Lesson 15: Discerning The Will Of The King (Acts 15)

As we’ve already noted, there was some opposition to taking the gospel to the Gentiles. Peter had been criticized by the “circumcision party” for eating with uncircumcised men (Acts 11.1-2). However, once the apostle reported how the Lord had given the Holy Spirit to Cornelius and his family, these traditionalists “glorified God, saying, ‘Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life’.” (Acts 11.18) It was now firmly established that Gentiles were accepted by God!

However, a significant issue remained: were Gentiles supposed to become like their Jewish brethren by being circumcised and keeping the Mosaic Law? After all, since the gospel is the fulfillment of God’s promise to Abraham (Acts 3.25-26; cf. Genesis 12.3), wouldn’t it follow that all who receive the promise also receive the sign of the covenant (Genesis 17.10,13-14)? And that is the issue at the heart of this chapter and of many of Paul’s letters: can one be justified merely through faith in Christ, or must one also keep the Law (cf. Romans 3.28-31; Galatians 5.2; etc.)?

Perhaps complicating the issue was that Jesus had not spoken regarding the future of circumcision. He had foretold that “other sheep” would be part of His flock (John 10.16) and had commanded His apostles to make disciples of all nations (Matthew 28.19-20; Mark 16.15-16), but did not reveal what obligation the nations would have to the Law. Yes, Jesus fulfilled the Law (Matthew 5.17), but did that mean the sign of the covenant was no longer needed? How could the church discern Jesus’ will on this matter? This chapter serves an essential function in the life of the church as we see how they reached a conclusion on what was the will of the King. We would do well to follow their example we continue to discern the will of the King in our lives.

Notes From The Text:

Vss. 1-5, Trouble Arises

• Vs. 1
  • The issue was not whether one could be circumcised… or keep any other aspect of the Mosaic Law for that matter. We’ve already noted how Peter and John would go to the Temple at the hour of prayer (Acts 3.1). Later in our study we will note how Paul undertook a vow (see Acts 21.20-24,26-27). Significantly, Paul would also have Timothy circumcised in order to defuse Jewish bias (Acts 16.3). But none of these acts of devotion were added to the gospel; none were bound on others as matters of salvation. However, these Jewish brothers were perverting the gospel by tying salvation to observance of the Mosaic Law rather than faith in Christ. Unfortunately, this issue would trouble the church for years to come (cf. Romans 3.21-31; Galatians 5.2; etc.).
  • We should note that the significance of circumcision had only grown in the centuries before Jesus’s birth. Greek rulers, most notably Antiochus IV, had outlawed circumcision in an effort to blend the Jews in with the rest of the Greek empire. After the successful revolt led by the Maccabees, circumcision “became the principal symbol of being a Jew. This attitude is well illustrated in the book of Jubilees (c. 180–170 B.C.): ‘Anyone who is born whose own flesh is not circumcised on the eighth day is not from the sons of the covenant which the Lord made for Abraham since he is from the children of destruction. And there is therefore no sign upon him so that he might belong to the Lord because he is destined to be destroyed and annihilated from the earth and to be uprooted from the earth because he has broken the covenant of the Lord our God’.” (Zondervan Illustrated Bible Background Commentary)
• Vs. 2, Paul, Barnabas and the others did not go to Jerusalem because the congregation in Antioch was answerable to them, rather because the issue came from Jerusalem. Furthermore, the counsel of all the apostles would be of value (see John 16.13).
• Vs. 3, it was approximately 300 miles from Antioch to Jerusalem. Luke’s comment that this news brought great joy implies that the churches in question probably took the same attitude to circumcision as Paul. These congregations would have been composed of Jewish Christians (see Acts 11:19), but they were not tradition bound like some of the Jerusalem Christians.
• Vs. 4, there is some question how this trip relates to the one recorded in Galatians 2.1-10. Some believe they are the same trip while some believe Galatians 2 refers to a prior trip. It is impossible to know which view is correct, but neither passage conflicts with the other.
• Vs. 5, Jesus said that He came to fulfill the Law (see Matthew 5.17). However, these brethren still labored under the notion that the Mosaic Law was binding, therefore circumcision was required (see Galatians 5.3).

Vss. 6-21, Discerning The King’s Will

• Vs. 6, This (and vs. 2) is the first mention of elders in the Jerusalem church, but their presence is unsurprising.
• Vs. 7, note Acts 10; 11.14.
• Vs. 8, see Acts 10.44-48; 11.15-17.
• Vs. 9, Cornelius was an uncircumcised Gentile who received the Holy Spirit. His heart was cleansed by faith as opposed to any work of the Law (vss. 1,5).
• Vss. 10-11, “The Mosaic system had been a ‘yoke’ because: 1) It required perfect obedience (Gal. 3:10), and no one (except Christ) had kept it in that fashion. 2) The Jews had encumbered it with many traditions (Mt. 15:6), which burdened the people. It was unreasonable, therefore, to urge the Gentiles to place themselves under the law of Moses. It is only through the new system, as an expression of Christ’s favor, that anyone is saved. In the final analysis, both Jew and Gentiles are saved ‘in like manner’.” (Wayne Jackson)
• Vs. 12, see Acts 14.3,8-10. God bearing witness before uncircumcised Gentiles demonstrated His acceptance of them.
• Vs. 13, James was the half-brother of Jesus (see Matthew 13.55) but did not accept Him as the Messiah during His life (Mark 3.21). However, he did believe after seeing the resurrected Jesus (1Corinthians 15.7).
• Vs. 14, the Jews gloried in their status as the Lord’s people (Deuteronomy 14.2), but the Lord foretold that the day was coming when the nations would become His people (Zechariah 2.11).
• Vss. 15-18, quotation from Amos 9.11-12. The tent of David had been rebuilt (see Acts 13.22-23), so it was the fulfillment of prophecy that the Gentiles would now be called by God’s name.
• Vs. 19, note vs. 28. This wasn’t simply the matter of man’s judgment, but judgment guided by the Spirit.
• Vs. 20, the Gentiles would not be bound by the Law, but neither could they adhere to pagan practices. The items listed here were forbidden in the Law (Leviticus 17-18) and were common pagan practices.
• Vs. 21, the meaning of this verse is unclear. One possibility is that the Gentile believers must not willingly offend the Jews who live in their communities.
• Before we move on, let’s consider what we’ve learned about how to discern the King’s will:
  • They took in ALL that God revealed about the matter. That included specific scriptures, such as Amos 9.11-15, but also included the actions of God: He had given the Holy Spirit to the Gentiles and had performed “signs and wonder” among the Gentiles. If we are going to discern the will of the King we must take in ALL that He has revealed. That will include specific commands in Scripture, but also examples of how His followers lived out the faith and even principles laid out in Scripture.
  • Once all that God has revealed has been taken in, conclusions are reached which are in accordance with revelation. So, while Jesus had never stated that Gentiles must not be circumcised, the early church was able to discern that this was not a requirement. God had revealed in prophecy that the day was coming when the nations would be called by His name, and He had visibly shown His acceptance of the Gentiles without their being circumcised. Thus, they could formulate a “judgment” that could rightly be said to come from the Holy Spirit (see vss. 19,28).
  • Simply stated, the process is the same for us when considering any matter where the Lord did not give specific commands (How should we worship? What responsibility does the church have in benevolence? How should a saint dress? Can a saint drink alcohol?) We take in ALL that the Lord has revealed and then reach a conclusion consistent with revelation.

Vss. 22-35, Letter To The Gentile Disciples

• Vs. 22, it was brethren from Judea who were the source of the problem (vss. 1,5). The fact that the “whole church” accepted the decision means that all were willing to be guided by truth and not their traditions or preconceived beliefs. Sending Barsabbas and Silas would confirm that this matter had been resolved in the minds of the saints in Jerusalem.
• Vs. 23, note that Paul would also deliver this message to the churches established on his first journey (Acts 16.4).
• Vs. 28, compare again with vs. 19. The conclusion was reached by men, but could be attributed to the Holy Spirit because these men relied on God’s revelation.
• Vs. 33, Silas would accompany Paul on his next journey (vs. 40). So he either did not return to Jerusalem, or made the trip and then returned to Antioch.

Vss. 36-41, Paul And Barnabas Separate

• Vs. 36, “Their evangelistic zeal was not limited to baptizing the lost. They wanted to make sure these saints continued to obey the commands of the Lord (cf. Matt. 28.20).
• Vs. 38, see Acts 13.13.
• Vs. 39
  • Barnabas was related to John Mark (Colossians 4.10) and his actions are consistent with his character (Acts 4.36; 9.27).
  • John Mark would be a reliable companion of Paul in the future (see Colossians 4.10; 2Timothy 4.11).
  • Who was right? Perhaps both were. Mark needed to be rebuked for deserting them, but he also needed encouragement. He received both, a needed rebuke from Paul and encouragement to do better from Barnabas.
• Vss. 39-41, while their disagreement was regrettable, the result was that more territory could be covered. Barnabas took Mark and returned to his homeland while Paul took Silas and went overland toward the regions he previously visited on the first journey.