perpetuates the pompous ritual and daily sacrifice of the old temple; religious zealots slaughter Canaanites in the form of modern heretics; professed Christians go to war under the old battle-cry of "The sword of the Lord and of Gideon;" the Latter-day Saints emulate the Turks in the multiplication of wives; and for all these corruptions authority is found in the laws and customs of ancient Israel. The intelligent reader of the New Testament knows scarcely which of these errors is most repugnant to the truth; but must, like Paul, struggle with untiring energy and ceaseless vigilance to uproot them all from the minds of men.

McGarvey: Act 15:6

6. After the Pharisees had stated their position, distinctly affirming that the Gentiles should be circumcised and keep the law, it seems that the assembly adjourned to meet up again at another hour. The next meeting is then announced in these words: (6) " Now the apostles and elders came together to consider this matter. " Neither this nor the former meeting was composed exclusively of the apostles and elders, for we have seen, from verse fifth Ac 15:5>, that the messengers were received by the Church, and we learn, from the twenty-second verse below Ac 15:22>, that at this second meeting the whole Church were present. There had been, however, previous to either of these, a private interview between Paul and the chief men of the Church, for the purpose of coming to some distinct understanding of the subject before it was laid before the multitude. This we learn from Paul himself, who says: "I communicated to them that gospel which I preached among the Gentiles, but privately to them who were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run in vain." This language implies that his course was approved by these brethren of reputation, who were, doubtless, the apostles and other inspired men. Their approval of his course shows that the objections afterward urged were preferred by another class of men. The public discussion was not for the purpose of bringing about an agreement among inspired men, for they really did not differ after the facts were stated by Paul and Barnabas. But it was an effort, on the part of the apostles, to bring the other brethren to the same conclusion in which they themselves had already united.

McGarvey: Act 15:7-11

7-11. Luke does not report all that was said, but only those speeches that were decisive, and that brought the controversy to a close. Merely alluding, therefore, to the first part of the discussion, he says: (7) " And when there had been much discussion, Peter arose and said to them, Brethren, you know that, a good while ago, God made choice among us that the Gentiles through my mouth should hear the word of the gospel and believe. (8) And God, who knows the heart, bore witness for them, giving to them the Holy Spirit even as he did to us. (9) He made no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. (10) Now, then, why do you put God to the proof, by putting a yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? (11) But we believe that we shall be saved through the favor of the Lord Jesus Christ, in the same manner as they. " The position of the Pharisees not only condemned the course of Paul and Barnabas, but also involved a censure of Peter, who was the first of all the apostles, as he here asserts, to preach the Word to Gentiles. When arraigned once before for his conduct in the case of Cornelius, he had vindicated his procedure by relating the miraculous evidences of God's will which had been his guide; and now, to accomplish the same end with these brethren, he adduces the most decisive of those miracles, the gift of the Holy Spirit to uncircumcised Gentiles. Having given to them the same gift as to the apostles on Pentecost, and having imposed upon them none of the purifying rites of the law, but simply purifying their hearts by faith, he assumes that God had made no difference between them and the Jewish brethren. Now, to attempt to impose the law upon them, in the face of these evidences of God's will to the contrary, would be putting God to the proof of his determination to maintain his own authority. It would, moreover, be imposing a yoke which the Jews themselves had never been able to bear successfully. This yoke is not circumcision, for there is no difficulty in submitting to that; but it was the law, under whose provisions no man could live without incurring its condemnation. His concluding statement, that " We believe that we shall be saved through the favor of the Lord Jesus, in the same manner as they," involves two important conclusions: First, That it is not through the merit of obedience to the law that we are to be saved, but through the favor of the Lord Jesus Christ. This favor is extended in the pardon of sins. Second, That the Gentiles are saved in the same manner as the Jews. By using the plural we believe, instead of I believe, he doubtless intended to express not only the conviction of his own mind, but that of the party with whom he acted, including the other apostles. It was a decision of the inspired teachers against the Pharisees.

McGarvey: Act 15:12

12. This brief statement of facts had so good an effect upon the multitude, that Barnabas and Paul determined to follow it by a rehearsal of similar facts in the history of their own labors among the Gentiles. (12) " Then all the multitude kept silence, and listened to Barnabas and Paul relating what signs and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles through them. " Their remarks on this occasion were not a repetition of what they had said in the former meeting, when they had set forth "all that God had done with them," but were confined to the "signs and wonders" by which God had indicated his approbation of their ministry. The reversal of the order in which Luke now habitually names these two brethren indicates that Barnabas, whose name is first, was the first speaker. This gave Paul the closing argument on those events.

McGarvey: Act 15:13-21

13-21. So far as recent indications of God's will were concerned, the argument was now complete and unanswerable; but the Jewish mind was prone to an underestimate of passing events, while they looked back with superior reverence to the law and the prophets. The Apostle James, knowing that they would reject all possible cotemporaneous evidences, if they appeared to conflict with the written word, determined to close up this avenue of escape from the argument already presented by sustaining it with the authority of the prophets. (13) " And, after they were silent, James answered, saying, Brethren, hear me. (14) Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name, (15) and to this agree the words of the prophets, as it is written, (16) After this I will return and will rebuild the tabernacle of David which has fallen down. I will rebuild its ruins, and set it upright, (17) that the residue of men may seek after the Lord, even all the Gentiles upon whom my name is called, says the Lord, who does all these things. (18) Known to God from eternity are all his works. (19) Therefore, my judgment is, not to trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God; (20) but to write to them that they abstain from the pollutions of idols. and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. (21) For Moses, for generations past, has in every city those who preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath. " In this speech James shows that God, who knows from eternity what his own works would be, had foretold, through the prophet, the work which he was then performing through the labors of Peter, Barnabas, and Paul. He had said that he would rebuild the tabernacle of David, in order that the residue of men, who had not known the Lord before, "even all the Gentiles, upon whom his name is called," should seek after the Lord; and now, he had, through these apostles, selected from among the Gentiles "a people for his name." The prophesy clearly covered all the ground claimed for it, and made the argument complete.

There was room for no other conclusion than the one which James deduced, that they should impose on the Gentiles, so far as the class of restrictions under consideration were concerned, only those necessary things which were necessary independent of the Mosaic law. Idolatry, with all the pollutions connected with it, was known to be sinful before the law of Moses was given; and so was fornication. The eating of blood, and, by implication, of strangled animals, whose blood was still in them, was forbidden to the whole world in the family of Noah. In the restrictions here proposed by James, therefore, there is not the slightest extension of the law of Moses, but a mere enforcement upon the Gentiles of rules of conduct which had ever been binding, and were to be perpetual. They are as binding to-day as they were then. To deny this would be to despise the combined authority of all the apostles, when enjoining upon the Gentile world, of which we form a part, restrictions which they pronounce necessary. One would be surprised that it was thought necessary to mention to Gentiles, who had turned to the Lord, the sinfulness of fornication, did we not know that among heathen nations of antiquity it was deemed innocent, and even sometimes virtuous.

The controversy now pending, in reference to the identity of the Jewish Church with the Church of Christ, renders it necessary that we should here pay some special attention to one remark made by James in this speech. He applies the prophesy concerning the rebuilding of the "tabernacle of David" to the reception of the Gentiles into the Church, and it is hence argued that this prophesy contemplated a reconstruction and extension of the dilapidated Jewish Church, and not the construction of a new one. The whole argument turns upon the meaning of the expression "tabernacle of David." If the metaphorical word tabernacle here means the Jewish Church, the argument would have force. But the Mosaic institution never sustained such a relation to David that it could, with propriety, be styled the " tabernacle of David. " If such had been the reference, the expression would undoubtedly have been, the tabernacle of Moses, which would have been unambiguous. But David was a king, and had a promise from God, that his " throne should be established forever;" that there should not fail him a man on the throne of Israel. This promise God confirmed with an oath, saying, "I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn to David my servant, Thy seed will I establish forever, and build up thy throne to all generations." According to the apparent meaning of this promise, it had long since failed; for it had been many generations since a descendant of David had occupied his throne. It was during this period, in which the royal house of David was in ruins, that Amos uttered the prophesy, "I will return, and build again the tabernacle of David which is fallen down; I will build again the ruins thereof, and set it upright." The term tabernacle, therefore, must be put for the family who dwell in the tabernacle, and the reconstruction of it the re-establishment of the royal dignity which the family had lost. Hence, when the birth of Jesus was announced to Mary, the angel said: "The Lord shall give to him the throne of his father David, and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there shall be no end." Thus, the promise, when properly understood, is seen to refer neither to a continuous line of Jewish kings, descended from David, nor to a reconstruction of the Jewish Church, but to the perpetual reign of Jesus, the "seed of David according to the flesh." When, therefore, Jesus sat down upon his throne in heaven, the tabernacle of David was rebuilt, and now, by the labors of Peter, Barnabas, and Paul, the remainder of the prophesy of Amos was being fulfilled, by the extension of his kingdom among the Gentiles.

The closing paragraph of this speech appears, at first glance, to have no immediate connection with the preceding argument. But it was, doubtless, designed to anticipate an objection. The Pharisees might object, If you thus ignore the statue of Moses, his writings will fall into contempt, or be neglected by the people. No danger of this, says the speaker, for Moses is preached in every city, and read in the synagogues every Sabbath, and has been for generations past.

Commentary -- Other

Evidence: Act 15:18

God doesn’t think as we do. He is omniscient—He knows all things. That means He never has an idea. If a concept suddenly came to Him, then He would be ignorant of the thought before it formed in His mind. However, God doesn’t have thoughts " come to His mind." Because He is omniscient, His mind has all thoughts resident.

Introduction / Outline

Robertson: Acts (Book Introduction)

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES

By Way of Introduction

But for the Acts we should know nothing of the early apostolic period save what is told in the Epistles. There are various apocryphal " Acts," but they are without historical worth. Hence the importance of this book.

Luke the Author

It ought to be possible to assume this as a fact since the work of Ramsay and Harnack on various phases of the problems concerning the Acts. Harnack, in particular, has covered the ground with his accustomed thoroughness and care in his two volumes ( The Acts of the Apostles , English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1909; The Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels , English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1911). Ramsay’s view may be found in Chapter I of St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen , Chapter XII of Pauline and Other Studies . A good summary of the matter appears in Part V of The Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Acts by Dr. D. A. Hayes, in Robertson’s Luke the Historian in the Light of Research , and in the introduction to the various commentaries by Knowling, Rackham, Furneaux, Rendall, Hackett, Meyer-Wendt, Zahn, Blass, Campbell-Morgan, Stokes. In Part I of The Acts of the Apostles , Vol. II of The Beginnings of Christianity , edited by Foakes-Jackson and Kirsopp Lake both sides are ably presented: The Case for the Tradition by C. W. Emmet, The Case against the Tradition by H. Windisch. The Internal Evidence of Acts is discussed by the Editors, Foakes-Jackson and Lake, with an adverse conclusion against Luke. Henry J. Cadbury surveys The Tradition (the external evidence) and draws a negative conclusion likewise on the ground that the early writers who ascribe Acts to Luke were not critical scholars. A similar position is taken by Cadbury in his more recent volume, The Making of Luke--Acts (1927). But all the same the traditional view that Luke is the author of the Acts holds the field with those who are not prejudiced against it. The view of Baur that Acts is a Tendenz writing for the purpose of healing the breach between Peter and Paul and showing that the two factions came together had great influence for a while. In fact both Ramsay and Harnack at first held it. Ramsay broke away first and he was followed by Harnack. Both were influenced to change their views by the accumulation of evidence to the effect that the author of both the Gospel and Acts is Luke the Physician and Friend of Paul. Part of this evidence has already been given in the Introduction to the Gospel according to Luke.

The Author of the Gospel Also

The author of the Acts expressly states that he wrote " the first treatise ( ton prōton logon ) concerning all things, O Theophilus, that Jesus began both to do and to teach until which day he gave command through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen and was received up" (Act_1:1.). There is no room for dispute that the reference is directly to the Gospel according to Luke as we have it now. Like the Gospel the book is dedicated to Theophilus. And, what is even more important, the same style appears in both Gospel and Acts. This fact Harnack has shown with great pains and conclusiveness. There is the same interest in medical matters and even Cadbury, who denies by implication the Lukan authorship, admits identity of authorship for both books.

The Unity of the Acts

There are some scholars who are willing to admit the Lukan authorship of the " we" sections when the author uses " we" and " us" as in chapter 16:10-40; 20:6-28:31. It has been argued that Luke wrote a travel-document or diary for these sections, but that this material was used by the editor or redactor of the whole book. But, unfortunately for that view, the very same style appears in the Acts as a whole and in the Gospel also as Harnack has proven. The man who said " we" and " us" in the " we" sections wrote " I" in Act_1:1 and refers to the Gospel as his work. The effort to disprove the unity of the Acts has failed. It stands as the work of the same author as a whole and the same author who wrote the Gospel.

Sources of the Acts

Beyond a doubt Luke employed a variety of sources for this great history as he did for the Gospel (Luk_1:1-4). In fact, Cadbury argues that this Prologue was meant to apply to the Acts also as Volume II whether he intended to write a third volume or not. Certainly we are entitled to say that Luke used the same historical method for Acts. Some of these sources are easy to see. Luke had his own personal experience for the " we" sections. Then he had the benefit of Paul’s own notes or suggestions for all that portion where Paul figures from chapter 8 to chapter 28, since Luke was apparently with Paul in Rome when he finished the Book. This would include Paul’s sermons and addresses which Luke gives unless one wishes to say, as some do, that Luke followed the style of Thucydides and composed the kind of addresses that he thought Paul would make. I see no evidence of that for each address differs from the others and suits precisely the occasion when it was delivered. The ancients frequently employed shorthand and Paul may have preserved notes of his addresses. Prof. C. C. Torrey, of Yale University, argues in his Composition and Date of Acts (1916) that Luke used an Aramaic document for the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. There is an Aramaic element in certain portions of these chapters, but nothing like so pronounced as in Luke 1 and 2 after Luk_1:1-4. It cannot be said that Torrey has made out his case for such a single document. Luke may have had several such documents besides access to others familiar with the early days of the work in Jerusalem. There was Simon Peter whom Paul visited for two weeks in Jerusalem (Gal_1:18) besides other points of contact with him in Jerusalem and Antioch (Acts 15 and Galatians 2). There was also Barnabas who was early Paul’s friend (Act_9:27) and who knew the beginnings as few did (Act_4:36.). Besides many others it is to be observed that Paul with Luke made a special visit to Caesarea where he spent a week with the gifted Philip and his daughters with the gift of prophecy (Act_21:8.). But with all the inevitable variety of sources for the information needed to cover the wide field of the Book of Acts the same mind has manifestly worked through it and it is the same style all through that appears in the " we" sections where the writer is confessedly a companion of Paul. No other companion of Paul carries this claim for the authorship and no other was a physician and no author has the external evidence from early writers.

The Date

There are three views about the date of the Acts. Baur and his Tubingen School held the second century to be the date of this late pamphlet as they termed it after the fashion of the Clementine Homilies. But that view is now practically abandoned save by the few who still strangely oppose the Lukan authorship. Probably the majority of those who accept the Lukan authorship place it in the latter part of the first century for two reasons. One is that the Gospel according to Luke is dated by them after the destruction of Jerusalem because of the prophecy by Jesus of the encompassing of the city by armies. Predictive prophecy that would be and so it is considered a prophecy post eventum . The other reason is the alleged use of the Antiquities of Josephus by Luke. Josephus finished this work a.d. 93 so that, if Luke did use it, he must have written the Acts after that date. Usually this argument is made to show that Luke could not have written it at all, but some hold that he may have lived to an age that would allow it. But it cannot be assumed that Luke used Josephus because of his mention of Theudas and Judas the Galilean. They differ so widely (Act_5:36. and Josephus, Ant . XX. v, 1, 2) that Von Dobschutz ( Dictionary of the Apostolic Church , art. Josephus) argues that the two accounts are entirely independent of each other. So Luke (Luk_13:1.) alludes to a Galilean revolt not mentioned by Josephus and Josephus records three revolts under Pilate not referred to by Luke. A comparison of the accounts of the death of Agrippa I in Act_12:20-23 and Ant . XIX. viii, 2 redounds to the credit of Luke. The Josephus phase of the argument may be brushed to one side. The third view, held by Harnack and adopted here, is that Luke wrote the Acts while with Paul in Rome and finished the book before Paul’s release, that is by a.d. 63. This is the obvious and natural way to take the language of Luke at the close of Acts. Events had gone no farther and so he ends the narrative right there. It is argued against this that Luke contemplated a third volume and for this reason closed with the arrival of Paul in Rome. But the use of prōton (first) in Act_1:1 is a common Koiné[28928]š idiom and does not imply three volumes any more than first and second stories with us means that the house has three. Of course this date for the Acts puts the date of the Gospel further back either in Caesarea (57 to 59) or in Rome (60 to 62). And that means that Mark’s Gospel is still earlier since Luke used it for his Gospel and the Logia (Q) earlier still. But all these dates are probable in the light of all the known facts.

The Historical Value

It was once a fad with a certain school of critics to decry Luke in the Acts as wholly untrustworthy, not above the legendary stage. But the spade has done well by Luke for inscriptions and papyri have brought remarkable confirmation for scores of points where Luke once stood all alone and was discounted because he stood alone. These will be duly noted in the proper places as they occur. Ramsay has done most in this restoration of the rank of Luke as a credible historian, as shown in particular in his St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen and in The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament . In every instance where discoveries have been made they have confirmed the testimony of Luke as concerning politarchs in Thessalonica, proconsul in Cyprus, etc. The result is that the balance of evidence is now in favour of Luke even when he still stands alone or seems to be opposed by Josephus. Luke, as it stands today, is a more credible historian than Josephus. Ramsay dares to call Luke, all things considered, the greatest of all historians, even above Thucydides. An interesting book on this phase of the subject is Chase’s The Credibility of the Acts of the Apostles (1902).

The Purpose of the Acts

It is not easy to say in a word precisely the object of Luke in writing this book. It is not the Acts of all the apostles. Outside of Peter and John little is told of any of them after chapter 3. And all the acts of Peter and John are not given for Peter disappears from the narrative after chapter 15, though he has been the central figure through chapter 11. Paul is not one of the twelve apostles, but Luke follows Paul’s career mainly after chapter 8. Stephen and Barnabas come in also. Still ( St. Paul on Trial , 1923) argues that Luke meant the book as an apology to be used in Paul’s trial at Rome or at any rate to put Paul in the right light with the Jews in Rome. Hence the full account of Paul’s series of defences in Jerusalem, Caesarea, Rome. There may be an element of truth in this idea, but it clearly does not cover the whole purpose of Luke. Others hold that Luke had a dramatic plan to get Paul to Rome as the climax of his campaign to win the Roman Empire to Christ. The book is not a history of all early Christianity. Peter and Paul dominate the atmosphere of the book with Paul as the great hero of Luke. But one can easily see that the work is done with consummate skill. The author is a man of culture, of Christian grace, of literary power. The book pulses with life today.

The Text of the Acts

A special problem arises concerning the text of Acts inasmuch as the Codex Bezae (D) with some other Western support presents a great many additions to the Neutral-Alexandrian text of Aleph A B C. Blass has even proposed the idea that Luke himself issued two editions of the book, an attractive hypothesis that is not generally accepted. J. M. Wilson has published The Acts of the Apostles from Codex Bezae . The whole subject is elaborately treated by J. H. Ropes in Vol. III, The Text of Acts in Part I of The Beginnings of Christianity . Besides thorough discussion of all the problems of text involved Ropes gives the text of the Vatican Codex (B) on the left page and that of Codex Bezae (D) on the right, making comparison easy. Blass’s ideas appear in his Acta Apostolorum .

JFB: Acts (Book Introduction)

THIS book is to the Gospels what the fruit is to the tree that bears it. In the Gospels we see the corn of wheat falling into the ground and dying: in the Acts we see it bringing forth much fruit (Joh 12:24). There we see Christ purchasing the Church with His own blood: here we see the Church, so purchased, rising into actual existence; first among the Jews of Palestine, and next among the surrounding Gentiles, until it gains a footing in the great capital of the ancient world--sweeping majestically from Jerusalem to Rome. Nor is this book of less value as an Introduction to the Epistles which follow it, than as a Sequel to the Gospels which precede it. For without this history the Epistles of the New Testament--presupposing, as they do, the historical circumstances of the parties addressed, and deriving from these so much of their freshness, point, and force--would in no respect be what they now are, and would in a number of places be scarcely intelligible.

The genuineness, authenticity, and canonical authority of this book were never called in question within the ancient Church. It stands immediately after the Gospels, in the catalogues of the Homologoumena, or universally acknowledged books of the New Testament (see Introduction to our larger Commentary, Vol. V, pp. iv, v). It was rejected, indeed, by certain heretical sects in the second and third centuries--by the Ebionites, the Severians (see EUSEBIUS, Ecclesiastical History, 4.29), the Marcionites, and the Manicheans: but the totally uncritical character of their objections (see Introduction above referred to, pp. xiii, xiv) not only deprives them of all weight, but indirectly shows on what solid grounds the Christian Church had all along proceeded in recognizing this book.

In our day, however, its authenticity has, like that of all the leading books of the New Testament, been made the subject of keen and protracted controversy. DE WETTE, while admitting Luke to be the author of the entire work, pronounces the earlier portion of it to have been drawn up from unreliable sources (New-Testament Introduction, 2a, 2C). But the Tubingen school, with BAUR at their head, have gone much farther. As their fantastic theory of the post-Joannean date of the Gospels could not pretend even to a hearing so long as the authenticity of the Acts of the Apostles remained unshaken, they contend that the earlier portion of this work can be shown to be unworthy of credit, while the latter portion is in flat contradiction to the Epistle to the Galatians--which this school regard as unassailable--and bears internal evidence of being a designed distortion of facts for the purpose of setting up the catholic form which Paul gave to Christianity in opposition to the narrow Judaic but original form of it which Peter preached, and which after the death of the apostles was held exclusively by the sect of the Ebionites. It is painful to think that anyone should have spent so many years, and, aided by learned and acute disciples in different parts of the argument, should have expended so much learning, research, and ingenuity in attempting to build up a hypothesis regarding the origination of the leading books of the New Testament which outrages all the principles of sober criticism and legitimate evidence. As a school, this party at length broke up: its head, after living to find himself the sole defender of the theory as a whole, left this earthly scene complaining of desertion. While some of his associates have abandoned such heartless studies altogether for the more congenial pursuits of philosophy, others have modified their attacks on the historical truth of the New Testament records, retreating into positions into which it is not worth while to follow them, while others still have been gradually approximating to sound principles. The one compensation for all this mischief is the rich additions to the apologetical and critical literature of the books of the New Testament, and the earliest history of the Christian Church, which it has drawn from the pens of THIERSCH, EBRARD, and many others. Any allusions which it may be necessary for us to make to the assertions of this school will be made in connection with the passages to which they relate--in Acts, First Corinthians, and Galatians.

The manifest connection between this book and the third Gospel--of which it professes to be simply the continuation by the same author--and the striking similarity which marks the style of both productions, leave no room to doubt that the early Church was right in ascribing it with one consent to Luke. The difficulty which some fastidious critics have made about the sources of the earlier portion of the history has no solid ground. That the historian himself was an eye-witness of the earliest scenes--as HUG concludes from the circumstantiality of the narrative--is altogether improbable: but there were hundreds of eye-witnesses of some of the scenes, and enough of all the rest, to give to the historian, partly by oral, partly by written testimony, all the details which he has embodied so graphically in his history; and it will appear, we trust, from the commentary, that De Wette's complaints of confusion, contradiction, and error in this portion are without foundation. The same critic, and one or two others, would ascribe to Timothy those later portions of the book in which the historian speaks in the first person plural--"we"; supposing him to have taken notes of all that passed under his own eye, which Luke embodied in his history just as they stood. It is impossible here to refute this gratuitous hypothesis in detail; but the reader will find it done by EBRARD (The Gospel History, sect. 110, Clark's translation; sect. 127 of the original work, Wissenschaftliche Kritik der Evangelische Geschichte, 1850), and by DAVIDSON (Introduction to New Testament, Vol. II, pp. 9-21).

The undesigned coincidences between this History and the Apostolic Epistles have been brought out and handled, as an argument for the truth of the facts thus attested, with unrivalled felicity by PALEY in his Horæ Paulinæ, to which Mr. BIRKS has made a number of ingenious additions in his Horæ Apostolicæ. Exception has been taken to some of these by JOWETT (St. Paul's Epistles, Vol. I, pp. 108 ff.), not without a measure of reason in certain cases--for our day, at least--though even he admits that in this line of evidence the work of PALEY, taken as a whole, is unassailable.

Much has been written about the object of this history. Certainly "the Acts of the Apostles" are but very partially recorded. But for this title the historian is not responsible. Between the two extremes--of supposing that the work has no plan at all, and that it is constructed on an elaborate and complex plan, we shall probably be as near the truth as is necessary if we take the design to be to record the diffusion of Christianity and the rise of the Christian Church, first among the Jews of Palestine, the seat of the ancient Faith, and next among the surrounding Gentiles, with Antioch for its headquarters, until, finally, it is seen waving over imperial Rome, foretokening its universal triumph. In this view of it, there is no difficulty in accounting for the almost exclusive place which it gives to the labors of Peter in the first instance, and the all but entire disappearance from the history both of him and of the rest of the Twelve after the great apostle of the Gentiles came upon the stage--like the lesser lights on the rise of the great luminary.

JFB: Acts (Outline)

• INTRODUCTION--LAST DAYS OF OUR LORD UPON EARTH--HIS ASCENSION. (Act 1:1-11)
• RETURN OF THE ELEVEN TO JERUSALEM--PROCEEDINGS IN THE UPPER ROOM TILL PENTECOST. (Act 1:12-26)
• DESCENT OF THE SPIRIT--THE DISCIPLES SPEAK WITH TONGUES--AMAZEMENT OF THE MULTITUDE. (Act 2:1-13)
• PETER FOR THE FIRST TIME, PUBLICLY PREACHES CHRIST. (Acts 2:14-36)
• BEAUTIFUL BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. (Act 2:41-47)
• PETER AND JOHN DISMISSED FROM THE SAMHEDRIM, REPORT THE PROCEEDINGS TO THE ASSEMBLED DISCIPLES--THEY ENGAGE IN PRAYER--THE ASTONISHING ANSWER AND RESULTS. (Act 4:23-37)
• ANANIAS AND SAPPHIRA. (Act 5:1-11)
• THE PROGRESS OF THE NEW CAUSE LEADS TO THE ARREST OF THE APOSTLES--THEY ARE MIRACULOUSLY DELIVERED FROM PRISON, RESUME THEIR TEACHING, BUT ALLOW THEMSELVES TO BE CONDUCTED BEFORE THE SAMHEDRIM. (Act 5:12-26)
• SECOND APPEARANCE AND TESTIMONY BEFORE THE SAMHEDRIM--ITS RAGE CALMED BY GAMALIEL--BEING DISMISSED, THEY DEPART REJOICING, AND CONTINUE THEIR PREACHING. (Acts 5:27-42)
• FIRST ELECTION OF DEACONS. (Act 6:1-7)
• STEPHEN ARRAIGNED BEFORE THE SAMHEDRIM. (Act 6:8-15)
• DEFENSE AND MARTYRDOM OF STEPHEN. (Acts 7:1-60)
• PERSECUTION CONTINUED, IN WHICH SAUL TAKES A PROMINENT PART--HOW OVERRULED FOR GOOD. (Act 8:1-4)
• SUCCESS OF PHILIP'S PREACHING IN SAMARIA--CASE OF SIMON MAGUS. (Acts 8:5-25)
• THE ETHIOPIAN EUNUCH. (Act 8:26-40)
• CONVERSION OF SAUL, AND BEGINNINGS OF HIS MINISTRY. (Acts 9:1-25)
• SAUL'S FIRST VISIT TO JERUSALEM AFTER HIS CONVERSION. (Act 9:26-31)
• FLOURISHING STATE OF THE CHURCH IN PALESTINE AT THIS TIME. (Act 9:31)
• PETER HEALS ENEAS AT LYDDA AND RAISES TABITHA TO LIFE AT JOPPA. (Act 9:32-43)
• ACCESSION AND BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS AND HIS PARTY; OR, THE FIRST-FRUITS OF THE GENTILES. (Acts 10:1-48)
• THE GOSPEL BEING PREACHED TO GENTILES AT ANTIOCH ALSO BARNABAS IS SENT THITHER FROM JERUSALEM, WHO HAILS THEIR ACCESSION AND LABORS AMONG THEM. (Act 11:19-24)
• BARNABAS, FINDING THE WORK IN ANTIOCH TOO MUCH FOR HIM, GOES TO TARSUS FOR SAUL--THEY LABOR THERE TOGETHER FOR A WHOLE YEAR WITH MUCH SUCCESS, AND ANTIOCH BECOMES THE HONORED BIRTHPLACE OF THE TERM CHRISTIAN. (Act 11:25-26)
• BY OCCASION OF A FAMINE BARNABAS AND SAUL RETURN TO JERUSALEM WITH A CONTRIBUTION FOR THE RELIEF OF THEIR SUFFERING BRETHREN. (Act 11:27-30)
• PERSECUTION OF THE CHURCH BY HEROD AGRIPPA I--MARTYRDOM OF JAMES AND MIRACULOUS DELIVERANCE OF PETER. (Acts 12:1-19)
• HEROD'S MISERABLE END--GROWING SUCCESS OF THE GOSPEL--BARNABAS AND SAUL RETURN TO ANTIOCH. (Act 12:20-25)
• BARNABAS AND SAUL, DIVINELY CALLED TO LABOR AMONG THE GENTILES, ARE SET APART AND SENT FORTH BY THE CHURCH AT ANTIOCH. (Act 13:1-3)
• ARRIVING IN CYPRUS THEY PREACH IN THE SYNAGOGUES OF SALAMIS--AT PAPHOS, ELYMAS IS STRUCK BLIND, AND THE GOVERNOR OF THE ISLAND IS CONVERTED. (Act 13:4-12)
• AT PERGA JOHN MARK FORSAKES THEM--AT ANTIOCH IN PISIDIA, PAUL PREACHES WITH GLORIOUS EFFECT--THE JEWS, ENRAGED, EXPEL THEM OUT OF THEM COASTS. (Acts 13:13-52)
• MEETING WITH SIMILAR SUCCESS AND SIMILAR OPPOSITION AT ICONIUM, PAUL AND BARNABAS FLEE FOR THEIR LIVES TO LYSTRA AND DERBE, AND PREACH THERE. (Act 14:1-7)
• AT LYSTRA PAUL HEALING A CRIPPLE, THE PEOPLE ARE SCARCE RESTRAINED FROM SACRIFICING TO THEM AS GODS, BUT AFTERWARDS, THEIR MINDS BEING POISONED, THEY STONE PAUL, LEAVING HIM FOR DEAD--WITHDRAWING TO DERBE, THEY PREACH AND TEACH THERE. (Act 14:8-21)
• COUNCIL AT JERUSALEM TO DECIDE ON THE NECESSITY OF CIRCUMCISION FOR THE GENTILE CONVERTS. (Acts 15:1-35)
• DISSENSION BETWEEN PAUL AND BARNABAS--THEY PART COMPANY TO PROSECUTE SEPARATE MISSIONARY TOURS. (Act 15:36-46)
• THEY BREAK NEW GROUND IN PHRYGIA AND GALATIA--THEIR COURSE IN THAT DIRECTION BEING MYSTERIOUSLY HEDGED UP, THEY TRAVEL WESTWARD TO TROAS, WHERE THEY ARE DIVINELY DIRECTED TO MACEDONIA--THE HISTORIAN HIMSELF HERE JOINING THE MISSIONARY PARTY, THEY EMBARK FOR NEAPOLIS, AND REACH PHILIPPI. (Act 16:6-12)
• AT THESSALONICA THE SUCCESS OF PAUL'S PREACHING ENDANGERING HIS LIFE, HE IS DESPATCHED BY NIGHT TO BEREA, WHERE HIS MESSAGE MEETS WITH ENLIGHTENED ACCEPTANCE--A HOSTILE MOVEMENT FROM THESSALONICA OCCASIONS HIS SUDDEN DEPARTURE FROM BEREA--HE ARRIVES AT ATHENS. (Act 17:1-15)
• PAUL AT ATHENS. (Acts 17:16-34)
• PAUL'S ARRIVAL AND LABORS AT CORINTH, WHERE HE IS REJOINED BY SILAS AND TIMOTHY, AND, UNDER DIVINE ENCOURAGEMENT, MAKES A LONG STAY--AT LENGTH, RETRACING HIS STEPS, BY EPHESUS, CÆSAREA, AND JERUSALEM, HE RETURNS FOR THE LAST TIME TO ANTIOCH, THUS COMPLETING HIS SECOND MISSIONARY JOURNEY. (Acts 18:1-22)
• PAUL'S THIRD AND LAST MISSIONARY JOURNEY--HE VISITS THE CHURCHES OF GALATIA AND PHRYGIA. (Acts 18:23-21:16)
• EPISODE CONCERNING APOLLOS AT EPHESUS AND IN ACHAIA. (Act 18:24-28)
• SIGNAL SUCCESS OF PAUL AT EPHESUS. (Acts 19:1-41)
• PAUL FULFILS HIS PURPOSE OF PROCEEDING AGAIN TO MACEDONIA AND GREECE--RETURNING THENCE, ON HIS ROUTE FOR JERUSALEM, HE REVISITS PHILIPPI AND TROAS--HIS MINISTRATIONS AT TROAS. (Act 20:1-12)
• CONTINUING HIS ROUTE TO JERUSALEM HE REACHES MILETUS, WHENCE HE SENDS FOR THE ELDERS OF EPHESUS--HIS FAREWELL ADDRESS TO THEM. (Acts 20:13-38)
• SAILING FROM EPHESUS, THEY LAND AT TYRE, AND THENCE SAILING TO PTOLEMAIS, THEY PROCEED BY LAND TO CÆSAREA AND JERUSALEM. (Acts 21:1-16)
• PAUL REPORTS THE EVENTS OF HIS THIRD MISSIONARY JOURNEY--IN THE TEMPLE, PURIFYING HIMSELF FROM A JEWISH VOW, HE IS SEIZED BY A MOB AND BEATEN TO THE DANGER OF HIS LIFE--THE UPROAR BECOMING UNIVERSAL, THE ROMAN COMMANDANT HAS HIM BROUGHT IN CHAINS TO THE FORTRESS, FROM THE STAIRS OF WHICH HE IS PERMITTED TO ADDRESS THE PEOPLE. (Acts 21:17-40)
• PAUL'S DEFENSE FROM THE STAIRS OF THE FORTRESS--THE RAGE OF THE AUDIENCE BURSTING FORTH, THE COMMANDANT HAS HIM BROUGHT INTO THE FORT TO BE EXAMINED BY SCOURGING, BUT LEARNING THAT HE IS A ROMAN, HE ORDERS HIS RELEASE AND COMMANDS THE SAMHEDRIM TO TRY HIM. (Acts 22:1-30)
• PAUL'S DEFENSE BEFORE THE SAMHEDRIM DIVIDES THE RIVAL FACTIONS, FROM WHOSE VIOLENCE THE COMMANDANT HAS THE APOSTLE REMOVED INTO THE FORTRESS. (Act 23:1-10)
• IN THE FORTRESS PAUL IS CHEERED BY A NIGHT VISION--AN INFAMOUS CONSPIRACY TO ASSASSINATE HIM IS PROVIDENTIALLY DEFEATED, AND HE IS DESPATCHED BY NIGHT WITH A LETTER FROM THE COMMANDANT TO FELIX AT CÆSAREA, BY WHOM ARRANGEMENTS ARE MADE FOR A HEARING OF HIS CAUSE. (Acts 23:11-35)
• PAUL, ACCUSED BY A PROFESSIONAL PLEADER BEFORE FELIX, MAKES HIS DEFENSE, AND IS REMANDED FOR A FURTHER HEARING. AT A PRIVATE INTERVIEW FELIX TREMBLES UNDER PAUL'S PREACHING, BUT KEEPS HIM PRISONER FOR TWO YEARS, WHEN HE WAS SUCCEEDED BY FESTUS. (Acts 24:1-27)
• FESTUS, COMING TO JERUSALEM, DECLINES TO HAVE PAUL BROUGHT THITHER FOR JUDGMENT, BUT GIVES THE PARTIES A HEARING ON HIS RETURN TO CÆSAREA--ON FESTUS ASKING THE APOSTLE IF HE WOULD GO TO JERUSALEM FOR ANOTHER HEARING BEFORE HIM, HE IS CONSTRAINED IN JUSTICE TO HIS CAUSE TO APPEAL TO THE EMPEROR. (Act 25:1-12)
• HEROD AGRIPPA II ON A VISIT TO FESTUS, BEING CONSULTED BY HIM ON PAUL'S CASE, DESIRES TO HEAR THE APOSTLE, WHO IS ACCORDINGLY BROUGHT FORTH. (Act 25:13-27)
• PAUL'S DEFENSE OF HIMSELF BEFORE KING AGRIPPA, WHO PRONOUNCES HIM INNOCENT, BUT CONCLUDES THAT THE APPEAL TO CÆSAR MUST BE CARRIED OUT. (Acts 26:1-32)
• THE VOYAGE TO ITALY--THE SHIPWRECK AND SAFE LANDING AT MALTA. (Acts 27:1-44)
• THE WINTERING AT MALTA, AND NOTABLE OCCURRENCES THERE--PROSECUTION OF THE VOYAGE TO ITALY AS FAR AS PUTEOLI, AND LAND JOURNEY THENCE TO ROME--SUMMARY OF THE APOSTLE'S LABORS THERE FOR THE TWO FOLLOWING YEARS. (Acts 28:1-31)
• PAUL AND BARNABAS RETRACE THEIR STEPS, RETURN TO ANTIOCH IN SYRIA, AND THUS COMPLETE THEIR FIRST MISSIONARY JOURNEY. (Act 14:21-28)
• VISITATION OF THE CHURCHES FORMERLY ESTABLISHED, TIMOTHEUS HERE JOINING THE MISSIONARY PARTY. (Acts 15:41-16:5)
• AT PHILIPPI, LYDIA IS GAINED AND WITH HER HOUSEHOLD BAPTIZED--AN EVIL SPIRIT IS EXPELLED, PAUL AND SILAS ARE SCOURGED, IMPRISONED, AND MANACLED, BUT MIRACULOUSLY SET FREE, AND THE JAILER WITH ALL HIS HOUSEHOLD CONVERTED AND BAPTIZED. (Act 16:12-34)

TSK: Acts (Book Introduction)

The Acts of the Apostles is a most valuable portion of Divine revelation; and, independently of its universal reception in the Christian church, as an authentic and inspired production, it bears the most satisfactory internal evidence of its authenticity and truth. St. Luke’s long attendance upon St. Paul, and his having been an eyewitness of many of the facts which he has recorded, independently of his Divine inspiration, render him a most suitable and credible historian; and his medical knowledge, for he is allowed to have been a physician, enabled him both to form a proper judgment of the miraculous cures which were performed by St. Paul, and to give an authentic and circumstantial detail of them. The plainness and simplicity of the narrative are also strong circumstances in its favour. The history of the Acts is one of the most important parts of the Sacred History, for without it neither the Gospels nor Epistles could have been so clearly understood; but by the aid of it the whole scheme of the Christian revelation is set before us in a clear and easy view.

TSK: Acts 15 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Act 15:1, Great dissensions arise touching circumcision; Act 15:5, The apostles consult about it, Act 15:22. and send their determination by letters to the churches; Act 15:36, Paul and Barnabas, thinking to visit the brethren together, disagree, and travel different ways.

Poole: Acts 15 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 15

MHCC: Acts (Book Introduction)

This book unites the Gospels to the Epistles. It contains many particulars concerning the apostles Peter and Paul, and of the Christian church from the ascension of our Saviour to the arrival of St. Paul at Rome, a space of about thirty years. St. Luke was the writer of this book; he was present at many of the events he relates, and attended Paul to Rome. But the narrative does not afford a complete history of the church during the time to which it refers, nor even of St. Paul's life. The object of the book has been considered to be, 1. To relate in what manner the gifts of the Holy Spirit were communicated on the day of Pentecost, and the miracles performed by the apostles, to confirm the truth of Christianity, as showing that Christ's declarations were really fulfilled. 2. To prove the claim of the Gentiles to be admitted into the church of Christ. This is shown by much of the contents of the book. A large portion of the Acts is occupied by the discourses or sermons of various persons, the language and manner of which differ, and all of which will be found according to the persons by whom they were delivered, and the occasions on which they were spoken. It seems that most of these discourses are only the substance of what was actually delivered. They relate nevertheless fully to Jesus as the Christ, the anointed Messiah.

MHCC: Acts 15 (Chapter Introduction)

(Act 15:1-6) The dispute raised by Judaizing teachers.

(Act 15:7-21) The council at Jerusalem.

(Act 15:22-35) The letter from the council.

(Act 15:36-41) Paul and Barnabas separate.

Matthew Henry: Acts (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Acts of the Apostles

We have with an abundant satisfaction seen the foundation of our holy religion laid in the history of our blessed Saviour, its great author, which was related and left upon record by four several inspired writers, who all agree in this sacred truth, and the incontestable proofs of it, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. Upon this rock the Christian church is built. How it began to be built upon this rock comes next to be related in this book which we have now before us, and of this we have the testimony only of one witness; for the matters of fact concerning Christ were much more necessary to be fully related and attested than those concerning the apostles. Had Infinite Wisdom seen fit, we might have had as many books of the Acts of the Apostles as we have gospels, nay, as we might have had gospels: but, for fear of over-burdening the world (Joh 21:25), we have sufficient to answer the end, if we will but make use of it. The history of this book (which was always received as a part of the sacred canon) may be considered.

I. As looking back to the preceding gospels, giving light to them, and greatly assisting our faith in them. The promises there made we here find made good, particularly the great promises of the descent of the Holy Ghost, and his wonderful operations, both on the apostles (whom here in a few days we find quite other men than what the gospels left them; no longer weak-headed and weak-hearted, but able to say that which then they were not able to bear (Joh 16:12) as bold as lions to face those hardships at the thought of which they then trembled as lambs), and also with the apostles, making the word mighty to the pulling down of Satan's strong holds, which had been before comparatively preached in vain. The commission there granted to the apostles we here find executed, and the powers there lodged in them we here find exerted in miracles wrought on the bodies of people - miracles of mercy, restoring sick bodies to health and dead bodies to life - miracles of judgment, striking rebels blind or dead; and much greater miracles wrought on the minds of people, in conferring spiritual gifts upon them, both of understanding and utterance; and this in pursuance of Christ's purposes, and in performance of his promises, which we had in the gospels. The proofs of Christ's resurrection with which the gospels closed are here abundantly corroborated, not only by the constant and undaunted testimony of those that conversed with him after he arose (who had all deserted him, and one of them denied him, and would not otherwise have been rallied again but by his resurrection, but must have been irretrievably dispersed, and yet by that were enabled to own him more resolutely than ever, in defiance of bonds and deaths), but by the working of the Spirit with that testimony for the conversion of multitudes to the faith of Christ, according to the word of Christ, that his resurrection, the sign of the prophet Jonas, which was reserved to the last, should be the most convincing proof of his divine mission. Christ had told his disciples that they should be his witnesses, and this book brings them in witnessing for him, - that they should be fishers of men, and here we have them enclosing multitudes in the gospel-net, - that they should be the lights of the world, and here we have the world enlightened by them; but that day - spring from on high the first appearing of which we there discerned we here find shining more and more. The corn of wheat, which there fell to the ground, here springs up and bears much fruit; the grain of mustard-seed there is here a great tree; and the kingdom of heaven, which was then at hand, is here set up. Christ's predictions of the virulent persecutions which the preachers of the gospel should be afflicted with (though one could not have imagined that a doctrine so well worthy of all acceptation should meet with so much opposition) we here find abundantly fulfilled, and also the assurances he gave them of extraordinary supports and comforts under their sufferings. Thus, as the latter part of the history of the Old Testament verifies the promises made to the fathers of the former part (as appears by that famous and solemn acknowledgment of Solomon's, which runs like a receipt in full, 1Ki 8:56, There has not failed one word of all his good promises which he promised by the hand of Moses his servant ), so this latter part of the history of the New Testament exactly answers to the world of Christ in the former part of it: and thus they mutually confirm and illustrate each other.

II. As looking forward to the following epistles, which are an explication of the gospels, which open the mysteries of Christ's death and resurrection, the history of which we had in the gospels. This book introduces them and is a key to them, as the history of David is to David's psalms. We are members of the Christian church, that tabernacle of God among men, and it is our honour and privilege that we are so. Now this book gives us an account of the framing and rearing of that tabernacle. The four gospels showed us how the foundation of that house was laid; this shows us how the superstructure began to be raised, 1. Among the Jews and Samaritans, which we have an account of in the former part of this book. 2. Among the Gentiles, which we have an account of in the latter part: from thence, and downward to our own day, we find the Christian church subsisting in a visible profession of faith in Christ, as the Son of God and Saviour of the world, made by his baptized disciples, incorporated into religious societies, statedly meeting in religious assemblies, attending on the apostles' doctrine, and joining in prayers and the breaking of bread, under the guidance and presidency of men that gave themselves to prayer and the ministry of the word, and in a spiritual communion with all in every place that do likewise. Such a body as this thee is now in the world, which we belong to: and, to our great satisfaction and honour, in this book we find the rise and origin of it, vastly different from the Jewish church, and erected upon its ruins; but undeniably appearing to be of God, and not of man. With what confidence and comfort may we proceed in, and adhere to, our Christian profession, as far as we find it agrees with this pattern in the mount, to which we ought religiously to conform and confine ourselves!

Two things more are to be observed concerning this book: - (1.) The penman of it. It was written by Luke, who wrote the third of the four gospels, which bears his name; and who (as the learned Dr. Whitby shows) was, very probably, one of the seventy disciples, whose commission (Luk 10:1, etc.) was little inferior to that of the twelve apostles. This Luke was very much a companion of Paul in his services and sufferings. Only Luke is with me, 2Ti 4:11. We may know by his style in the latter part of this book when and where he was with him, for then he writes, We did so and so, as Act 16:10; Act 20:6; and thenceforward to the end of the book. He was with Paul in his dangerous voyage to Rome, when he was carried thither a prisoner, was with him when from his prison there he wrote his epistles to the Colossians and Philemon, in both which he is named. And it should seem that St. Luke wrote this history when he was with St. Paul at Rome, during his imprisonment there, and was assistant to him; for the history concludes with St. Paul's preaching there in his own hired house. (2.) The title of it: The Acts of the Apostles; of the holy Apostles, so the Greek copies generally read it, and so they are called, Rev 18:20, Rejoice over her you holy apostles. One copy inscribes it, The Acts of the Apostles by Luke the Evangelist. [1.] It is the history of the apostles; yet there is in it the history of Stephen, Barnabas, and some other apostolical men, who, though not of the twelve, were endued with the same Spirit, and employed in the same work; and, of those that were apostles, it is the history of Peter and Paul only that is here recorded (and Paul was now of the twelve), Peter the apostle of the circumcision, and Paul the apostles of the Gentiles, Gal 2:7. But this suffices as a specimen of what the rest did in other places, pursuant to their commission, for there were none of them idle; and as we are to think what is related in the gospels concerning Christ sufficient, because Infinite Wisdom thought so, the same we are to think here concerning what is related of the apostles and their labours; for what more is told us from tradition of the labours and sufferings of the apostles, and the churches they planted, is altogether doubtful and uncertain, and what I think we cannot build upon with any satisfaction at all. This is gold, silver, and precious stones, built upon the foundation: that is wood, hay, and stubble. [2.] It is called their acts, or doings; Gesta apostolorum; so some. Praxeis - their practices of the lessons their Master had taught them. The apostles where active men; and though the wonders they did were by the word, yet they are fitly called their acts; they spoke, or rather the Spirit by them spoke, and it was done. The history is filled with their sermons and their sufferings; yet so much did they labour in their preaching, and so voluntarily did they expose themselves to sufferings, and such were their achievements by both, that they may very well be called their acts.

Matthew Henry: Acts 15 (Chapter Introduction)

Hitherto we have, with a great deal of pleasure, attended the apostles in their glorious travels for the propagating of the gospel in foreign parts, have seen the bounds of the church enlarged by the accession both of Jews and Gentiles to it; and thanks be to that God who always caused them to triumph. We left them, in the close of the foregoing chapter, reposing themselves at Antioch, and edifying the church there with the rehearsal of their experiences, and it is a pity they should ever be otherwise employed; but in this chapter we find other work (not so pleasant) cut out for them. The Christians and ministers are engaged in controversy, and those that should have been now busied in enlarging the dominions of the church have as much as they can do to compose the divisions of it; when they should have been making war upon the devil's kingdom they have much ado to keep the peace in Christ's kingdom. Yet this occurrence and the record of it are of great use to the church, both for warning to us to expect such unhappy discords among Christians, and direction to us what method to take for accommodating them. Here is, I. A controversy raised at Antioch by the judaizing teachers, who would have the believing Gentiles brought under the yoke of circumcision and the ceremonial law (Act 15:1, Act 15:2). II. A consultation held with the church at Jerusalem about this matter, and the sending of delegates thither for that purpose, which occasioned the starting of the same question there (Act 15:3-5). III. An account of what passed in the synod that was convened upon this occasion (Act 15:6). What Peter said (Act 15:7-11). What Paul and Barnabas discoursed of (Act 15:12). And, lastly, what James proposed for the settling of this matter (Act 15:13-21). IV. The result of this debate, and the circular letter that was written to the Gentile converts, directing them how to govern themselves with respect to Jews (Act 15:22-29). V. The delivering of this determination to the church at Antioch, and the satisfaction it gave them (Act 15:30-35). VI. A second expedition designed by Paul and Barnabas to preach to the Gentiles, in which they quarrelled about their assistant, and separated upon it, one steering one course and the other another (Act 15:36-41).

Barclay: Acts (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES

A Precious Book

In one sense Acts is the most important book in the New Testament. It is the simple truth that if we did not possess Acts, we would have, apart from what we could deduce from the letters of Paul, no information whatever about the early Church.

There are two ways of writing history. There is the way which attempts to trace the course of events from week to week and from day to day; and there is the way which, as it were, opens a series of windows and gives us vivid glimpses of the great moments and personalities of any period. The second way is the way of Acts.

We usually speak of The Acts of the Apostles. But the book neither gives nor claims to give an exhaustive account of the acts of the apostles. Apart from Paul only three apostles are mentioned in it. In Act_12:2 we are told in one brief sentence that James, the brother of John, was executed by Herod. John appears in the narrative, but never speaks. It is only about Peter that the book gives any real information, and very soon, as a leading character, he passes from the scene. In the Greek there is no The before Acts; the correct title is Acts of Apostolic Men; and what Acts aims to do is to give us a series of typical exploits of the heroic figures of the early Church.

The Writer Of The Book

Although the book never says so, from the earliest times Luke has been held to be its writer. About Luke we really know very little; there are only three references to him in the New Testament--Col_4:14 , Phm_1:24 , 2Ti_4:11 . From these we can say two things for sure. First, Luke was a doctor; second, he was one of Paulmost valued helpers and most loyal friends, for he was a companion of his in his last imprisonment. We can deduce the fact that he was a Gentile. Col_4:11 concludes a list of mentions and greetings from those who are of the circumcision, that is, from Jews; Col_4:12 begins a new list and we naturally conclude that the new list is of Gentiles. So then we have the very interesting fact that Luke is the only Gentile author in the New Testament.

We could have guessed that Luke was a doctor because of his instinctive use of medical words. In Luk_4:35 , in telling of the man who had the spirit of an unclean devil, he says "when the devil had thrown him down" and uses the correct medical word for convulsions. In Luk_9:38 when he draws the picture of the man who asked Jesus, "I beg you to look upon my son" he employs the conventional word for a doctor paying a visit to a patient. The most interesting example is in the saying about the camel and the needleeye. All three synoptic writers give us that saying (Mat_19:24 ; Mar_10:25 ; Luk_18:25 ). For needle both Mark and Matthew use the Greek raphis (G4476), the ordinary word for a tailoror a household needle. Luke alone uses belone, the technical word for a surgeonneedle. Luke was a doctor and a doctorwords came most naturally to his pen.

The Recipient Of The Book

Luke wrote both his gospel and Acts to a man called Theophilus (Luk_1:3 ; Act_1:1 ). We can only guess who Theophilus was. Luk_1:3 calls him "most excellent Theophilus." The phrase really means "your excellency," and indicates a man high up in the service of the Roman government. There are three possibilities.

(i) Just possibly Theophilus is not a real name at all. In those days it might well be dangerous to be a Christian. Theophilus comes from two Greek words, theos (G2316) which means God and philein (G5368) which means to love. It may be that Luke wrote to a lover of God whose real name he did not mention for safetysake.

(ii) If Theophilus was a real person, he must have been a high government official. Perhaps Luke wrote to show him that Christianity was a lovely thing and that Christians were good people. Maybe his writing was an attempt to persuade a government official not to persecute the Christians.

(iii) There is a more romantic theory than either of these based on the facts that Luke was a doctor and that doctors in the ancient days were often slaves. It has been conjectured that Luke was the doctor of Theophilus, that Theophilus had been gravely ill, that by Lukeskill and devotion he was brought back to health, and that in gratitude he gave Luke his freedom. Then, it may be, Luke wished to show how grateful he was for this gift; and since the most precious thing he had was the story of Jesus, he wrote it down and sent it to his benefactor.

LukeAim In Writing Acts

When a man writes a book he does so for a reason, and maybe for more than one. Let us consider now why Luke wrote Acts.

(i) One of his reasons was to commend Christianity to the Roman government.

Again and again he goes out of his way to show how courteous Roman magistrates were to Paul. In Act_13:12 Sergius Paulus, the governor of Cyprus, becomes a Christian. In Act_18:12 Gallio is absolutely impartial in Corinth. In Act_16:35 . the magistrates at Philippi discover their mistake and apologize publicly to Paul. In Act_19:31 the Asiarchs in Ephesus are shown to be concerned that no harm should come to Paul. Luke was pointing out that in the years before he wrote Roman officials had often been well-disposed and always just to Christianity.

Further, Luke takes pains to show that the Christians were good and loyal citizens. and had always been regarded as such. In Act_18:14 Gallio declares that there is no question of wickedness or villainy. In Act_19:37 the secretary of Ephesus gives the Christians a good testimonial. In Act_23:29 Claudius Lysias is careful to say that he has nothing against Paul. In Act_25:25 Festus declares that Paul has done nothing worthy of death, and in the same chapter Festus and Agrippa agree that Paul might well have been released had he not appealed to Caesar.

Luke was writing in the days when Christians were disliked and persecuted; and he told his story in such a way as to show that the Roman magistrates had always been perfectly fair to Christianity and that they had never regarded the Christians as evil men. In fact, the very interesting suggestion has been made that Acts is nothing other than the brief prepared for Pauldefense when he stood his trial before the Roman Emperor.

(ii) One of Lukeaims was to show that Christianity was for all men of every country.

This was one of the things the Jews found it hard to grasp. They had the idea that they were Godchosen people and that God had no use for any other nation. Luke sets out to prove otherwise. He shows Philip preaching to the Samaritans; he shows Stephen making Christianity universal and being killed for it; he shows Peter accepting Cornelius into the Church; he shows the Christians preaching to the Gentiles at Antioch; he shows Paul travelling far and wide winning men of all kinds for Christ; and in Ac 15 he shows the Church making the great decision to accept the Gentiles on equal terms with the Jews.

(iii) But these were merely secondary aims. Lukechief purpose is set out in the words of the Risen Christ in Luk_1:8 , "You shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judaea and Samaria and to the end of the earth." It was to show the expansion of Christianity, to show how that religion which began in a little corner of Palestine had in not much more than thirty years reached Rome.

C. H. Turner has pointed out that Acts falls into six panels, each ending with what might be called a progress report. The six panels are:

(a) Ac 1-5; Act_6:1-7 ; this tells of the church at Jerusalem and the preaching of Peter; and it finishes with the summary, "The word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem; and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith."

(b) Act_6:8-15 ; Ac 7-8; Act_9:1-31 ; this describes the spread of Christianity through Palestine and the martyrdom of Stephen, followed by the preaching in Samaria. It ends with the summary, "So the Church throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria had peace and was built up; and, walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, it was multiplied."

(c) Act_9:32-43 ; Ac 10-11; Act_12:1-24 ; this includes the conversion of Paul, the extension of the Church to Antioch, and the reception of Cornelius, the Gentile, into the Church by Peter. Its summary is, "The word of God grew and multiplied."

(d) Act_12:25 ; Ac 13-15; Act_16:1-5 ; this tells of the extension of the Church through Asia Minor and the preaching tour of Galatia. It ends, "So the churches were strengthened in the faith, and they increased in numbers daily."

(e) Act_16:6-40 ; Ac 17-18; Act_19:1-20 ; this relates the extension of the Church to Europe and the work of Paul in great Gentile cities like Corinth and Ephesus. Its summary runs, "So the word of the Lord grew and prevailed mightily."

(j) Act_19:21-41 ; Ac 20-28; this tells of the arrival of Paul in Rome and his imprisonment there. It ends with the picture of Paul "preaching the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ quite openly and unhindered."

This plan of Acts answers its most puzzling question, why does it finish where it does? It finishes with Paul in prison awaiting judgment. We would so much have liked to know what happened to him and the end is wrapped in mystery. But Luke stopped there because his purpose was accomplished; he had shown how Christianity began in Jerusalem and swept across the world until it reached Rome. A great New Testament scholar has said that the title of Acts might be, "How they brought the Good News from Jerusalem to Rome."

LukeSources

Luke was an historian, and the sources from which an historian draws his information is all important. Where then did Luke get his facts? In this connection Acts falls into two parts.

(i) There are the first fifteen chapters, of whose events Luke had no personal knowledge. He very likely had access to two sources.

(a) There were the records of the local churches. They may never have been set down in writing but the churches had their stories. In this section we can distinguish three records. There is the record of the Jerusalem church which we find in Ac 1-5 and in Ac 15-16. There is the record of the church at Caesarea which covers Act_8:26-40 , Act_9:31-43 and Act_10:1-48 . There is the record of the church at Antioch which includes Act_11:19-30 , Act_12:25 , Ac 13 and Act_14:1-28 .

(b) Very likely there were cycles of stories which were the Acts of Peter, the Acts of John, the Acts of Philip and the Acts of Stephen. Beyond a doubt Lukefriendship with Paul would bring him into touch with all the great men of all the churches and all their stories would be at his disposal.

(ii) There is Ac 16-28. Of much of this section Luke had personal knowledge. When we read Acts carefully we notice a strange thing. Most of the time Lukenarrative is in the third person plural; but in certain passages it changes over to the first person plural and "they" becomes "we". The "we" passages are as follows--Acts 16:10-17; Act_20:5-16 ; Act_21:1-18 ; Ac 27 ; Act_28:1-16 . On all these occasions Luke must have been present. He must have kept a travel diary and in these passages we have eye-witness accounts. As for the times when he was not present, many were the hours he must have spent in prison with Paul and many were the stories Paul must have told him. There can have been no great figure Luke did not know and in every case he must have got his story from someone who was there.

When we read Acts we may be quite sure that no historian ever had better sources or used his sources more accurately.

FURTHER READING

Acts

F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts (NLC; E)

E. Haenchen, Die Apostelgeschichte (G)

F. J. Foakes Jackson and K. Lake, The Beginnings Of Christianity (A five-volume work; especially useful are Vol.

IV, The Commentary and Vol. V, Additional Notes)

W. Neil, The Acts of the Apostles (NCB; E)

Abbreviations

NCB: New Century Bible

NLC: New London Commentary

E: English Text

G: Greek Text

Barclay: Acts 15 (Chapter Introduction)

The Crucial Problem (Act_15:1-5)

A Problem Becomes Acute (Act_15:1-5 Continued)

Peter States The Case (Act_15:6-12)

The Leadership Of James (Act_15:13-21)

The Decree Goes Out (Act_15:22-35)

Paul Takes The Road Again (Act_15:36-41)

Constable: Acts (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Title

The title "Acts of the Apostles" is very ancient. The Anti-Marcionite Prologue to the Gospel of Luke (150-180 A.D.) contains the oldest reference to the book by this name. The title is a bit misleading, however, because the book contains only a few of the acts of some of the apostles, primarily Peter and Paul.

Writer

Two lines of argument lead to the conclusion that Luke, the friend, fellow missionary, and physician of Paul wrote this book under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. First, there is the internal evidence, the passages written in the first person plural that can refer to Luke (16:10-40; 20:5-21:18; 27:1-28:16). Second, we have external evidence indicating that Luke wrote Acts. This evidence includes references by early church fathers,¹ comments in collections of New Testament books,² and editorial statements in early notes on certain New Testament books.³

Date and place of composition

The date of composition was probably in the early sixties, 60-62 A.D. In view of his emphases Luke probably would have mentioned several important events had they occurred by the time he wrote. These include the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., Paul's death in 68 A.D., and the Neronian persecution of Christians that began in 64 A.D.

We do not know for sure where Luke was when he wrote Acts. Perhaps he composed it over a period of years drawing on various sources and then put it into its final form in Rome where Paul was in confinement for two years (28:30-31; 60-62 A.D.).

"Fortunately the intelligibility and value of the book are largely independent of a knowledge of the precise situation in which it was written. While the finer points of the interpretation of Acts can still cause intense discussion among scholars, the essential themes of the book are basically clear and simple."⁴

Scope

The events recorded in Acts cover a period of about 30 years beginning with the Lord's ascension in 33 A.D. to Paul's two-year Roman house arrest that ended about 62 A.D.⁵

Purpose

There seems to have been a three-fold purpose for the writing of Acts. As with the other books of the Bible that record history in narrative form, certainly the Holy Spirit had a historical purpose.⁶ He intended to provide an inspired record of selected events that show the spread of the gospel and the church. They branched out from Jerusalem, the center of Judaism where the church began, to Rome, the uttermost part of the Gentile earth.

"Streeter suggested that an alternative title for the book of Acts might be The Road to Rome', for this is indeed the significance of Luke's work. Whatever minor motifs Luke had in mind, such as the establishment of Christianity in men's minds as a constructive and not destructive element in the social order, his main concern was to show that, in God's plan for the renewal of the life of mankind, Jerusalem, the heart of old Israel, was the goal of Stage I [i.e., the Book of Luke], while Rome, the centre of the world, was the goal of Stage II [i.e., the Book of Acts]."⁷

However the fact that Luke included what he did and omitted much other historical data indicates a second theological purpose. He showed how the plans and purposes of God were working out through history. In particular he showed how Jesus Christ was faithfully and irresistibly building His church (Matt. 16:18).⁸ This involved clarifying how God's dealings with humankind had taken a different course because of the Jews' rejection of their Messiah.

Third, Luke evidently had an apologetic purpose in writing. He frequently pointed out the relationship of the church to the Roman state by referring to many Roman officials not one of whom opposed Christianity because of its doctrines or practices. This would have made Acts a powerful defensive tool for the early Christians in their struggle to survive in a hostile pagan environment.⁹

". . . the Acts is to be seen in close literary association with the Gospel [of Luke]. They form two parts of one work, conceived in its final form as a unity, whether or not the original composition of the Gospel took place independently of the plan to produce the two-part work. Although there are other examples of literary compositions in two parts (Josephus, Contra Apionem, is one of the nearest parallels to Luke-Acts in time and cultural context), Luke's work appears to be unique among Christian writings and to have no close secular precedents in its combination of the stories of a religious leader and of his followers."¹⁰

". . . Luke in Acts is not merely concerned to draw a link between the time of Jesus and the time of the early church, as is commonly noticed, but also between the time of Israel and the time of Jesus and His church. Acts insists that the God who was at work in the history of his ancient people, Israel, bringing them salvation, is the same God who is at work in the church."¹¹

Unique features

Acts is the only New Testament book that continues the history begun in the Gospels. It is also an indispensable historical record for understanding the Apostle Paul's epistles; without it we could not understand some of the things he wrote. It is the only Bible book that records the historical transition from Judaism to Christianity. It provides basic information about and insight into the early church. And it challenges every modern Christian.¹²

Structure

Longenecker identified five phenomena about the structure of Acts that the reader needs to recognize to appreciate what Luke sought to communicate.

"1. It begins, like the [Third] Gospel, with an introductory section of distinctly Lukan cast dealing with the constitutive events of the Christian mission (1:1-2:41) before it sets forth the advances of the gospel in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth' (1:7).

"2. This introductory section is followed by what appears to be a thematic statement (2:42-47). This material, while often viewed as a summary of what precedes, most probably serves as the thesis paragraph for what follows.

"3. In his presentation of the advance of the Christian mission, Luke follows an essentially geographical outline that moves from Jerusalem (2:42-6:7), through Judea and Samaria (6:8-9:31), on into Palestine-Syria (9:32-12:24), then to the Gentiles in the eastern part of the Roman Empire (12:25-19:20), and finally culminates in Paul's defenses and the entrance of the gospel into Rome (19:21-28:31).

"4. In his presentation, Luke deliberately sets up a number of parallels between the ministry of Peter in the first half of Acts and that of Paul in the last half.¹³

"5. Luke includes six summary statements or progress reports' (6:7; 9:31; 12:24; 16:5; 19:20; and 28:31), each of which seems to conclude its own panel' of material.¹⁴

"Taking all these literary and structural features into account, we may conclude that Luke developed his material in Acts along the following lines:

"Introduction: The Constitutive Events of the Christian Mission (1:1-2:41)

Part I: The Christian Mission to the Jewish World (2:42-12:24)

Panel 1--The Earliest Days of the Church at Jerusalem (2:42-6:7)

Summary Statement: So the word of God spread. The number of disciples in Jerusalem increased rapidly, and a large number of priests became obedient to the faith' (6:7).

Panel 2--Critical Events in the Lives of Three Pivotal Figures (6:8-9:31)

Summary Statement: Then the church throughout Judea, Galilee and Samaria enjoyed a time of peace. It was strengthened; and encouraged by the Holy Spirit, it grew in numbers, living in the fear of the Lord' (9:31).

Panel 3--Advances of the Gospel in Palestine-Syria (9:32-12:24)

Summary Statement: But the word of God continued to increase and spread' (12:24).

Part II: The Christian Mission to the Gentile World (12:25-28:31)

Panel 4--The First Missionary Journey and the Jerusalem Council (12:25-16:5)

Summary Statement: So the churches were strengthened in the faith and grew daily in numbers' (16:5).

Panel 5--Wide Outreach Through Two Missionary Journeys (16:6-19:20)

Summary Statement: In this way the word of the Lord spread widely and grew in power' (19:20).

Panel 6--To Jerusalem and Thence to Rome (19:21-28:31)

Summary Statement: Boldly and without hindrance he preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ' (28:31)."¹⁵

Message¹⁶

If I were to boil down to one sentence what the Book of Acts is in the Bible to teach us, I would say this.

The message of Acts is that the church of Jesus Christ is God's instrument to glorify Himself in the present age. The subject of the Book of Acts, what is its primary focus of attention, is the church of Jesus Christ.

Acts contains three major revelations regarding the church that I would like to point out.

The first of these concerns is the origin of the church. Jesus Christ created the church.

During His earthly ministry Jesus Christ prepared for the creation of the church. He instructed His disciples with truth they did not fully understand at the time, and He demonstrated for them life that they did not fully appreciate at the time (John 14:6). We have this record in the Gospels.

After His ascension Christ poured out His Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. This was the birthday of the church. The baptism of the Spirit did something God had never done before in history. It united believers with Christ in a new relationship as fellow members of the spiritual body of Christ (John 14:17). Believers then shared the life of Christ in a way never before experienced. God united them with Him. The same Spirit of God that indwelt Him now indwells us. The unity of the church is not external: what we believe (creeds), how we organize ourselves (polity), where we meet (culture), etc. It is internal: who indwells us. The basis of our unity in the church goes back to the origin of the church. It began when the Holy Spirit first baptized believers on the day of Pentecost (1 Cor. 12:13; Rom. 8:9).

The second major revelation of the church that we receive in Acts concerns the nature of the church. The church is one with Jesus Christ. That is its nature. It shares one life with its risen Lord.

In Luke's Gospel our writer presented Jesus Christ as the Head of a new race. As Adam was the head of one race, Christ is the last Adam, the Head of a new race. As Adam was the first man, Christ is the second man, the Head of a new race. As the First-born from the dead, Christ is the Head of a new race.

In Acts we see the new race springing from the First-born from the dead. We see the brotherhood of which Christ is the elder Brother. We see the body growing of which Christ is the Head. The spiritual bonds that unite the members of Christ's race are stronger than the physical bonds that unite the members of Adam's race (Matt. 12:47-50). The members of the new race are feeble, faulty, and foolish, but they possess the life of Christ. Christ is manifesting His life through those who have become partakers of His life by Holy Spirit baptism. The nature of the church is that it is one organic whole empowered by the life of Christ. The Holy Spirit has joined us organically to Christ.

The third major revelation of the church that Acts gives us concerns the function of the church. The function of the church is to be the instrument of Jesus Christ, His hands and feet and mouth, to carry out His will in the world. What is the will of Christ? Let me point out three things that Acts emphasizes.

The will of God is the imparting of life where there is death. Jesus Christ ministers divine life through His human instruments. We see Peter, Paul, and all God's other servants in Acts, doing the same kinds of things Jesus did when He walked this earth. They even did the same types of miracles. Christ by His Spirit was working through them (1:1-2). References to their being filled with the Spirit reflect Christ's control of these people as His instruments. He wants to impart life through us too.

The will of God is also the manifestation of light where there is darkness. The light of the gospel shines through Spirit filled believers to bring the lost into the light of God's presence. In Acts we see Christ through the Holy Spirit choosing the persons to whom the gospel would go. We see Him indicating the places where the gospel would reach. We see Him initiating the processes by which the gospel would penetrate the darkness caused by Satan. This is what Christ wants to do today too. He wants to manifest light through us.

Third, the will of God is the production of love where there is apathy, bitterness, and hatred. Christ's love reaches through believers, His instruments, by the Holy Spirit. It produces in the believer love for the Lord, love for the brethren, and love for the world. We see this illustrated in Acts. This is what Christ wants to do through us: produce love.

In summary, these are three great revelations of the church in Acts. As to its origin, Jesus Christ created it (Matt. 16:18). As to its nature, the church is one with Christ (1 Cor. 12:13). As to its function, the church is the instrument of Christ. Rom. 6:13 says, "Present yourselves to God . . . and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God."

Acts also warns us of three major antagonists facing the church.

The first of these is prejudice. Prejudice means prejudging, judging on the basis of limited information.

The outstanding example of this type of opposition in Acts is the unbelieving Jews. They refused to accept the witness of the Christians. They would not tolerate the evidence the Christians presented. They became the major enemies of the church as well as missing the blessings that could have been theirs if they had acknowledged their Messiah. The church faces the same opposition today (e.g., traditional concepts as opposed to Scriptural revelation).

The root cause of this problem is lack of confidence in the Holy Spirit. Prejudice says, "I do not trust what the Holy Spirit has said in Scripture." We must always interpret experience in the light of revelation, not the other way around.

The second antagonist the church faces that Acts identifies is personal interests. By this I mean the desire for something other than the will of God.

There are several examples of this peril in Acts. Ananias and Sapphira wanted a reputation for spirituality as well as spirituality. Simon Magus wanted a supernatural gift for personal glory as well as for the glory of God. Our flesh also tempts us to serve ourselves as well as God. This is compromise.

The root cause of this problem seems to me to be lack of passive yielding to the Holy Spirit. The Spirit does not fill or control us. We are doubleminded.

A third antagonist the church faces that we also see in Acts is pride.

Two men provide perhaps the outstanding examples of this peril: Felix and Agrippa. Their desire for personal prestige determined their response to God's will. Many a person's career goals and ego needs have limited God's use of him.

The cause of this problem is lack of active obedience to the Holy Spirit. When the Spirit through His Word says "Do this," and we refuse, it is because we set our wills against His. That is pride. We need to humble ourselves under the mighty hand of God. In chapter 10 Peter said, "Not me, Lord."

These are three major perils to the church corporately as well as to Christians individually. Luke has warned us of them in Acts. They are major obstacles to Christ's building His church in the world.

Acts also presents three major lessons for the church that it should always keep in view.

First, the church's passion must be the glory of God. This was the driving motive in the lives of Peter, Paul, and the other faithful missionaries and witnesses that Luke recorded in this book. Their passion was not their own personal safety or their physical comfort, or the opportunity to relieve the sufferings of others, or the desire to create better living conditions in the world. They subordinated all these to God's glory in their hearts. We too must commit ourselves to glorifying God above everything else personally and corporately. My goal for this course is that it will glorify God.

Second, the church's governing principle must be loyalty to Christ. Again, the leaders of the early church modelled this for us. They put Christ's interests before their own. They were singleminded in their living. This is the evidence of their being filled with the Spirit. Their primary commitment was to letting His life work in and through them, and to carrying out His work, not their own. How loyal are we to Christ individually and corporately? John the Baptist said, "He must increase, but I must decrease."

Third, the church's power must be the Holy Spirit. The constant references to prayer in Acts show us how conscious the early Christians were of their dependence on God's power. They did not go out in self-confidence but in God-confidence. They called on Him to reveal Christ's life in and through them (4:24-30). They called on Him to direct Christ's works in and through them (12:12; 20:36). We must not only be obedient and yielded to the Holy Spirit but also dependent on Him because He is our power individually and corporately (John 15:5). I'll be praying for you this semester. Please pray for me.

Finally I would like to leave you with three challenges that grow out of the emphases of Acts.

First, what is your motivation? Why do you do what you do? What motivated the Spirit filled believers in Acts was the desire that God get the glory above everything else. Who do you want to get the credit for what you do?

Second, what is your method? How do you do what you do? Our models in Acts cooperated with God so Christ could work through them by His Holy Spirit. This involved having confidence in His revelation, yielding to His will, obeying His Word, and depending on His Holy Spirit.

Third, what is your emphasis? What do you do? In Acts the leaders of the church gave priority to what is most important to God, not to what was most important to them personally. Furthermore they emphasized the essentials, not the incidentals. Let's not get so fascinated with the incidentals, such as how God manifested His power (healings, speaking in tongues, etc.), that we fail to give priority to the essentials. One essential is that He is powerful enough to do anything to accomplish His purposes. Let's give ourselves to the task before us wholeheartedly and enthusiastically (Matt. 28:19-20; Acts 1:8).

Constable: Acts (Outline)

Outline

I. The witness in Jerusalem 1:1-6:7

A. The founding of the church 1:1-2:46

1. The resumptive preface to the book 1:1-5

2. The command to witness 1:6-8

3. The ascension of Jesus 1:9-11

4. Jesus' appointment of a twelfth apostle 1:12-26

5. The birth of the church 2:1-41

6. The early state of the church 2:42-46

B. The expansion of the church in Jerusalem 3:1-6:7

1. External opposition 3:1-4:31

2. Internal compromise 4:32-5:11

3. Intensified external opposition 5:12-42

4. Internal conflict 6:1-7

II. The witness in Judea and Samaria 6:8-9:31

A. The martyrdom of Stephen 6:8-8:1a

1. Stephen's arrest 6:8-7:1

2. Stephen's address 7:2-53

3. Stephen's death 7:54-8:1a

B. The ministry of Philip 8:1b-40

1. The evangelization of Samaria 8:1b-25

2. Philip's ministry to the Ethiopian eunuch 8:26-40

C. The mission of Saul 9:1-31

1. Saul's conversion and calling 9:1-19a

2. Saul's initial conflicts 9:19b-30

3. The church at peace 9:31

III. The witness to the uttermost part of the earth 9:32-28:31

A. The extension of the church to Syrian Antioch 9:32-12:24

1. Peter's ministry in Lydda and Joppa 9:32-43

2. The conversion of Cornelius 10:1-11:18

3. The initiatives of the Antioch church 11:19-30

4. The persecution of the Jerusalem church 12:1-24

B. The extension of the church to Cyprus and Asia Minor 12:25-16:5

1. The divine appointment of Barnabas and Saul 12:25-13:3

2. The mission to Cyprus 13:4-12

3. The mission to Asia Minor 13:13-14:25

4. Paul and Barnabas' return to Antioch of Syria 14:26-28

5. The Jerusalem Council 15:1-35

6. The strengthening of the Gentile churches 15:36-16:5

C. The extension of the church to the Aegean shores 16:6-19:20

1. The call to Macedonia 16:6-10

2. The ministry in Macedonia 16:11-17:15

3. The ministry in Achaia 17:16-18:17

4. The beginning of ministry in Asia 18:18-22

5. The results of ministry in Asia 18:23-19:20

D. The extension of the church to Rome 19:21-28:31

1. Ministry on the way to Jerusalem 19:21-21:16

2. Ministry in Jerusalem 21:17-23:32

3. Ministry in Caesarea 23:33-26:32

4. Ministry on the way to Rome 27:1-28:15

5. Ministry in Rome 28:16-31

Constable: Acts

Acts

Bibliography

Albright, William Foxwell. The Archaeology of Palestine. 1949. Revised ed. Pelican Archaeology series. Harmondswroth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1956.

Alexander, Joseph Addison. Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, n.d.

Alexander, L. C. A. "Luke's Preface in the Context of Greek Preface-Writing." Novum Testamentum 18 (1986):48-74.

Allen, Roland. Missionary Methods: St. Paul's or Ours? 2nd American ed., Chicago, Moody Press, 1959.

Allis, Oswald T. Prophecy and the Church. Nutley, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1945.

The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1974.

Archer, Gleason L. Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Regency Reference Library, 1982.

Ballance, M. The Site of Derbe: A New Inscription. Anatolian Studies series. London: British Institute of Archaeology at Ankora, 1957.

Bammel, Ernst. "Jewish Activity against Christians in Palestine according to Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 357-64. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Barclay, William. The Acts of the Apostles. Daily Study Bible series. 2nd ed. and reprint ed. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1962.

Barker, Kenneth L. "The Scope and Center of Old and New Testament Theology and Hope." In Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The Search for Definition, pp. 293-328. Edited by Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Barnhouse, Donald G. God's River. Vol. IV in Exposition of Bible Doctrines. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1958.

Barrett, C. K. "The Apostolic Decree of Acts 15.29." Australian Biblical Review 35 (1987):50-59.

_____. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. Vol. 1. The International Critical Commentary series. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1994.

_____. The New Testament Background: Selected Documents. New York: Harper & Row, 1961.

Bauckham, Richard. "James and the Jerusalem Church." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 415-80. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965.

Bellshaw, William G. "The Confusion of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:478 (April-June 1963):145-53.

Berghuis, Kent D. "A Biblical Perspective on Fasting." Bibliotheca Sacra 158:629 (January-March 2001):86-103.

Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology. 4th revised ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1959.

Blaiklock, E. M. The Acts of the Apostles. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. London: Tyndale Press, 1959; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1979.

Blaising, Craig. A. "The Extent and Varieties of Dispensationalism." In Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 9-56. By Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993.

_____. "The Fulfillment of the Biblical Covenants Through Jesus Christ." In Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 174-211. By Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993.

_____. "The Kingdom of God in the New Testament." In Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 232-83. By Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993.

Bock, Darrell L. "Evidence from Acts." In A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus, pp. 181-98. Edited by Donald K. Campbell and Jeffrey L. Townsend. Chicago: Moody Press, 1992.

_____. "Jesus as Lord in Acts and in the Gospel Message." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:570 (April-June 1986):146-54.

_____. "The Reign of the Lord Christ." In Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The Search for Definition, pp. 37-67. Edited by Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

_____. "A Theology of Luke-Acts." In A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, pp. 87-166. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Boice, James Montgomery. Foundations of the Christian Faith. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1986.

Bruce, F. F. "Chronological Questions in the Acts of the Apostles." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 68:2 (Spring 1986):273-95.

_____. Commentary on The Book of Acts. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1984.

_____. "The Church of Jerusalem in the Acts of the Apostles." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 67:2 (Spring 1985):641-61.

_____. The Epistle to the Galatians. New International Greek Testament Commentary series. Exeter, England: Paternoster Press, 1982; reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

_____. "Paul's Apologetic and the Purpose of Acts." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library 39:2 (Spring 1987):379-93.

Brunner, Emil. The Misunderstanding of the Church. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1953.

Burns, J. Lanier. "A Reemphasis on the Purpose of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 132:527 (July-September 1975):242-49.

Burton, Ernest DeWitt. "The Politarchs." American Journal of Theology 2 (1898):598-632.

Butcher, J. Kevin. "A Critique of The Gospel According to Jesus." Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 2:1 (Spring 1989):27-43.

Cadbury, Henry J. The Book of Acts in History. London: Black, 1955.

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Vols. XXI and XXII in The Library of Christian Classics. Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960.

Campbell, Donald K. "Paul's Ministry at Ephesus--A Devotional Study." Bibliotheca Sacra 118:472 (October-December 1961):304-10.

Capper, Brian. "The Palestinian Cultural Context of Earliest Christian Community of Goods." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 323-56. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Carroll, J. Response to the End of History: Eschatology and Situation in Luke-Acts. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989.

Carson, Donald A. Exegetical Fallacies. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1984.

Casson, Lionel. Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World. Princeton: University Press, 1971.

Catalog of Oral Roberts University. Tulsa, Ok: Oral Roberts University, 1973.

Chafer, Lewis S. Grace. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1922.

_____. He That Is Spiritual. Findlay, Oh.: Dunham Publishing Co., 1819.

_____. Salvation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1917.

_____. Systematic Theology. 8 vols. Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1947-48.

Chase, F. H. The Credibility of the Acts of the Apostles. London: Macmillan Co., 1902.

Cocoris, G. Michael. Evangelism: A Biblical Approach. Chicago: Moody Press, 1984.

_____. "John MacArthur, Jr's, System of Salvation: An Evaluation of the Book, The Gospel According to Jesus." Glendora, CA: By the Author, 1989.

_____. Lordship Salvation--Is It Biblical? Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1983.

Cohen, Shaye J. D. "Was Timothy Jewish (Acts 16:1-3)? Patristic Exegesis, Rabbinic Law, and Matrilineal Descent." Journal of Biblical Literature 105:2 (June 1986):251-68.

Cole, Dan P. "Corinth & Ephesus." Bible Review 4:6 (December 1988):20-30.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament." Paper submitted for course 686 Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1968.

_____. "The Gospel Message." In Walvoord: A Tribute, pp. 201-17. Edited by Donald K. Campbell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.

_____. "What Prayer Will and Will Not Change." In Essays in Honor of J. Dwight Pentecost, pp. 99-113. Edited by Stanley D. Toussaint and Charles H. Dyer. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Conybeare, W. J. and Howson, J. S. The Life and Epistles of St. Paul. New ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964.

Criswell, W. A. Acts. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978.

Crocker, Piers T. "The City of Meroe and the Ethiopian Eunuch." Buried History 22:3 (September 1986):53-72.

Croy, N. Clayton. "Hellenistic Philosophies and the Preaching of the Resurrection (Acts 17:18, 32)." Novum Testamentum 39:1 (1997):21-39.

Culver, Robert Duncan. "Apostles and the Apostolate in the New Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 134:534 (April-June 1977):131-43.

Dalman, Gustaf H.. The Words of Jesus. Translated by D. M. Kay. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1909.

Dana, H. E., and Mantey, Julius R. A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament. New York: Macmillan, 1955.

Darby, John Nelson. Meditations on the Acts of the Apostles. London: G. Moorish, n.d.

_____. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Dean, David A. "A Study of the Enthronement of Christ in Acts 2 and 3." Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1992.

Deere, Jack. Surprised by the Power of the Spirit. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

Deissmann, Adolf. Light From the Ancient East. Revised ed. Translated by Lionel R. M. Strachan. Grand Rapids: Baker Book Houst, 1965.

_____. Paul: A Study in Social and Religious History. Translated by William E. Wilson. Harper Torchbook ed. New York: Harper and Row, Harper Torchbooks, 1957.

deSilva, David A. "Paul and the Stoa: A Comparison." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 38:4 (December 1995):549-64.

_____. "Paul's Sermon in Antioch of Pisidia." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March 1994):32-49.

Detwiler, David F. "Paul's Approach to the Great Commission in Acts 14:21-23." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:605 (January-March 1995):33-41.

de Waard, J. A. A Comparative Study of the Old Testament Text in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the New Testament. Leiden: Brill, 1965.

Dictionary of the Apostolic Church. Edited by James Hastings. 1915 ed. S.v. "Acts of the Apostles," by Kirsopp Lake.

Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by James Hastings. 1910 ed. S.v. "Acts of the Apostles," by A. C. Headham.

_____. S.v. "The Chronology of the New Testament," by C. H. Turner.

_____. S.v. "Temple," by W. T. Davies.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fl.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

_____. Speaking in Tongues: Seven Crucial Questions. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1980.

"Doctrinal Statement of Dallas Theological Seminary." Dallas Theological Seminary 1988-89 Catalog.

Documents of the Christian Church. Edited by Henry Bettenson. Second ed. London, Oxford, and New York: Oxford University Press, 1967.

Dodd, C. H. According to the Scriptures. London: Nisbet, 1952.

Dunn, James D. G. Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1970.

Edgar, Thomas R. "The Cessation of the Sign Gifts." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:580 (October-December 1988):371-86.

_____. Miraculous Gifts. Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1983.

English, E. Schuyler. "Was St. Peter Ever in Rome?" Bibliotheca Sacra 124:496 (October-December 1967):314-20.

Eusebius. The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilus. Twin Brooks series. Popular ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974.

Falk, Daniel K. "Jewish Prayer Literature and the Jerusalem Church." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 267-301. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Feldman, Louis H. "The Omnipresence of the God-Fearers." Biblical Archaeology Review 12:5 (September-October 1986):58-63.

Fiensy, David A. "The Composition of the Jerusalem Church." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 213-36. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Finegan, Jack. The Archaeology of the New Testament. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969.

Foakes-Jackson, F. J. The Acts of the Apostles. Moffat New Testament Commentary series. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1931; reprint ed. 1960.

Foakes-Jackson, F. J. and Lake, Kirsopp. The Acts of the Apostles. Part I of The Beginnings of Christianity, vols. 4 and 5. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965

Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G. "Israel and the Church." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 113-30. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

_____. Israelology: The Missing Link in Systematic Theology. Tustin, Cal.: Ariel Ministries Press, 1989.

Fung, Ronald Y. K. The Epistle to the Galatians. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1988.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Acts of the Apostles: An Exposition. New York: Our Hope, 1912.

_____. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1970.

Gangel, Kenneth O. "Paul's Areopagus Speech." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:508 (October-December 1970):308-12.

Gentry, K. L. "The Great Option: A Study of the Lordship Controversy." Baptist Reformation Review 5 (1976):49-79.

Gerlach, Joel C. "Glossolalia." Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly 70:4 (October 1973):233-61.

Gill, David W. J. "Acts and Roman Policy in Judaea." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 15-26. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Goodspeed, Edgar J. "Gaius Titius Justus." Journal of Biblical Literature 69:4 (December 1950):382-83.

Grant, F. W. The Numerical Bible. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, n.d.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. By C. G. Wilke. Revised by C. L. Wilibald Grimm. Translated, revised and enlarged by Joseph Henry Thayer, 1889.

Gromacki, Robert G. The Modern Tongues Movement. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1967; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, n.d.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. 3 vols. 2nd ed. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

Haenchen, Ernst. The Acts of the Apostles. Translated by R. McL. Wilson. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1971.

Harm, Frederick R. "Structural Elements Related to the Gift of the Holy Spirit in Acts." Concordia Journal 14:1 (January 1988):28-41.

Harnack, Adolph. The Date of the Acts and of the Synoptic Gospels. Translated by J. R. Wilkinson. London: Williams & Norgate, 1911.

_____. The Mission and Expansion of Christianity. 2 vols. Translated by J. Moffatt. London: Williams & Norgate, 1908.

Hays, J. Daniel. "The Cushites: A Black Nation in the Bible." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:612 (October-December 1996):396-409.

Heater, Homer, Jr. "Evidence from Joel and Amos." In A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus, pp. 147-64. Edited by Donald K. Campbell and Jeffrey L. Townsend. Chicago: Moody Press, 1992.

Helyer, Larry R. "Luke and the Restoration of Israel." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 36:3 (September 1993):317-29.

Hengel, Martin. "The Geography of Palestine in Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 27-78. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Herodotus. 4 vols. With an English translation by A. D. Godley. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, and London: William Heinemann, 1960.

Hesner, Colin. "The Name of Felix Again." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 31 (October 1987):45-49.

Hiebert, D. Edmond. Working With God: Scriptural Studies in Intercession. New York: Carlton Press, 1987.

Hodges, Zane C. Absolutely Free! A Biblical Reply to Lordship Salvation. Dallas: Redencion Viva, and Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academie Books, 1989.

_____. "A Dispensational Understanding of Acts 2." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 167-80. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

_____. The Gospel Under Seige. Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1981.

_____. "The Purpose of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:479 (July-September 1963):226-33.

_____. Review of "A Review of The Gospel According to Jesus, by Darrell L. Bock in Bibliotheca Sacra, January-March 1989, pp. 21-40." Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 2:1(Spring 1989):79-83.

Hoehner, Harold W. Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ. Grand Rapid: Zondervan Publishing House, 1977.

_____. "Chronology of the Apostolic Age." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1965.

_____. "The Duration of the Egyptian Bondage." Bibliotheca Sacra 126:504 (October-December 1969):306-16.

Homer. The Odyssey. 2 vols. With an English translation by A. T. Murray. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, and London: William Heinemann, 1946.

Hook, H. Phillip. "A Biblical Definition of Faith." Bibliotheca Sacra 121:482 (April-June 1964):133-40.

Horsley, Richard A. "High Priests and the Politics of Roman Palestine." Journal for the Study of Judaism 17:1 (June 1986):23-55.

Ice, Thomas D. "Dispensational Hermeneutics." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 29-49. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Edited by James Orr. 1957 ed. S.v. "Acts of the Apostles," by A. T. Robertson.

Ironside, Harry A. Except Ye Repent. New York: American Tract Society, 1937.

_____. Lectures on the Book of Acts. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1943.

Jeremias, Joachim. Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus. Translated by F. H. and C. H. Cave. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969.

_____. "Untersuchungen zum Quellenproblem der Apostelgeschichte." Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschrift 36 (1937):208-13.

Jewett, Robert A. A Chronology of Paul's Life. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979.

Jewish Encyclopedia. S. v. "Alexandrians in Jerusalem," by Emil Schürer.

Johnson, Elliott E. "Hermeneutical Principles and the Interpretation of Psalm 110." Bibliotheca Sacra 149:596 (October-December 1992):428-37.

Johnson, John E. "The Old Testament Offices as Paradigm for Pastoral Identity." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:606 (April-June 1995):182-200.

Johnson, S. Lewis, Jr. "The Gift of Tongues and the Book of Acts." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:480 (October-December 1963):309-11.

_____. "How Faith Works." Christianity Today 33:13 (September 22, 1989):21-25.

Jones, A. H. M. Studies in Roman Government and Law. New York: Praeger, 1960.

Jones, Bruce. "Real Repentance." Moody Monthly 88:2 (October 1987):21-23.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William Whiston. Antiquities of the Jews and The Wars of the Jews. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1866.

Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. Back Toward the Future: Hints for Interpreting Biblical Prophecy. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1989.

Kent, Homer A., Jr. Jerusalem to Rome. New Testament Studies series. Brethren Missionary Herald, 1972; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House and BMH Books, 1985.

Ladd, George E. "Acts." In Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1123-78. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

_____. A Theology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1974.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol 9: John--Acts, by J. P. Lange and Gotthard Victor Lechler. Translated by Philip Schaff and Charles F. Schaeffer.

Larkin, William J., Jr. "The Recovery of Luke-Acts as Grand Narrative' for the Church's Evangelistic and Edification Tasks in a Postmodern Age." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43:3 (September 2000):405-15.

Law, Robert. The Tests of Life. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1909.

Lawrence, William D. "The New Testament Doctrine of the Lordship of Christ." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1968.

Lawson, Steven J. "The Priority of Biblical Preaching: An Expository Study of Acts 2:42-47." Bibliotheca Sacra 158:630 (April-June 2001):198-217.

Légasse, Simon. "Paul's Pre-Christian Career according to Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 365-90. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Lenski, R. C. H. The Interpretation of the Acts of the Apostles. Reprint ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1964.

Levinskaya, Irena. The Book of Acts in Its Diaspora Setting. Vol. 5 of The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting, edited by Bruce W. Winter. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1996.

Lewellen, Thomas G. "Has Lordship Salvation Been Taught throughout Church History?" Bibliotheca Sacra 147:585 (January-March 1990):54-68.

Lightner, Robert P. Speaking in Tongues and Divine Healing. 2nd ed. Schaumburg, Il: Regular Baptist Press, 1978.

Longenecker, Richard N.. "The Acts of the Apostles." In John-Acts. Vol. 9 of Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981.

_____. Paul, Apostle of Liberty. New York: Harper & Row, 1964.

Lumby, J. Rawson. The Acts of the Apostles. Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1885.

MacArthur, John F., Jr. The Charismatics: A Doctrinal Perspective. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1979.

_____. Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993.

_____. The Gospel According to Jesus. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academie Books, 1988.

_____. Justification by Faith. Chicago: Moody Press, 1984.

Macartney, Clarence E. N. Paul the Man. Westwood, NJ: Fleming H. Revell, 1961.

MacLennan, Robert S. and A. Thomas Kraabel. "The God-Fearers--A Literary and Theological Invention." Biblical Archaeology Review 12:5 (September-October 1986):46-53.

Maile, John F. "The Ascension in Luke-Acts." Tyndale Bulletin 37 (1986):29-59.

Malina, Bruce J. "Religion' in the World of Paul." Biblical Theology Bulletin 16:3 (July 1986):92-101.

Malphurs, Aubrey M. "A Theological Critique of the Churches of Christ Doctrine of Soteriology." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1981.

Man, Ronald E. "The Value of Chiasm for New Testament Interpretation." Bibliotheca Sacra 141:562 (April-June 1984):146-57.

Manek, Jindrich. "The New Exodus in the Books of Luke." Novum Testamentum 2 (1957):8-23.

Manson, T. W. Studies in the Gospels and Epistles. Edited by Matthew Black. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1962.

Marshall, I. Howard. "Acts and the Former Treatis.'" In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 1: The Book of Acts in Its Ancient Literary Setting, pp. 163-182. Edited by Bruce W. Winter and Andrew D. Clarke. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1993.

_____. The Acts of the Apostles. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. Reprint ed. Leicester, England: InterVarsity Press, and Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1984.

Mason, Steve. "Chief Priests, Sadducees, Pharisees and Sanhedrin in Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 115-77. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

McClain, Alva J. The Greatness of the Kingdom. Reprint ed. Winona Lake, In.: BMH Books, 1974.

McGee, J. Vernon. Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee. 5 vols. Pasadena: Thru the Bible Radio, 1983.

McGrath, Alister E. "Apologetics to the Romans." Bibliotheca Sacra 155:620 (October-December 1998):387-93.

McIntyre, Luther B., Jr. "Baptism and Forgiveness in Acts 2:38." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:609 (January-March 1996):53-62.

McLean, John A. "Did Jesus Correct the Disciples' View of the Kingdom?" Bibliotheca Sacra 151:602 (April-June 1994):215-27.

McNeile, A. H. An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament. 2nd ed. Revised by C. S. C. Willilams. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965.

Meisner, Donald R. "Chiasm and the Composition and Message of Paul's Missionary Sermons." S.T.D. thesis, Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago, 1974.

_____. "The Missionary Journeys Narrative: Patterns and Implications." In Perspectives on Luke-Acts, pp. 199-214. Edited by Charles H. Talbert. Danville, Va: Association of Baptist Professors of Religion, 1978.

Merrill, Eugene H. "Paul's Use of About 450 Years' in Acts 13:20." Bibliotheca Sacra 138:551 (July-September 1981):246-57.

Metzger, Bruce M. "St. Paul and the Magicians." Princeton Seminary Bulletin 38 (1944):27-30.

Meyer, F. B. Paul: A Servant of Jesus Christ. London: Morgan and Scott, n.d.

The Mishnah. Translated by Herbert Danby. London: Oxford University Press, 1933.

Moore, Thomas S. "To the End of the Earth': The Geographical and Ethnic Univarsalism of Acts 1:8 in Light of Isaianic Influence on Luke." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:3 (September 1997):389-99.

Morgan, G. Campbell. The Acts of the Apostles. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1924; reprint ed., London: Pickering and Inglis, 1965.

_____. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Moule, C. F. D. "Once More, Who Were the Hellenists?" Expository Times 70 (October 1958-September 1959):100-2.

Murphy-O'Connor, Jerome. "The Cenacle--Topographical Setting for Acts 2:44-45." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 303-22. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

_____. "On the Road and on the Sea with St. Paul." Bible Review 1:2 (Summer 1985):38-47.

Murray, George W. "Paul's Corporate Evangelism in the Book of Acts." Bibliotheca Sacra 155:618 (April-June 1998):189-200.

Murray, John. Redemption--Accomplished and Applied. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1955.

"Must Christ be Lord to be Savior?" Eternity, September 1959, pp. 14-18, 36-37, 48.

Neil, William, The Acts of the Apostles. New Century Bible Commentary series. London: Marshall, Morgan, and Scott, 1973; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and London: Marshall, Morgan, and Scott, 1981.

The New Bible Dictionary. Edited by J. D. Douglas. 1962 ed. S.v. "Cilicia," by E. M. B. Green.

_____. Edited by J. D. Douglas. 1962 ed. S.v. "Judas Iscariot," by R. P. Martin.

The New Scofield Reference Bible. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelien, William Culbertson, et al. New York: Oxford University Press, 1967.

The New Testament in Modern English. Translated by J. B. Phillips. New York: Macmillan Co., 1958.

The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. First series. Edited by Philip Schaff. 14 vols. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1978.

O'Connor, E. D. The Pentecostal Movement in the Catholic Church. Notre Dame: Ave Maria Press, 1971.

Orr, J. Edwin. The Fervent Prayer: The Worldwide Impact of the Great Awakening of 1858. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

O'Toole, Robert F. "Acts 2:30 and the Davidic Covenant of Pentecost." Journal of Biblical Literature 102:2 (1983):245-58.

Packer, James I. Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God. Downers Grove, Il: InterVarsity Press, 1961.

Palmer, D. W. "The Literary Background of Acts 1.1-14." New Testament Studies 33:3 (July 1987):427-38.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. "The Apostles' Use of Jesus' Predictions of Judgment on Jerusalem in A.D. 70." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 134-43. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

_____. Thy Kingdom Come. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1990.

Peterson, David. "The Motif of Fulfilment and Purpose of Luke-Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 1: The Book of Acts in Its Ancient Literary Setting, pp. 83-104. Edited by Bruce W. Winter and Andrew D. Clarke. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1993.

Philostratus. The Life of Appollonius. 2 vols. With an English translation by F. C. Conybeare. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: London: William Heinemann, and New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1921.

Pink, Arthur W. Studies on Saving Faith. Swengel, Pa: Reiner Publications, n.d.

Pocock, Michael. "The Role of Encouragement in Leadership." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 301-7. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

Pollock, A. J. The Apostle Paul and His Missionary Labors. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, n.d.

Praeder, Susan Marie. "The Problem of First Person Narration in Acts." Novum Testamentum 29:3 (July 1987):193-218.

Price, J. Randall. "Prophetic Postponement in Daniel 9 and Other Texts." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 133-65. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Rackham, Richard Belward. The Acts of the Apostles. Westminster Commentaries series. 9th ed. London: Methuen and Co., 1922.

Ramm, Bernard. Rapping about the Spirit. Waco: Word Books, 1974.

Ramsay, William M. The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953.

_____. The Church in the Roman Empire. 3rd ed. London: Hoddar and Stoughton, 1894.

_____. Pictures of the Apostolic Church. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1910.

_____. St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen. London: Hoddar and Stoughton, 1897; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1960.

Reinhardt, Wolfgang. "The Population Size of Jerusalem and the Numerical Growth of the Jerusalem Church" In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 237-65. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Richard, Ramesh. "Soteriological Inclusivism and Dispensationalism." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March 1994):85-108.

Riesner, Rainer. "Synagogues in Jerusalem." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 179-211. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Roberts, C.; Skeat, T. C.; and Nock, A. D. "The Guild of Zeus Hypsistos." Harvard Theological Review 29 (1936):39-88.

Robertson, Archibald, and Plummer, Alfred. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St Paul to the Corinthians. International Critical Commentary series. Second ed. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1963.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures in the New Testament. 6 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931.

Rogers, Cleon L., Jr. "The Davidic Covenant in Acts-Revelation." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March):71-84.

_____. "The Davidic Covenant in the Gospels." Bibliotheca Sacra 150:600 (October-December 1993):458-78.

Rosner, Brian S. "Acts and Biblical History." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 1: The Book of Acts in Its Ancient Literary Setting, pp. 65-82. Edited by Bruce W. Winter and Andrew D. Clarke. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1993.

Ross, Bob L. Acts 2:38 and Baptismal Regeneration. Pasadena, TX.: Pilgrim Publications, 1976.

Ruble, Richard L. "The Doctrine of Dreams." Bibliotheca Sacra 125:500 (October-December 1968):360-64.

Russell, Walt. "The Anointing with the Holy Spirit in Luke-Acts." Trinity Journal 7NS (Spring 1986):47-63.

Ryrie, Charles Caldwell. The Acts of the Apostles. Everyman's Bible Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1961.

_____. Balancing the Christian Life. Chicago: Moody Press, 1969.

_____. The Basis of the Premillennial Faith. Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, 1953.

_____. "The Christian and Civil Disobedience." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:506 (April-June 1970):153:62.

_____. Dispensationalism. Chicago: Moody Press, 1995.

_____. Dispensationalism Today. Chicago: Moody Press, 1965.

_____. "The End of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra 124:495 (July-September 1967):243.

_____. So Great Salvation. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1989.

_____. You Mean the Bible Teaches That . . . Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

Sanders, John. "Inclusivism." In What about Those Who Have Never Heard? Three Views on the Destiny of the Unevangelized, pp. 21-55. Edited by John Sanders. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1995.

Sarles, Ken L. "All Power & Signs." Kindred Spirit 13:2 (Summer 1989):8-11.

_____. "An Appraisal of the Signs and Wonders Movement." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:577 (January-March 1988):57-82.

_____. "A Theological Evaluation of the Prosperity Gospel." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:572 (October-December 1986):329-52.

Saucy, Robert L. The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

_____. "The Presence of the Kingdom and the Life of the Church." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:577 (January-March 1987):30-46.

Schwartz, Joshua. "Peter and Ben Stada in Lydda." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 391-414. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Scofield, C. I. Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth. 1896; reprint ed. Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, n.d.

Schürer, Emil. The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1979.

Sherrill, John. They Shall Speak with Other Tongues. Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1964.

Showers, Renald E. Maranatha Our Lord, Come: A Definitive Study of the Rapture of the Church. Bellmawr, Pa.: Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry, 1995.

Smith, James. The Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul. London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans, 1848.

Stagg, Frank. The Book of Acts. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1955.

Stewart, James S. A Man in Christ. Reprint ed. London: Hoddar and Stoughton, 1964.

Stonehouse, Ned. "The Gift of the Holy Spirit." Westminster Theological Journal 13 (1949-51):1-15.

Stott, John R. W. Basic Christianity. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1958.

_____. The Message of Acts. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1990.

Strabo. Geography. 8 vols. With an English translation by Horace Leonard Jones. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, and London: William Heinemann, 1960.

Strom, Mark R. "An Old Testament Background to Acts 12. 20-23." New Testament Studies 32:2 (April 1986):289-92.

Suetonius. "The Deified Claudius." In The Lives of the Caesars. Translated by J. C. Rolfe. The Loeb Classical Lubrary. Cambridge, Mass.: and London: Harvard University Press, 1939.

Swindoll, Charles. "Dallas's New Dispensation." Christianity Today, October 25, 1993, pp. 14-15.

Sylva, Dennis D. "The Meaning and Function of Acts 7:46-50." Journal of Biblical Literature 106:2 (1987):261-75.

Tacitus. The Histories. The Loeb Classical Library series. Translated by Clifford H. Moore. London: William Heinemann Ltd., New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1931.

Talbert, Charles H. Literary Patterns, Theological Themes, and the Genre of Luke-Acts. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1974.

_____. Luke and the Gnostics. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1966.

Tannehill, Robert C. The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts: A Literary Interpretation. Vol. 2: The Acts of the Apostles. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990.

Tannenbaum, Robert F. "Jews and God-Fearers in the Holy City of Aphradite." Biblical Archaeology Review 12:5 (September-October 1986):54-57.

Tanton, Lanny T. "The Gospel and Water Baptism: A Study of Acts 2:38." Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 3:1 (Spring 1990):27-52.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. S.v. "kyrios," by Werner Foerster.

_____. S.v. "pneuma . . .," by Eduard Schweizer.

Thiessen, Henry Clarence. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

Thomas, W. H. Griffith. The Acts of the Apostles: Outline Studies in Primitive Christianity. Chicago: Bible Institute Colportage Association, n.d.

Toussaint, Stanley D. "Acts." In Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, pp. 349-432. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

_____. "The Contingency of the Coming of the Kingdom." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 222-37. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

Treier, Daniel J. "The Fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32: A Multiple-Lens Approach." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:1 (March 1997):13-26.

Trites, Allison A. "Church Growth in the Book of Acts." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:578 (April-June 1988):162-73.

Unger, Merrill F. "Archaeology and Paul's Visit to Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe." Bibliotheca Sacra 118:470 (April-June 1961):107-12.

_____. The Baptizing Work of the Holy Spirit. Chicago: Scripture Press, 1953.

_____. "Historical Research and the Church at Thessalonica." Bibliotheca Sacra 119:473 (January-March 1962):38-44.

_____. "Pisidian Antioch and Gospel Penetration of the Greek World." Bibliotheca Sacra 118:469 (January-March 1961):46-53.

_____. "The Significance of Pentecost." Bibliotheca Sacra 122:486 (April-June 1965):169-77.

_____. Zechariah. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1963.

Unger's Bible Dictionary. Edited by Merrill F. Unger. 1957 ed. S.v. "Herod," by S. L. Bowman.

van Ommeren, Nicholas M. "Was Luke an Accurate Historian? Bibliotheca Sacra 148:589 (January-March 1991):57-71.

van Unnik, W. C. Tarsus or Jerusalem: The City of Paul's Youth. Translated by G. Ogg. London: Epworth, 1962.

Walvoord, John F. "The Ascension of Christ." Bibliotheca Sacra 121:481 (January-March 1964):3-12.

_____. "Biblical Kingdoms Compared and Contrasted." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 75-91. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

_____. The Holy Spirit at Work Today. Chicago: Moody Press, 1973.

_____. Jesus Christ Our Lord. Chicago: Moody Press, 1969.

Warfield, Benjamin B. Counterfeit Miracles. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1918; reprint ed., London: Banner of Truth Trust, 1972.

Weinert, Francis D. "Luke, Stephen, and the Temple in Luke-Acts." Biblical Theology Bulletin 17:3 (July 1987):88-90.

Wenham, John. "The Identification of Luke." Evangelical Quarterly 63:1 (1991):3-44.

Wilkin, Robert N. "An Exegetical Evaluation of the Perseverance of the Saints." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1982.

_____. "Did H. A. Ironside Teach Commitment Salvation?" Grace Evangelical Society News 4:6 (June 1989):1, 3.

_____. "Repentance and Salvation." Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 1:1 (Autumn 1988):11-20; 2:1 (Spring 1989):13-26.

_____. "Repentance and Salvation: A Key Gospel Issue." Grace Evangelical Society News 3:6 (June-July 1988):3.

Williams, Ernest Swing. Systematic Theology. 3 vols. Springfield, Mo: Gospel Publishing House, 1953.

Williams, Margaret H. "Palestinian Jewish Personal Names in Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 79-113. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Wimber, John. Power Evangelism. San Francisco: Harper & Row Publishers, 1986.

Winter, B. W. "Providentia for the Widows of 1 Timothy 5:3-16." Tyndale Bulletin 39 (1988):93-99.

Woodbridge, Charles J. A Study of the Book of Acts. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1955.

Zimmerman, Charles. "To This Agree the Words of the Prophets." Grace Journal 4:3 (Fall 1963):28-40.

Zuck, Roy B. "Cheap Grace?" Kindred Spirit 13:2 (Summer 1989):4-7.

_____. "The Doctrine of Conscience." Bibliotheca Sacra 126:504 (October-December 1969):329-40.

Zweck, Dean W. "The Areopagus Speech of Acts 17." Lutheran Theological Journal 21:3 (December 1987):111-22.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Acts (Book Introduction)

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.

INTRODUCTION.

St. Luke, who had published his gospel, wrote also a second volume, which, from the first ages, hath been called the Acts of the Apostles. Not that we can look upon this work, as a history of what was done by all the apostles, who were dispersed in different nations; but we have here a short view of the first establishment of the Christian Church, a small part of St. Peter's preaching and actions, set down in the first twelve chapters, and a more particular account of St. Paul's apostolical labours, in the following chapters, for about thirty years, till the year 63, and the 4th year of Nero, where these acts end. (Witham) --- St. Luke, after giving us the history of the life, actions, miracles, sufferings, and instructions of Jesus Christ, in his gospel, here give us the life and actions of the apostles, the primitive Christians, and particularly all that relates to St. Paul, by way of an appendix. And what could he give more useful or more important to the Church, whether we consider the noble examples he offers for our imitation, or the excellent lessons for our improvement in spiritual wisdom? He describes in this book the accomplishment of many things that had been predicted by Jesus Christ, the descent of the Holy Ghost, the prodigious change effected in the minds and hearts of the apostles: we behold here the model of Christian perfection, in the lives of the first Christians, and the practice of the most eminent virtues, in the conduct of the blessed apostles; the miraculous operations of the holy Spirit, in the conversion of the Gentiles, and this wonder of wonders, the foundation of the holy Catholic Church, the establishment of the spiritual kingdom of God promised through all the inspired oracles, and the daily addition which the Lord made to his Church, of such as should be saved. (chap. 2. ver. 47. and chap. xv. ver. 5.) --- St. Luke has entitled this work, the Acts of the Apostles, that we may seek therein, says St. John Chrysostom, (tom. 5. hom. xii.) not so much the miracles that the apostles performed, as their good deeds, and eminent virtues. In appearing to give us a simple history, says St. Jerome, this holy physician furnishes us with as many remedies, to cure the maladies of our souls, as he gives us words for our instruction. (Ep. 103.) --- It is thought, that his principal design was to oppose to the false acts of the apostles, that were then in circulation, a true and authentic history of the actions of St. Peter and St. Paul. The Catholic Church has ever held this work in such great esteem, that it has not only superseded every pretended history of the kind, that preceded it, but also every ascititious one that has succeeded it. (St. Augustine, de consen. Evang. lib. iv. chap. 8.) --- It is very probable, that St. Luke wrote his acts at Rome, whilst he was near St. Paul, during the time of his confinement, for he remained with him till his deliverance. There can be no doubt that the work was written in Greek, and in a more pure and polished style, than we find in any other writings of the New Testament. St. Luke generally cites the Septuagint, apparently because he was ignorant of the Hebrew; and because, St. Paul more frequently having to preach to the Gentiles, preferred citing the sacred text in the language known in common, sooner than in Hebrew, which was understood by few. See St. Jerome, in Isai. vi. and again, tradit. Hebr. in Genes. 45. --- The Catholic Church has ever admitted this book into the canon of Scriptures; though many heretics, says St. Augustine, have rejected it. (ep. 253. and lib. de util. cred. 7.) St. John Chrysostom, (hom. i. in Acta) complains, that this book, in his time, was not sufficiently attended to, which he esteems as no less useful than the gospel itself. Erasmus, in his preface to the Acts, says, that he had, in the first instance, some notion of adding this book to St. Luke's gospel, as they are both addressed to the same person, and the Acts are not inconsiderable part of the sacred history; for, as the gospel shews the seed committed to the earth, and sown in the field, the Acts represent it as taking root, shooting up, and producing its fruit. --- The Acts have not uniformly held the same place in the Testament which they hold at present. Sometimes this book was inserted immediately before the book of Revelation, as St. Augustine and others insinuate. At other times, we find it between the epistles of St. Paul and the canonical epistles. Some persons express their surprise, that St. Luke, who was the inseparable companion of St. Paul, has not given the account of St. Paul's martyrdom. St. John Chrysostom (hom. i. in Acta) gives an excellent solution: "the apostles, and other apostolic men, wrote little, but did a great deal." The martyrdom of St. Paul, that took place in the public theatre of Rome itself, and before the eyes of all the Christians of this capital of the world, could not remain unknown, but the voyages and other circumstances of his life, too useful to the Church to be suffered to pass into oblivion, called for the exertions of St. Luke's eloquent pen, which, though admirably accommodated to an historic design, is not wholly free from Hebraisms, and Syriacisms. The Acts of the Apostles include the history of the infant Church, from the day of our Lord's ascension into heaven, till the deliverance of St. Paul, two years after his arrival at Rome, i.e. a space of thirty years, from the year 33, to the year 63 of Jesus Christ, or from the 19th year of Tiberius, till the 9th year of Nero. This golden book paints, as it were, the face of the primeval Christian Church; it places before our eyes the singular providence of God, in founding and protecting his Church, and how the apostles, (in spite of every opposition of the armed power of the whole world, to oppress the gospel,) without any foreign assistance of learning, credit, power, or expectation of any temporal advantages, but relying solely on the power of truth, and the virtue of the holy Spirit, laboured in the propagation of the faith, without intermission, till the power of God, under the ignominy of the cross, became eventually triumphant. See Wm. Whitfield Dakins, LL.D. in his prolegomena. --- It may be divided into four parts. In the first eight chapters, St. Luke gives the origin and progress of the Christian Church among the Jews. From the 9th to the 16th, he shews how widely it was spread among the Gentiles: from the 16th to the 20th, the diverse peregrinations of St. Paul, till his last journey to Jerusalem: and from the 20th to the end, with what patience he underwent innumerable sufferings, trials, and indignities, with what magnanimity he had head against the violent surges of persecution, and his astonishing equanimity under every possible calamity. --- This account, which is not continued beyond his two years' imprisonment in Rome, contains a general sketch of the history of the Church during the epoch it describes of thirty years. The leading facts therein contained are, the choice of Matthias to be an apostles, in the room of Judas; the descent of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost; the preaching, miracles, and sufferings of the apostles at Jerusalem; the conversion of St. Paul; the call of Cornelius, the first Gentile convert; the persecution of the Christians by Herod Agrippa; the preaching of Paul and Barnabas to the Gentiles, by the express command of the Holy Ghost; the decree made at Jerusalem, declaring that circumcision, and a conformity to other Jewish rites and ceremonies were not necessary in Gentile converts; the miraculous cures performed by the handkerchiefs and aprons which had only touched the body of St. Paul; whilst the latter part of the book is exclusively confined to the history of St. Paul, of whom, as we have already seen, St. Luke was the constant companion for several years. --- The place of its publication is doubtful. A learned prelate advances, that the probability appears to be in favour of Greece, though some contend for Alexandria, in Egypt. This latter opinion rests upon the subscriptions at the end of some Greek manuscripts, and of the copies of the Syriac version; but the best critics think, that these subscriptions, which are also affixed to other books of the New Testament, deserve but little weight; and in this case they are not supported by any ancient authority. But the sentiment of this learned prelate, does not bias the opinion we gave at the beginning, and which we find confirmed by Alban Butler, in his life of St. Luke, vol. x. p. 432. where he says, "that St. Luke attended St. Paul at Rome, whither he was sent prisoner from Jerusalem in 61. The apostle remained there two years in chains; but was permitted to live in a house which he hired, though under the custody of a constant guard; and there he preached to those who daily resorted to hear him. From ancient writings and monuments belonging to the Church of St. Mary in via lata, which is an ancient title of a Cardinal Deacon, Boronius, in his Annals ad. an. 55. and Arringhi, in his Roma Subterranea, lib. iii, chap. 41. tell us, that this Church was built upon the spot where St. Paul then lodged, and where St. Luke wrote the Acts of the Apostles."

====================

Gill: Acts (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO ACTS

This book, in some copies, is called, "The Acts of the holy Apostles". It contains an history of the ministry and miracles of the apostles of Christ, and is a sort of a journal of their actions, from whence it takes its name. It begins at the ascension of Christ, and reaches to the imprisonment of the Apostle Paul at Rome; and is a history of upwards of thirty years: it gives an account of the first Gospel church at Jerusalem, and of the progress of the Gospel there, and in Judea, by the means of all the apostles, and particularly Peter, the minister of the circumcision, and who also first opened the door of faith to the Gentiles: it shows how the Gospel went forth from Jerusalem, and was spread in the Gentile world, especially by the Apostle Paul, whose companion Luke was, that was the writer of this book; for that it was written by him is very evident from the beginning of it, it being dedicated to the same person his Gospel is, and of which he makes mention; and in the Complutensian edition the book is called, "The Acts of the Apostles of Saint Luke the Evangelist"; and so the title of it in the Syriac version is, "the Book of the Acts: that is, the history of the blessed apostles, which my Lord Luke the Evangelist collected for the saints". It was by him written in the Greek language; and we are told ^a, that there was a version of it into the Hebrew language, and which was laid up in the library of the Jews at Tiberias; and is cited by R. Azarias ^b under the name of twlweph, "the Acts": of the authority of this book there has been no doubt, among the ancients, only Cerinthus the heretic endeavoured to discredit it; and it was not received by another sort of heretics called Severiani, from Severus, a disciple of Tatian ^c. It is a most excellent and useful work, showing the first planting of Christianity, and of Christian churches, both among the Jews and Gentiles; the spread and progress of the Gospel in several parts of the world; what sufferings the apostles endured for the sake of it; and with what patience and courage they bore them; and what success attended them; and is a standing proof and confirmation of the Christian religion.

College: Acts (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION

As early as the second century the title "The Acts of the Apostles" was given to this document. Before that time the work probably circulated with its companion volume, "The Gospel of Luke." When the other three Gospels were collected and the New Testament was formed, The Gospel of Luke and The Acts of the Apostles were separated. Both were included in the New Testament as books of history.

AUTHORSHIP

Like the Third Gospel, the Book of Acts does not identify its author. Evidence must be gathered, therefore, from both within the document itself and from references to the document in early church history.

The strongest evidence within the Book of Acts is its Prologue (1:1-3). When the Prologue of Acts is compared with the Prologue of the Third Gospel (1:1-4), the similarities are striking. Both books mention the name Theophilus as the recipient. Acts refers to "the former book," implying that the Third Gospel is that book. Acts also intends to begin the story at the point that the Third Gospel ends it-the ascension of Christ. The style of Greek used in both cases is polished and formal. The implication that both works were written by the same author is unavoidable.

In addition, the passages in Acts which use the pronoun "we" imply an eyewitness account. Appearing toward the end of Acts, these passages give the impression that whoever was writing the book was also present when some of the recorded events took place. It seems that the author makes himself a companion of Paul at these points in the narrative (Acts 16:10-17; 20:5-21:18; 27:1-28:16). At other points in the record the author was content to use "they" in describing events.

Inevitably, then, the question of authorship focuses on Paul's traveling companions. Because some of the "we" sections overlap with Paul's years in prison at both Caesarea and Rome, the companions who were with him at that time become prime candidates. When Paul wrote the letters to Philemon and to the Colossians from prison, Luke was one of the companions Paul mentioned (Phlm 23-24; Col 4:10-17).

Another line of reasoning was proposed by W.K. Hobart in 1882. He analyzed the vocabulary of Acts and concluded that the language indicated that the author of Acts was a physician. This proposal did not survive the scrutiny of scholarship for long. By 1920 H.J. Cadbury offered a study which showed that much of the language which Hobart considered "technical" medical terminology was in use by such nonmedical writers as Josephus, Plutarch, and Lucian. The most that can be said for this evidence today is that the terminology of Acts is compatible with authorship by a person with a medical background.

These pieces of evidence are consistent with the external evidence. Though references to The Acts of the Apostles do not appear as early in the church fathers as do references to other books of the New Testament, they do appear nonetheless. Diognetus (A.D. 130) and The Didache (A.D. 140) allude to the work, as does The Epistle of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons (A.D. 177), according to Eusebius. The latter source quotes the words of Stephen's prayer in which he asks that his accusers not have their sin charged against them ( Ecclesiastical History V.2). Similarly, Irenaeus (A.D. 180), Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 190), Tertullian (A.D. 200), and Eusebius (A.D. 325) quote from Acts without naming their source.

In addition to this evidence, many early church writers refer to the Third Gospel as written by Luke. This is important since the internal evidence makes the author of the Third Gospel the same as the author of Acts. Such testimony comes from the Muratorian Canon (A.D. 170). Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Jerome, on the other hand, speak directly of Acts as written by Luke.

Much attention has also been given to the sources used by Luke in writing Acts. Harnack was the primary scholar who promoted the position that underlying Acts are several sources. He argued that one could detect first an "Antioch" source, then a second source describing Paul's conversion, and finally a third source which contained the "Jerusalem Caesarean" tradition. This third source, he said, was actually two sources blended together, one more reliable than the other.

Harnack's proposals ran into trouble on a couple of counts. His approach seemed dominated by a rationalism which excised the miraculous from the text. In addition his theories about the parallels between the two "Jerusalem Caesarean" sources did not hold up under the scrutiny of Joachim Jeremias and others.

Another proposal regarding written sources for Acts came from C.C. Torrey. He argued that an Aramaic source was used in the composition of Acts 1-15, but absent from Acts 16-28. This argument was made on the basis of Semitisms which he found in these earlier chapters. Later scholars argued that these terms and phrases are best explained as coming from the Septuagint or the synagogue.

Also among the possible sources for Acts are oral traditions. C.J. Hemer lists dozens of passages which he thinks are best explained as deriving from reports passed along verbally to Luke.

In recent years scholars have been far more interested in Luke as a writer and theologian than as a compiler of sources. In some cases studies have concentrated on comparing Luke's style with other ancient writers.

With the work of Hans Conzelmann in 1953 the emphasis on Luke's theology as reflected in Acts became pronounced. This perspective continues to dominate scholarly discussions today. One problem with this perspective is that it frequently ignores or denies the value of Acts as a historical record of events in the early church.

DATE OF WRITING

Acts 1:1 indicates that Luke wanted Acts to serve as the second volume of a two-volume work. For this reason Acts must be dated at the same time or later than the Gospel of Luke. The earliest dates that scholars assign to Luke are in the late 50s. Festus had already ascended to power when Acts was written, an event which is dated in A.D. 60. These boundaries fix the earliest date for Acts.

The real question is how late can Acts be dated. Some radical Bible critics have dated Acts as late as A.D. 115-130. This date reduces the chances that Luke was the author. Many scholars fix the date between A.D. 70-80. The reasons often given for this date have to do with the subject matter of Luke's Gospel, especially Luke 21:5-38. In these verses Jesus speaks of the destruction of Jerusalem. His description is so vivid that many scholars believe Luke must have recorded it after the event had occurred in A.D. 70.

One question which must arise in discussing the date of Acts has to do with the last verses of the Book. Acts closes with a description of the Apostle Paul under house-arrest in Rome. He was taken there to stand trial before Caesar. The account ends by noting that he remained there "two whole years," preaching the gospel as he waited for his accusers to arrive. Tradition indicates that he was martyred in Rome during the reign of Nero (A.D. 54-68). The question to be answered is whether Paul was martyred during this Roman imprisonment. If so, why didn't Luke record Paul's death in Acts? Is the absence of any word on Paul's death significant? Was Luke avoiding the issue in order to preserve his focus on the victorious progress of the church? If so, maybe Acts was meant to end at this point in the story. This would allow for Acts to be written later than the year of Paul's death. The date of writing could then be fixed somewhere between A.D. 70-80.

On the other hand, it may be that Luke does not record Paul's death because it had not occurred when he wrote Acts, meaning that the dating of Acts would be earlier. If Luke finished Acts before Paul's death occurred, the work must be dated somewhere in the early or mid 60s. Church tradition (especially Jerome and Eusebius) dates Paul's martyrdom in Rome around A.D. 67-68. Many scholars believe, however, that Paul was released from his house-arrest described in Acts 28. They argue that he resumed his missionary travels until the day he was once again arrested and taken to Rome. They also contend that the Pastoral letters (1, 2 Timothy and Titus) were written before this second imprisonment. If this is true, then Acts may have been written at the end of Paul's first imprisonment, or about A.D. 63.

THEME OF ACTS

Acts opens with a statement from Jesus which seems to set the tone for the entire work. Jesus promises the Apostles that they will receive power in the form of the Holy Spirit (see 1:8). He then tells them that they will be his "witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth" (NIV). This theme of being a witness for the gospel is carried throughout the Book of Acts. Consider the following verses in Acts:

1:22 - the replacement for Judas had to be a witness of Christ's resurrection

2:32 - Peter's sermon on Pentecost emphasized that the apostles were witnesses of the resurrection

3:15 - after healing the beggar Peter proclaimed the resurrected Christ and that the apostles were witnesses

4:20 - the apostles told the Jewish authorities they could not help proclaiming what they had seen and heard

5:32 - when the apostles were again persecuted they said they must obey God because they were witnesses along with the Holy Spirit

8:25 - Peter and John went to Samaria where they "testified and proclaimed the word of the Lord"

10:39 - Peter proclaimed to Cornelius that he was a witness to the ministry of Jesus

13:31 - Paul told the crowd in Pisidian Antioch that Jesus' followers had witnessed Christ's resurrection

22:15 - Ananias went to Paul with the message that Paul would be a witness to all men of what he had seen and heard

23:11 - God appeared to Paul encouraging him that he would testify in Rome concerning the Lord These references do not include the numerous passages in which individuals are found witnessing falsely (e.g., 6:13; 7:58; 24:1; 25:7).

As the witnesses for Christ carried the gospel toward the far reaches of the world, the church advanced everywhere. This theme is also important in Acts. The expansion of the church is presented in a historical context. Luke even dates some of the events in his record by using key Roman names and events as reference points (see 12:1, 19; 18:12; 23:24; 24:24; 25:1, 23).

As Acts 1:8 indicates, Luke shows how the gospel prevailed wherever it was proclaimed. In Jerusalem, huge numbers were baptized on the Day of Pentecost. Later, thousands were added (4:4), even though the believers were being persecuted by the Jewish authorities. Such incidents as the striking down of Ananias and Sapphira and the dissension over the ministry to Hellenistic widows did not slow down the rapid increase of converts to the gospel (5:14; 6:1,7).

Beyond the walls of Jerusalem, the gospel also found fertile ground for growth. After the conversion of Saul of Tarsus, the church in Judea, Galilee, and Samaria experienced peace and saw its numbers increasing (9:31). Peter's work in Lydda bore rich fruit (9:35) and his raising of Tabitha in Joppa brought many to believe in the Lord (9:42).

The ever-widening influence of the gospel was felt beyond Judea and Samaria as well. Antioch saw increasing numbers of believers, especially among the Gentile populations (11:21,24). The cities of southern Galatia felt the gospel's impact as Paul and Barnabas evangelized in places like Lystra, Iconium, and Derbe (see 14:1,21). Later, Paul and Silas revisited these cities and more growth came (see 16:5). On this same missionary journey Paul and Silas even crossed into Macedonia where the results were the same (see 17:12). The gospel continued to conquer hearts and minds for Christ with each passing day.

Through all of Luke's record, the role of the Holy Spirit is highlighted. From the Day of Pentecost when he was poured out (see 2:14ff), the Spirit was essential to God's purposes for the proclamation of the gospel. When the men were chosen to administer the benevolence to widows, Stephen was appointed because he was a man full of "faith and of the Holy Spirit" (see 6:5). In Samaria the new converts received a visit from the apostles who placed their hands on them, granting them the power of the Holy Spirit (see 8:17). This was a power which Simon the Sorcerer wanted to buy (see 8:18). Philip heard from the Spirit that he was to go to the chariot of the Ethiopian (see 8:29). While Peter was preaching to Cornelius, the Holy Spirit came on the listeners, interrupting Peter's address (see 10:44). Barnabas and Saul were first selected as missionaries at Antioch when the Spirit spoke to the church (see 13:2). Their travels were guided by the Holy Spirit (see 16:7) and in Ephesus Paul rebaptized believers who had not received the Spirit (see 19:1-7). When Paul addressed the Ephesian elders, he reminded them that they had become leaders because of the Spirit's ministry (see 21:28).

While Acts emphasizes that the apostles received the power of the Spirit (1:8), it also emphasizes how they used this power. They faithfully bore witness for Christ. Acts underscores the work of the apostles, or at least some of the apostles. Roughly speaking, Acts 1-12 focuses on the work of the Apostle Peter. His role in the choosing of a successor for Judas (see 1:15ff) and the preaching on the Day of Pentecost (see 2:14ff) open the book. Almost every chapter which follows contains some report on the work of Peter. He and John heal the lame man (see 3:1-10), and then stand before the Sanhedrin (see 4:1-22). He confronts Ananias and Sapphira (see 5:1-11) and Simon the Sorcerer (see 8:9-25). He experiences the vision which results in the preaching to Cornelius and the conversion of his family (see 10:9-48). He then defends his actions before the church leaders in Jerusalem (see 11:1-18). Finally, he miraculously escapes imprisonment by Herod (see 12:1-19).

With Acts 13 the spotlight shifts to the Apostle Paul. Paul and Barnabas are sent from Antioch as missionaries (see 13:2). Their report at the Jerusalem conference is crucial (see 15:12), and though they cannot agree about John Mark, a second missionary journey is undertaken by Paul and Silas (see 15:40). The second journey is followed immediately by a third (see 18:23), and then comes the account of Paul's tragic visit to Jerusalem and his arrest in the temple (see 21:30). The rest of the book describes the series of hearings Paul endures and his transport to Caesarea and on to Rome. Paul's ministry as a Roman prisoner is the focus of the final comment in Acts. For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house and welcomed all who came to see him. Boldly and without hindrance he preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ (28:30-31).

THE PURPOSE OF ACTS

For years scholars have puzzled over why Luke produced Acts. Comparing the opening of Acts with that of Luke's Gospel shows that a particular disciple named Theophilus was central to Luke's motives. Was he a new convert? Was he a wealthy patron? Was he an influential Christian? These questions have no obvious answer.

Luke implies in the opening of the gospel that he had carefully researched his material (see Luke 1:1-4). He was concerned to provide a proper sequence of events. He shows awareness of other accounts which have been written concerning Jesus.

One purpose often noted is a historical one. Luke wanted to provide a historical record of the events of Jesus' life and the progress of the first-century church. Though some scholars argue that his reasons had to do with his concerns about the return of Christ, it is possible that he saw the end of the age of the apostles coming. Perhaps Luke wanted a written record of the apostles' work in carrying on the ministry of Jesus.

The immediate purpose of Luke may be indicated in his words in the opening of the gospel. He tells Theophilus that he writes so that this believer will "know the certainty of the things" he had been taught (1:4). This comment may indicate that the two-volume work was meant for Christian instruction.

The apologetic value of Acts has often been noted. Some have wondered if Luke's work was intended to serve as a defense-brief for the Apostle Paul as he stood before Caesar. The problem with this suggestion is that Luke includes so much material that has nothing to do with Paul's defense. Why would he include the birth, ministry, death, and resurrection of the Lord? Why would he focus on the Apostle Peter in the early chapters of Acts? Acts would be very tedious reading if the main purpose were a defense of Paul.

Nevertheless, it is true that much of Acts emphasizes that the believers posed no threat to the Roman empire. When the apostles are summoned before the Jerusalem authorities, their only crime is healing the lame man (see 3:1ff). When Stephen is martyred, his only fault is his zeal for the faith (see 6:8ff). Peter's imprisonment at the hands of Herod Agrippa I is due to no fault of the Apostle (see 12:1ff). Paul's hearing before Gallio is a matter of questions about the Jewish Law (see 18:12-16). The series of trials experienced by Paul repeatedly emphasizes his innocence (see 21:29; 23:29; 24:27; 25:19; 26:31). The cumulative effect of these statements establishes that the church was never any real threat to Caesar.

Beyond these purposes, Acts has a theological purpose. Luke intends to show how the apostles began the work Jesus initiated on the earth. Acts 1:1 describes Luke's Gospel as an account of "all that Jesus began to do and to teach." Acts intends to describe how the apostles continued this work of Jesus. The Gospel begins in Jerusalem and fans out over the whole Roman world to the Imperial City itself. The salvation of the Lord is, in Paul's language, "first for the Jew, then for the Gentile" (Rom. 1:16). Acts records how God used human means to send out the divine message of salvation in Christ.

THE HISTORICITY OF ACTS

Concerning the historical accuracy of the Book of Acts modern scholarship appears to be at an impasse. Questions have been raised for years about Luke's account of events. Many of the questions have been aimed at the portrait of Paul which is presented in Acts. Since the days of F.C. Baur and the Tübingen school, the issue of how Paul is presented in Acts as compared with the Pauline letters has been prominent among scholars who study Acts. The result has been a series of scholars who cast doubts upon the historical accuracy of Acts.

Drawing much of this attention has been the relationship between Acts and Galatians. Especially important to scholars are such topics as the number of visits Paul made to Jerusalem, the description of the debate about circumcision, the matter of Paul's relationship to the other apostles, the position of Paul regarding the "apostolic decrees" (see 15:19-20), and other matters relating to Paul's association with the Jerusalem leaders. In addition questions have been raised about Paul's portrait in Acts as an apostle who would carry the decrees from church to church when he says nothing of them in his letters to some of the same churches. Also a problem is the fact that Acts is silent with regard to any of these letters Paul was addressing to the churches, even though he wrote during the very time covered in Acts. Beyond this strange silence is the other important event in Paul's ministry about which Acts is so quiet-the collection for the believers in Judea (see 1 Cor 16:1-4; Rom 15:23-33).

These differences have caused some scholars to speak of the "Lucan Paul" in contrast to the "Paul of the epistles." Another scholar explains the difference (in the tradition of Baur) by referring to the "Paulinism of Acts." Luke is viewed not as a historian recording events in the ministry of Paul, but as a theologian who carefully constructs a historical explanation of Paul even if it is at odds with historical reality. The Pauline speeches of Acts, in particular, are viewed as fabrications of Luke's theological genius, motivated by the need to present Paul in terms which agree with his own theological perspective.

For many scholars, then, Acts is regarded as so preoccupied with theological concerns as to render it suspect as a historical report of events in the life of the first-century church. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries this skepticism was met with a wave of scholars who resisted such a pessimistic assessment of the historicity of Acts. Such scholars as James Smith, Henry Alford, J.B. Lightfoot, F.W. Farrar, R.B. Rackham, William Ramsay, Theodor Zahn, Adolf Harnack, Arthur McGiffert, C.C. Torrey, and H.J. Cadbury found more reasons for confidence in the historical value of Acts. The impact of Martin Dibelius, however, was decisive. His critical studies of Acts produced a significant trend toward the conclusion that Acts should be understood in terms of descriptive theology rather than history. Hans Conzelmann and Ernst Haenchen were instrumental in systematically applying the approach of Dibelius to the text of Acts. Thus a powerful stream of thought continues to influence scholars who study Acts for the purpose of clarifying the theological tendencies of early church teaching, while dismissing the historical contribution of the work.

These trends have been called into question in recent years by such scholars as F.F. Bruce, I.H. Marshall, Martin Hengel, and C.J. Hemer. But no consensus among scholars has been reached. To some extent, then, the study of Acts advances on two entirely different (if not always unrelated) tracks. Work goes on in the effort to understand the theological tendencies which shape Luke's production of the Book of Acts. At the same time other scholars look to historical and archaeological studies as potential sources for additional help in comprehending the contribution Acts makes to the historical picture of the emerging church of the first century.

Whenever scholars from the Restoration Movement have engaged in major studies of Acts, the issue of the historicity of the Book has been dominant. Alexander Campbell's Acts of the Apostles is largely a grammatical analysis of the text of Acts, but the historicity of Luke's work is assumed throughout. J.W. McGarvey's New Commentary on Acts of Apostles not only proceeds on the presupposition that Acts can be trusted as a historical representation of the events it records, but argues the point against such "infidel" scholars as Baur and Zeller. Another commentary was produced in 1896, this time by David Lipscomb. His work makes theology the primary focus, but once again the issue of the historical credibility of Acts is central.

More recent volumes have appeared which offer the same balance. H. Leo Boles produced his commentary in 1941, a study which follows in the same tradition. Don DeWelt's commentary appeared in 1958, and it is stamped with a devotional and didactic quality that makes the message of Acts practical for the believer, yet it never compromises on the assumption that Acts is reliable as a historical account. Finally, the work of Gareth Reese was pivotal. His New Testament History: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Acts is from the very start a work which argues the case for the historicity of Acts. With full awareness of the challenges from the Bible critics, Reese builds his case for the credibility of Luke's account of these events.

In this commentary our approach is to appreciate the theological motivations of Luke's work while not rejecting this record as the most valuable source we have regarding the developing church. Our confidence does not rest entirely on the fact that Luke's abilities as a historian have proven to be convincing. We also believe in the promise of the Lord to direct his servant into all truth.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Commentaries:

Arrington, French. The Acts of the Apostles: An Introduction and Commentary . Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1988.

Boles, H.L. A Commentary on Acts of the Apostles . Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 1941.

Campbell, Alexander. Acts of the Apostles . Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 1858.

Conzelmann, Hans. Acts of the Apostles , trans. James Limburg, A. Thomas Kraabel, Donald Juel. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987.

Carter, C.W. and Ralph Earle. Acts of the Apostles . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1959.

DeWelt, Don. Acts Made Actual . Joplin, MO: College Press, 1969.

Foster, Lewis. "Acts," in The NIV Study Bible . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985.

Harnack, Adolf. The Acts of the Apostles , trans. J.R. Wilkinson. London: Williams & Norgate, 1909.

Haenchen, Ernst. The Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary , trans.Bassil Blackwell. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1971.

Harrison, E.F. Interpreting Acts . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986.

Lake, Kirsopp and H.J. Cadbury. The Beginnings of Christianity , ed. F.J. Foakes-Jackson. Vol. 4. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979.

Lipscomb, David. Commentary on Acts of the Apostles . Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 1896.

McGarvey, J.W. New Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles . 2 Vols. in One. Cincinnati: Standard, 1892.

Marshall, I.H. The Acts of the Apostles , Tyndale Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980.

Munck, Johannes. The Acts of the Apostles . The Anchor Bible. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967.

Pesch, Rudolf. Die Apostelgeschichte . Teilband I: Apg. 1-12. Zurich: Benziger, 1986.

Polhill, John. Acts . The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman, 1992.

Stagg, Frank. The Book of Acts: The Early Struggle for an Unhindered Gospel . Nashville: Broadman, 1955.

Reese, Gareth. New Testament History: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Acts . Joplin, MO: College Press, 1991.

Williams, C.S.C. A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles . Harper's New Testament Commentaries. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1988.

Special Studies:

Arrington, French. New Testament Exegesis: Examples . Washington, D.C.: University Press of America, 1977.

Barrett, C.K. The New Testament Background: Selected Documents . New York: Harper & Row, 1961.

Bassler, Jouette. Divine Impartiality: Paul and a Theological Axiom . Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1982.

Beasley-Murray, George. Baptism in the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.

Behm, Johannes. "Glossa," in TDNT , ed. Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich; trans. Geoffrey Bromiley. Vol. 1. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.

Beitzel, Barry. The Moody Atlas of Bible Lands . Chicago: Moody, 1985.

Blaiklock, E.M. "The Acts of the Apostles as a Document of First-Century History," in Apostolic History and the Gospel , ed. Ward Gasque, Ralph Martin. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970.

Cadbury, H.J. "Roman Law and the Trial of Paul," in The Beginnings of Christianity , ed. F.J. Foakes-Jackson. Vol. 5. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1975.

. Style and Literary Method of Luke Part 1. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1920.

. The Making of Luke-Acts . New York: MacMillan, 1927.

Casson, Lionel. Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World . Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973.

. The Ancient Mariners . New York: Macmillan, 1959.

Conzelmann, Hans. The Theology of St. Luke , trans. G. Buswell. New York: Harper & Row, 1960.

Cottrell, Jack. Baptism: A Biblical Study . Joplin, MO: College Press, 1989.

Dahl, Nils. "The Story of Abraham in Luke-Acts," in Studies in Luke-Acts , ed. Leander Keck, J.L. Martyn. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980.

Davies, W.D. Paul and Rabbinic Judaism . London: SPCK, 1958.

. The Gospel and the Land . Berkeley: University of California, 1974.

. Torah in the Messianic Age and/or the Age to Come. Philadelphia: SBL, 1952.

Dibelius, Martin. "The Acts of the Apostles in the Setting of the History of Early Christian Literature," in Studies in the Acts of the Apostles , trans. M. Ling. London: SCM, 1956.

. "Paul on the Areopagus," Ibid.

Dunn, J.D.G. Baptism in the Holy Spirit . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970.

. Jesus and His Spirit . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975.

Dupont, Jacques. The Salvation of the Gentiles: Essays on the Acts of the Apostles . New York: Paulist, 1967.

. The Sources of Acts: The Present Position , trans. Kathleen Pond. London: Darton, Longman, & Todd, 1964.

Easton, Burton. Early Christianity: The Purpose of Acts and Other Papers , ed. F.C. Grant. London: SPCK, 1955.

Ellis, E.E. Paul's Use of the Old Testament . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1985.

Enslin, Morton. Reapproaching Paul . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1987.

Esler, Philip. Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts: The Social and Political Motivations of Lucan Theology . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.

Filson, Floyd. "The Journey Motif in Luke-Acts," in Apostolic History and the Gospel , ed. W.W. Gasque and Ralph Martin. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970.

Fitzmyer, Joseph. Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament . London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1971.

Flew, R.N. Jesus and His Church: A Study of the Idea of the Ecclesia in the New Testament . London: Epworth, 1943.

Gärtner, Bertil. The Areopagus Speech and Natural Revelation . Uppsala: Gleerup, 1955.

Gasque, Ward. A History of the Criticism of the Acts of the Apostles . Tübingen: Mohr, 1975.

Gaston, Lloyd. No Stone on Another: Studies in the Significance of the Fall of Jerusalem in the Synoptic Gospels . Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1970.

Georgi, Dieter. The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians . Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986.

Goulder, M.D. Type and History in Acts . London: SPCK, 1964.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction . Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1970.

Hamey, L.A. and J.A. The Roman Engineers . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.

Harnack, Adolf. Luke the Physician , trans. J.R. Wilkinson. New York: Putnam's, 1907.

Harris, J.R. Testimonies , I, II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1916.

Hemer, C.J. The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History , ed. Conrad Gempf. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990.

Hengel, Martin. Between Jesus and Paul , trans. John Bowden. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983.

. Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in Their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period , trans. John Bowden. 2 Vols. in One. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981.

Hobart, W.K. The Medical Language of St. Luke . London: Longmans Green, 1882.

Horsley, Richard. Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs: Popular Movements in the Time of Jesus . New York: Harper and Row, 1985.

Horton, Jr., Fred. "Reflections on the Semitisms of Luke-Acts," in Perspectives on Luke-Acts , ed. Charles Talbert. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978.

Hubbard, Benjamin. "The Role of Commissioning Accounts in Acts," in Perspectives on Luke-Acts , ed. Charles Talbert. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978.

Hurd, John. The Origin of 1 Corinthians . London: SPCK, 1965.

Jensen, Irving. Acts: An Independent Study . Chicago: Moody, 1974.

Jeremias, Joachim. Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus , trans. F.H. and C.H. Cave. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989.

Jervell, Jacob. Luke and the People of God: A New Look at Luke-Acts . Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1979.

Jewett, Paul. Infant Baptism and the Covenant of Grace . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.

Jewett, Robert. A Chronology of Paul's Life . Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979.

Johnson, Luke. S haring Possessions: Mandate and Symbol of Faith . Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981.

Kim, Seyoon. The Origin of Paul's Gospel . Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1981.

Kurz, William. "Luke-Acts and Historiography in the Greek Bible," in SBL Seminar Papers 1980, ed. P.J. Achtemeier. Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1980.

Ladd, George. A Theology of the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.

Lohse, Eduard. "Pentekoste," in TDNT , ed. Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich; trans. Geoffrey Bromiley. Vol. 6. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.

Longenecker, Richard. Paul, Apostle of Liberty . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1977.

McRay, John. Archaeology and the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1991.

Maddox, Robert. The Purpose of Luke-Acts . Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1982.

Manson, T.W. The Servant-Messiah . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1953.

Marshall, I.H. Luke: Historian and Theologian . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1970.

Martin, Ralph. New Testament Foundations . 2 Vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.

Miesner, Donald. "The Missionary Journeys Narrative: Patterns and Implications," in Perspective on Luke-Acts , ed. Charles Talbert. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978.

Minear, Paul. Images of the Church in the New Testament . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1977.

Moore, G.F. Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era . New York: Schocken, 1971.

Moule, C.F.D. "Obligation in the Ethic of Paul," in Essays in New Testament Interpretation . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.

. "The Christology of Acts," in Studies in Luke-Acts , ed. Leander Keck, J.L. Martyn. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980.

Moulton, J.H., W.F. Howard, and Nigel Turner. A Grammar of New Testament Greek . 4 Vols. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1963.

Munck, Johannes. Paul and the Salvation of Mankind , trans. Frank Clarke. Richmond, VA: John Knox, 1959.

Nickle, K.F. The Collection . London: SCM, 1966.

Norden, Eduard. Agnostos Theos . Stuttgart: Teubner, 1923.

O'Neill, J.C. The Theology of Acts in Its Historical Setting . London: SPCK, 1961.

Plevnik, Joseph. What Are They Saying about Paul? New York: Paulist Press, 1986.

Ramsay, William. Luke the Physician . London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1908.

. St. Paul the Traveller and Roman Citizen . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978.

Richard, Earl. Acts 6:1-8:4: The Author's Method of Composition. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1978.

Rienecker, Fritz. A Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament , trans. Cleon Rogers, Jr. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1980.

Rivkin, Ellis. A Hidden Revolution . Nashville: Abingdon, 1978.

Robertson, A.T. Luke the Historian in Light of Research . Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1920.

Robinson, J.A.T. Twelve New Testament Studies . London: SCM, 1962.

Robbins, Vernon. "By Land and by Sea: The We-Passages and Ancient Sea Voyages," in Perspectives on Luke-Acts , ed. Charles Talbert. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978.

Russell, Bob. Making Things Happen: The Power of Christian Leadership . Cincinnati: Standard, 1987.

Sanders, E.P. Paul and Palestinian Judaism . Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977.

Scharlemann, Martin. Stephen: A Singular Saint . Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1968.

Schürer, Emil. The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ , ed. and rev. Geza Vermes, Fergus Millar, and Matthew Black. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1979.

Shepard, J.W. The Life and Letters of the Apostle Paul: An Exegetical Study . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956.

Sherwin-White, A.N. Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament . Oxford: Clarendon, 1963.

Smith, James. The Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul , 3rd ed. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1866.

Spiro, Abram. "Stephen's Samaritan Backgound," in Johannes Munck, The Acts of the Apostles , Anchor Bible. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967.

Stagg, Frank. The Book of Acts: The Early Struggle for an Unhindered Gospel . Nashville: Broadman, 1955.

Stagg, Frank and Evelyn . Woman in the World of Jesus . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978.

Stendahl, Krister. "The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West," in Paul among Jews and Gentiles . Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983.

Swidler, Leonard. Biblical Affirmations of Woman . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1979.

Talbert, Charles. Literary Patterns, Theological Themes and the Genre of Luke-Acts . Missoula: Scholars Press, 1974.

Tarn, W.W. and G.T. Griffith. Hellenistic Civilization . Cleveland: World Publishing, 1969.

Torrey, C.C. The Composition and Date of Acts . Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1916.

Trites, Allison. The New Testament Concept of Witness . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977.

van Unnik, W.C. "Luke-Acts, A Storm Center in Contemporary Scholarship," in Studies in Luke-Acts , ed. Leander Keck and J.L. Martyn. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980.

. "Tarsus or Jerusalem: The City of Paul's Youth," trans. G. Ogg, in Sparsa Collecta . Part 1. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1973.

Veltman, Fred. "The Defense Speeches of Paul in Acts," in Perspectives on Luke-Acts , ed. Charles Talbert. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978.

Via, E.J. "An Interpretation of Acts 7:35-37 from the Perspective of Major Themes in Luke-Acts," in Society of Biblical Literature 1978 Seminar Papters , ed. Paul Achtemeier. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1978.

Vielhauer, Philipp. "On the 'Paulinism' of Acts," in Studies in Luke-Acts , ed. Leander Keck, J.L. Martyn. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980.

Wilson, Stephen. "Law and Judaism in Acts," in SBL Seminar Papers 1980, ed. Paul Achtemeier. Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1980.

. The Gentiles and the Gentile Mission in Luke-Acts . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973.

Periodicals:

Acworth, Angus. "Where Was St. Paul Shipwrecked? A Re-examination of the Evidence." JTS 24 (1973): 190-193.

Bamberger, Bernard. "The Sadducees and the Belief in Angels." JBL 82 (1963): 433-435.

Best, Ernest. "Acts XIII.1-3." JTS 11 (1960): 344-348.

Blevins, William. "The Early Church: Acts 1-5." RevEx 71 (1974): 463-474.

Bowker, J.W. "Speeches in Acts." NTS 14 (1968): 96-111.

Bruce, F.F. "Chronological Questions in the Acts of the Apostles." BJRL 68 (1986): 273-295.

Bull, Robert. "Caesarea Maritima: The Search for Herod's City." BAR 8 (1982): 24-41.

Cadbury, H.J. "Erastus of Corinth." JBL 50 (1930): 42-58.

. "Lexical Notes on Luke-Acts: V. Luke and the Horse-Doctors." JBL 52 (1933): 55-65.

Catchpole, David. "Paul, James and the Apostolic Decree." NTS 23 (1977): 428-444.

Cosgrove, Charles. "The Divine dei in Luke-Acts." NovT 26 (1984): 168-190.

Clark, David. "What Went Overboard First?" BTr 26 (1975): 144-146.

Culpepper, R.A. "Paul's Mission to the Gentile World." RevEx 71 (1974): 487-497.

Daube, David. "On Acts 23: Sadducees and Angels." JBL 109 (1990): 493-497.

Davis, J.C. "Another Look at the Relationship between Baptism and Forgiveness of Sins in Acts 2:38." RestQ 24 (1981): 80-88.

Downing, F.G. "Common Ground with Paganism in Luke and Josephus." NTS 28 (1982): 546-559.

Duncan, G.S. "Paul's Ministry in Asia - The Last Phase." NTS 3 (1957): 211-218.

Filson, Floyd. "The Christian Teacher in the First Century." JBL 60 (1941): 317-328.

Fitzgerald, Michael. "The Ship of Saint Paul: Comparative Archaeology." BA 53 (1990): 31-39.

Fitzmyer, Joseph. "The Ascension of Christ and Pentecost." TS 45 (1984): 409-440.

Gilchrist, J.M. "On What Charge Was St. Paul Brought to Rome?" ExpT 78 (1967): 264-266.

Goldsmith, Dale. "Acts 13:33-37: A Pesher on II Samuel 7." JBL 87 (1968): 321-324.

Goodspeed, E.J. "Gaius Titius Justus." JBL 69 (1950): 382-383.

Gordon, Alasdair. "The Fate of Judas according to Acts 1:18." EQ 43 (1971): 97-100.

Greenhut, Zvi. "Burial Cave of the Caiaphas Family." BAR 18 (1992): 29-36.

Haldane, Douglas. "Anchors of Antiquity." BA 53 (1990): 19-24.

Hemer, C.J. "First Person Narrative in Acts 27-28." TB 36 (1985): 97-98.

Hirschfield, Nicolle. "The Ship of St. Paul - Part I: Historical Background." BA 53 (1990): 19-24.

Hohlfelder, Robert. "Caesarea beneath the Sea." BAR 8 (1982): 42-47.

Horsley, G.H.R. "The Inscriptions of Ephesos and the New Testament." NovT 34 (1992): 105-168.

Kepple, Robert. "The Hope of Israel, The Resurrection of the Dead, and Jesus: A Study of Their Relationship in Acts with Particular Regard to the Understanding of Paul's Trial Defense." JETS 20 (1977): 231-241.

Kilgallen, John. "The Function of Stephen's Speech (Acts 7:2-53)." Biblica 70 (1989). 173-193.

Kilpatrick, G.D. "Acts XXIII.23 DEXIOLABOI ." NTS 14 (1963): 393-394.

Kodell, Jerome. "'The Word of God grew': The Ecclesial Tendency of logos in Acts 1,7; 12,24; 19,20." Biblica 55 (1974): 505-519.

Ladouceur, David. "Hellenistic Preconceptions of Shipwreck and Pollution as a Context for Acts 27-28." HTR 73 (1980): 435-449.

Lofthouse, W.F. "The Holy Spirit in the Acts and the Fourth Gospel." ExpT 52 (1940-41): 334-337.

Malherbe, Abraham. "Gentle as Nurse." NovT 12 (1970): 203-217.

Mare, Harold. "Acts 7: Jewish or Samaritan?" WThJ 34 (1971): 1-21.

Mastin, B.A. "Scaeva the Chief Priest." JTS 27 (1976): 405-412.

Meinardus, Otto. "St. Paul Shipwrecked in Dalmatia." BA 39 (1976): 145-147.

Merrill, Eugene. "Paul's Use of 'About 450 Years' in Acts 13:20." BiblThecSac 138 (1981): 246-257.

Metzger, Bruce. "The Meaning of Christ's Ascension." ChrT 10 (1966): 863-864.

Miles, Gary and Garry Trompf. "Luke and Antiphon: The Theology of Acts 27-28 in the Light of Pagan Beliefs about Divine Retribution, Pollution, and Shipwreck." HTR 69 (1976): 259-267.

Nash, Donald. "For the Remission of Sin." ChrSt (3-30-75): 270-272.

Palmer, Darryl. "Acts and the Historical Monograph." TB 43 (1992): 373-388.

Parrat, J.K. "The Rebaptism of the Ephesian Disciples." ExpT (1968): 182-183.

Parker, Pierson. "Once More, Acts and Galatians." JBL 36 (1967): 175-182.

Rapuano, Yehudah. "Did Philip Baptize the Eunuch at Ein Yael?" BAR (1990): 44-49.

Scott, J.J. "Stephen's Speech: A Possible Model for Luke's Historical Method?" JETS 17 (1974): 91-97.

. "The Cornelius Incident in the Light of Its Jewish Setting." JETS 34 (1991): 475-484.

Slater, Thomas. "The Possible Influence of LXX Exodus 20:11 on Acts 14:15." AUSS 30 (1992): 151-152.

Stagg, Frank. "The Unhindered Gospel." RevEx 71 (1974): 451-462.

Stein, Robert. "The Relationship of Galatians 2:1-10 and Acts 15:1-35: Two Neglected Arguments." JETS 17 (1974): 239-242.

Stoops, Jr., R.F. "Riot and Assembly: The Social Context of Acts 19:23-41." JBL 108 (1989): 73-91.

Talbert, Charles. "The Place of the Resurrection in the Theology of Luke." Int 46 (1992): 19-30.

Thornton, T.C.G. "Stephen's Use of Isaiah LXVI.1." JTS 25 (1974): 432-435.

Tiede, David. "The Exaltation of Jesus and the Restoration of Israel in Acts 1." HTR 79 (1986): 278-286.

Trites, Allison. "The Importance of Legal Scenes and Language in the Book of Acts." NovT 16 (1974): 278-284.

Viviano, Benedict and Justin Taylor. "Sadducees, Angels, and Resurrection (Acts 23:8-9)." JBL 111 (1992): 496-498.

Walker, William. "Acts and the Pauline Corpus Reconsidered." JSNT 24 (1985): 3-23.

Wall, Robert. "Successors to 'the Twelve' according to Acts 12:1-17." CBQ 53 (1991): 628-643.

Wilcox, Max. "The 'God-Fearers' in Acts - A Reconsideration." JSNT 13 (1981): 102-122.

Workman, W.P. "A New Date Indication in Acts." ExpT 11 (1900): 316-317.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

ABBREVIATIONS

AUSS . . . Andrews University Seminary Studies

BA . . . Biblical Archaeology

BAR . . . Biblical Archaeology Review

BiblThecSac . . . Bibliotheca Sacra

BJRL . . . Bulletin of the John Rylands Library

BTr . . . Bible Translator

ChrSt . . . Christian Standard

ed. . . . edited by

EQ . . . Evangelical Quarterly

ExpT . . . Expository Times

HTR . . . Harvard Theological Review

JBL . . . Journal of Biblical Literature

JSNT . . . Journal of Studies in the New Testament

JETS . . . Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society

JTS . . . Journal of Theological Studies

n. . . . note

NovT . . . Novum Testamentum

RevEx . . . Review and Expositor

TB . . . Tyndale Bulletin

TDNT . . . Theological Dictionary of the New Testament

TS . . . Theological Studies

trans . . . translated by

WThJ . . . Westminster Theological Journal

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

College: Acts (Outline)

OUTLINE

I. THE CHURCH IN JERUSALEM - 1:1-8:1a

A. INTRODUCTION OF THE BOOK - 1:1-3

B. THE COMMISSIONING OF THE APOSTLES - 1:4-8

C. THE ASCENSION OF CHRIST - 1:9-11

D. WAITING FOR THE HOLY SPIRIT - 1:12-14

E. THE REPLACEMENT OF JUDAS ISCARIOT - 1:15-26

F. THE DAY OF PENTECOST - 2:1-47

1. The Apostles Baptized with the Holy Spirit - 2:1-4

2. The Amazement of the Crowd - 2:5-13

3. The Sermon of Peter - 2:14-36

a. The Promise of Joel - 2:14-21

b. The Proclamation of Jesus' Resurrection - 2:22-28

c. Jesus the Lord and Messiah - 2:29-36

4. The Call to Repentance - 2:37-40

5. The First Church - 2:41-47

G. THE HEALING OF THE LAME MAN AND ITS CONSEQUENCES - 3:1-4:31

1. A Cripple Cured - 3:1-10

2. Peter's Address in Solomon's Colonnade - 3:11-26

a. The Power of Jesus' Name - 3:11-16

b. The Call to Repentance - 3:17-21

c. The Witness of the Prophets - 3:22-26

3. The Arrest of Peter and John - 4:1-4

4. Peter and John before the Sanhedrin - 4:5-12

5. The Debate in the Sanhedrin - 4:13-17

6. The Prohibition against Preaching Christ - 4:18-22

7. The Release of Peter and John - 4:23-31

a. Their Reunion with the Twelve - 4:23

b. Their Prayer for Boldness - 4:24-30

c. Their Power from the Holy Spirit - 4:31

H. THE UNITY AND GENEROSITY OF THE EARLY CHURCH - 4:32-5:16

1. The Sharing of Material Possessions by Believers - 4:32-35

2. The Example of Barnabas - 4:36-37

3. The Deceit of Ananias and Sapphira - 5:1-11

4. The Signs and Wonders from the Apostles - 5:12-16

I. THE ARREST OF THE APOSTLES - 5:17-42

1. The Imprisonment of the Apostles - 5:17-26

2. The Apostles before the Sanhedrin - 5:27-40

3. The Continued Witness of the Apostles - 5:41-42

J. THE CHOOSING OF THE SEVEN DEACONS - 6:1-7

K. THE ARREST, TRIAL, AND STONING OF STEPHEN - 6:8-8:1a

1. False Accusations Against Him - 6:8-15

2. Stephen's Defense - 7:1-53

a. The Old Testament Patriarchs - 7:1-8

b. Israel in Egypt - 7:9-19

c. Early Days of Moses - 7:20-29

d. The Call of Moses - 7:30-34

e. The Wilderness Wanderings - 7:35-43

f. The Tabernacle and the Temple - 7:44-50

g. The Personal Application - 7:51-53

h. The Final Witness of Stephen - 7:54-56

i. The Death of Stephen - 7:57-60

j. The Consent of Saul - 8:1a

II. THE CHURCH IN JUDEA AND SAMARIA - 8:1b-12:25

A. PERSECUTION AND DISPERSION OF THE CHURCH - 8:1b-3

B. MINISTRY OF PHILIP - 8:4-40

1. Philip in Samaria - 8:4-8

2. The Conversion of Simon Magus - 8:9-13

3. The Visit of Peter and John to Samaria - 8:14-17

4. Peter's Condemnation of Simon's Offer to Pay for the Holy Spirit - 8:18-24

5. The Return of the Apostles to Jerusalem - 8:25

6. Philip and the Conversion of the Ethiopian - 8:26-40

C. THE CONVERSION OF SAUL OF TARSUS - 9:1-31

1. The Expedition of Saul to Damascus - 9:1-2

2. The Light and the Voice from Heaven - 9:3-7

3. The Entrance of Saul to Damascus - 9:8-9

4. The Commissioning of Ananias to Visit Saul - 9:10-16

5. The Visit from Ananias - 9:17-19a

6. The Preaching of Saul in Damascus - 9:19b-22

7. The Escape of Saul from Damascus - 9:23-25

8. The Ministry of Saul in Jerusalem and His Departure for Tarsus - 9:26-30

D. PEACE AND PROSPERITY FOR THE CHURCH - 9:31

E. PETER'S MINISTRY IN WESTERN JUDEA - 9:32-43

1. The Ministry at Lydda: Healing of Aeneas - 9:32-35

2. The Ministry at Joppa: The Raising of Dorcas - 9:36-43

F. THE CONVERSION OF THE FIRST GENTILES - 10:1-11:18

1. The Ministry of Peter at Caesarea - 10:1-48

a. The Vision Seen by Cornelius - 10:1-8

b. The Vision Seen by Peter - 10:9-16

c. The Arrival at Joppa of Servants Sent by Cornelius - 10:17-23a

d. The Visit of Peter to the House of Cornelius - 10:23b-33

e. The Sermon by Peter - 10:34-43

f. The Reception of the Holy Spirit by Gentiles - 10:44-48

2. The Endorsement of Peter's Ministry by the Jerusalem Leadership - 11:1-18

a. The Questioning of the Jerusalem Leaders - 11:1-3

b. The Defense by Peter - 11:4-17

c. The Defense Accepted - 11:18

G. THE CHRISTIANS AT ANTIOCH - 11:19-30

1. Evangelism among the Gentiles of Antioch - 11:19-21

2. The Ministry of Barnabas and Saul at Antioch - 11:22-26

3. The Famine Relief Work from Antioch - 11:27-30

H. THE PERSECUTION OF THE CHURCH BY HEROD AGRIPPA I - 12:1-25

1. The Martyrdom of James and Imprisonment of Peter - 12:1-4

2. The Escape of Peter from Prison - 12:5-11

3. The Report of Peter about the Escape - 12:12-17

4. The Discovery of Peter's Escape - 12:18-19a

5. The Death of Herod Agrippa I - 12:19b-23

6. The Continued Progress of the Gospel - 12:24

7. The Return of Barnabas and Saul to Antioch - 12:25

III. THE CHURCH IN THE ENDS OF THE EARTH - 13:1-28:31

A. THE FIRST MISSIONARY JOURNEY - 13:1-14:28

1. The Commissioning of Barnabas and Saul at Antioch - 13:1-3

2. The Arrival of Barnabas and Saul on Cyprus - 13:4-5

3. The Confrontation at Paphos - 13:6-12

4. The Arrival at Pisidian Antioch - 13:13-15

5. Paul's Address in the Synagogue - 13:16-41

a. Old Testament Prelude to Christ - 13:16-22

b. Fulfillment in Christ - 13:23-37

c. Conclusion and Warning - 13:38-41

6. The Response to Paul's Address - 13:42-43

7. Gentile Interest and Jewish Opposition - 13:44-52

8. The Visit to Iconium - 14:1-7

9. The Healing at Lystra - 14:8-13

10. Paul's Address about the Living God - 14:14-18

11. The Stoning of Paul - 14:19-20a

12. The Visit to Derbe and Return to Lystra, Iconium, and Pisidian Antioch - 14:20b-23

13. Return to Antioch of Syria - 14:24-28

B. THE COUNCIL AT JERUSALEM - 15:1-35

1. The Visit of Judaizers to Antioch - 15:1-2

2. The Journey of Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem - 15:3-5

3. The Convening of the Council - 15:6

4. The Address of Peter - 15:7-11

5. The Address of Paul and Barnabas - 15:12

6. The Summation by James - 15:13-21

7. The Apostolic Letter to Gentile Christians - 15:22-29

8. The Reception of the Apostolic Letter by the Church in Antioch - 15:30-35

C. THE SECOND MISSIONARY JOURNEY - 15:36-18:22

1. The Proposal and the Debate about John Mark - 15:36-39

2. The Journey through Syria and Cilicia - 15:40-41

3. The Visit to Derbe and Lystra - 16:1-4

4. The Growth of the Churches - 16:5

5. The Journey through Phrygia and Galatia - 16:6-7

6. The Macedonian Vision in Troas - 16:8-10

7. The Visits to Samothrace and Neapolis - 16:11

8. The Visit to Philippi - 16:12-40

a. The Faith of Lydia - 16:12-15

b. The Slave Girl with the Spirit of Divination - 16:16-22

c. The Imprisonment - 16:23-26

d. The Conversion of the Jailer - 16:27-34

e. The Departure - 16:35-40

9. The Visits at Amphipolis and Apollonia - 17:1a

10. The Visit at Thessalonica - 17:1b-9

a. Paul's Preaching in the Synagogue - 17:1b-4

b. The Backlash from the Jews - 17:5-9

11. The Visit of Paul and Silas in Berea - 17:10-14

12. The Visit at Athens - 17:15-34

a. Paul's Preaching in Athens - 17:15-17

b. Paul's Encounter with the Philosophers - 17:18

c. Paul's Address in the Areopagus - 17:19-31

1) Paul's Acknowledgement of Their Idols - 17:19-23

2) God the Creator of Everything - 17:24-26

3) God Who is Near Enough to Touch - 17:27-29

4) God Who Judges and Demands Repentance - 17:30-31

d. The Reaction to Paul's Preaching - 17:32-34

13. The Visit at Corinth - 18:1-17

a. Paul's Arrival and Ministry with Aquila and Priscilla - 18:1-4

b. Resistance from the Jews and Paul's Decision to Preach to the Gentiles - 18:5-6

c. Encouragement in a Night Vision - 18:7-10

d. Paul's Trial before Gallio - 18:11-17

14. The Visit at Cenchrea - 18:18

15. The Visit at Ephesus - 18:19-21

16. The Journey to Caesarea, Jerusalem,and Antioch of Syria - 18:22

D. THE THIRD MISSIONARY JOURNEY - 18:23-21:16

1. The Journey through Galatia and Phrygia - 18:23

2. The Ministry of Apollos in Ephesus and Corinth - 18:24-28

3. The Twelve Disciples at Ephesus - 19:1-7

4. Paul's Preaching in the Synagogue and the School of Tyrannus - 19:8-10

5. The Conflict with the Exorcists - 19:11-19

6. The Growth of Paul's Ministry - 19:20

7. Paul's Plans to Visit Rome - 19:21-22

8. The Riot of Demetrius and the Silversmiths - 19:23-41

a. The Anger of the Silversmiths - 19:23-28

b. The Demonstration in the Theater - 19:29-34

c. The Calming Words of the Town Clerk - 19:35-41

9. The Journey through Macedonia and Greece - 20:1-6

10. The Visit at Troas - 20:7-12

11. The Visits at Assos, Mitylene, Kios (Chios), Samos, and Miletus - 20:13-15

12. The Meeting with the Ephesian Elders - 20:16-38

a. Paul's Summons of the Ephesian Elders - 20:16-17

b. Paul's Reflections on His Ephesian Ministry - 20:18-21

c. Paul's Expectations for the Future - 20:22-24

d. Paul's Charge to the Ephesian Elders - 20:25-31

e. Paul's Final Admonition - 20:32-35

f. The Emotional Parting - 20:36-38

13. The Stops at Cos, Rhodes, and Patara - 21:1-2

14. The Arrival at Tyre - 21:3-6

15. The Arrival at Ptolemais and Caesarea - 21:7-14

a. The Entrance into the Home of Philip - 21:7-9

b. The Warning of Agabus and Paul's Response - 21:10-14

16. The Arrival at Jerusalem - 21:15-16

E. PAUL'S VISIT TO THE TEMPLE AND HIS ARREST - 21:17-23:30

1. Paul's Reception by the Church - 21:17-26

a. Paul's Report of the Gentile Response to the Gospel - 21:17-19

b. The Proposal of James and the Elders - 21:20-26

2. The Riot in the Temple - 21:27-30

3. Paul's Rescue by the Romans - 21:31-36

4. Paul's Request for Permission to Address the Mob - 21:37-40

5. Paul's Defense to the Jews - 22:1-21

a. Paul's Early Days - 22:1-5

b. The Episode on the Damascus Road - 22:6-11

c. The Visit from Ananias of Damascus - 22:12-16

d. The Vision in the Temple - 22:17-21

6. The Reaction of the Mob and Paul's Imprisonment - 22:22-29

7. The Trial before the Sanhedrin - 22:30-23:10

a. The Confrontation with the High Priest - 22:30-23:5

b. The Division of the Pharisees and Sadducees over the Resurrection Hope - 23:6-10

8. The Word of Encouragement from God - 23:11

9. The Conspiracy Against Paul's Life - 23:12-15

10. The Discovery of the Conspiracy - 23:16-22

11. The Decision to Transfer Paul to Caesarea - 23:23-24

12. The Letter from the Tribune to Felix - 23:25-30

F. THE IMPRISONMENT AT CAESAREA - 23:31-26:32

1. Paul's Transfer to Caesarea - 23:31-35

2. Paul's Trial before Felix - 24:1-21

a. The Accusations Against Paul - 24:1-9

b. The Defense by Paul - 24:10-21

3. The Postponement of a Verdict by Felix - 24:22-23

4. Paul's Interviews with Felix - 24:24-26

5. The Ascension of Festus: Paul's Continued Custody - 24:27

6. The Visit of Festus to Jerusalem - 25:1-5

7. Paul's Appeal to Caesar - 25:6-12

8. The Visit of Agrippa II and Bernice to Festus - 25:13-22

9. Paul's Appearance before Agrippa - 25:23-26:32

a. The Presentation of Paul to Agrippa by Festus - 25:23-27

b. Paul's Address to Agrippa - 26:1-23

1) The Introduction - 26:1-3

2) Paul's Pharisaic Heritage - 26:4-8

3) Paul's Former Zeal Against Christians - 26:9-11

4) Paul's Experience on the Road to Damascus - 26:12-18

5) Paul's Obedience to God - 26:19-20

6) Paul's Arrest - 26:21

7) Paul's Continuing Preaching of Christ - 26:22-23

c. The Interchange Between Festus, Paul, and Agrippa - 26:24-29

d. The Agreement Regarding Paul's Innocence - 26:30-32

G. PAUL'S VOYAGE TO ROME - 27:1-28:31

1. The Journey from Caesarea to Sidon - 27:1-3

2. The Journey from Sidon to Myra - 27:4-6

3. The Journey from Myra around Crete - 27:7

4. The Arrival at Fair Havens - 27:8-15

a. Paul's Warning About the Coming Danger - 27:8-12

b. The Storm at Sea - 27:13-15

5. The Difficult Journey around Cauda - 27:16-17

6. The Shipwreck - 27:18-44

a. The Attempts to Lighten the Ship - 27:18-19

b. Paul's Words of Encouragement - 27:20-26

c. The Sighting of Land - 27:27-29

d. The Attempt of the Sailors to Escape - 27:30-32

e. Paul's Encouragement of the Crew to Eat - 27:33-38

f. The Running Aground of the Ship - 27:39-41

g. The Escape to Dry Land - 27:42-44

7. The Winter at Malta - 28:1-10

a. The Welcome by the Barbarians - 28:1-6

b. Paul's Ministry of Healing - 28:7-10

8. The Journey to Syracuse - 28:11-12

9. The Journey to Rhegium and Puteoli - 28:13-14

10. The Welcome at Three Taverns - 28:15

11. The Imprisonment at Rome - 28:16-29

a. The Arrival at Rome - 28:16

b. Paul's Preaching to the Jews - 28:17-29

1) Paul's Defense - 28:17-20

2) The Request for Further Information by the Jews - 28:21-22

3) The Interview with the Jews - 28:23

4) The Mixed Response - 28:24-29

12. Paul's Two Years in Rome - 28:30-31

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV