Acts 15:1-35(i)

From the heights of multiple conversions to the depths of persecution and deceit in the church, the experience of the church has been quite varied. Yet even with those negatives, the greatest challenge to the life and unity of the church - to the gospel itself - occurs in the events recorded in this chapter.

In terms of way Acts is structured and the way Luke tells the story of the early church, this chapter forms the central focus. Strategically and theologically, it is utterly crucial.

1. The Problem (v.1)
The issue arises in v.1 tells when "Some men...". The problem being raised here is not simply one of salvation by works but of salvation through becoming Jews. They were quite happy for Gentiles to come into God's family but it had to be by becoming Jews (proselytes) otherwise they couldn't be saved.

For centuries, Jews were used to Gentiles embracing the ancient faith, coming to worship the one true God. But to do that, they needed to become as Jews. These Jews, who are now Christians, are still working under that old system: to be saved, part of the family of God, you need to believe in Jesus and become Jews.

This brought them "into sharp dispute and debate" with Paul and Barnabas - a 'full and frank exchange of views'. A major storm is brewing that threatens the Gentile mission & the unity of the church.

2. The Solution
The church at Antioch send Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem to try to sort the problem out. As they go, they tell in Phoenicia and Samaria what the Lord has done and there is great rejoicing. But how will Jerusalem react?

When the meeting is convened, there is much discussion and some of the believing Pharisees put the case for the Gentiles being circumcised. There follows 3 decisive speeches which effectively resolve the issue:

i) Peter - The first to speak at length is Peter who recounts his experience with Cornelius and his household. He makes a number of points that are extremely important.

He recalls in v.9 how God showed he accepted them just as he had the Jews by giving them his Spirit when they believed, as Gentiles. Then in v.10 he speaks of the law as having been a burden to the Jews, a burden they'd found hard to bear. And he concludes in v.11 by affirming that "it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are".

Salvation is, and always was, by grace, for all peoples. But now, all who believe are saved as they are, without being required to come under the law and become Jews.

ii) Paul & Barnabas - The second main speech is made by Paul and Barnabas (v.12). They too speak of their experiences, referring to how the Lord has been with them, working signs and wonders among the Gentiles through them.

Their point is that God has authenticated their work, a work that had not required Gentiles to become Jews in order to be saved. Would God have been with them in such power if they were fundamentally wrong in what they were doing?

iii) James - Last of all, James speaks, clearly with authority, although quite how much authority is a moot point! But whatever the answer to that question, what is not in doubt is the decisive contribution his argument makes to the debate (v.15ff).

Peter and Paul have related their experiences of God at work among the Gentiles; James now brings those experiences to the bar of scripture and shows how what has happened is entirely in line with what the Lord had said would happen.

He refers to part of the prophecy of Amos, a passage that has in mind the last-times when the Lord would act to restore his people. Clearly that is what has happened in Jesus for all Jews who would believe. But what of the Gentiles?

These verses from Amos show conclusively that when God acted to restore his people, he would also at that time bring in the Gentiles too. We read here of "the remnant of men" seeking the Lord and of "the Gentiles who bear my name". And in v.17 it's clear that the Gentiles would come in as a result of God's work among the Jewish people.

So the OT scriptures show that this coming in of the Gentiles was to be expected and that they were to come in as Gentiles. After these speeches, there is no more debate. The issue is settled: salvation is by grace, whoever you are, and the law is not a requirement that is to be added to faith.

3. Applying it today
This issue has resonated down through the centuries as people have grappled with how a person is saved. But, as we've seen, the issue is not simply about salvation by works, it is also to do with the difference between proselytism and conversion.

The brothers who caused the trouble were not denying that salvation is through faith in Jesus; what they were doing was adding to that the requirement to become Jews. They were clinging to Jewish exclusivity and in doing so pushing a Christ-plus theology.

The issue of how a person is saved is still with us today and must be contended for and settled on scriptural grounds. The whole gospel is at stake where a 'Christ-plus' theology is at work and God is robbed of his glory. Such teaching must be countered.

But the issue of proselytism versus conversion is also still with us and is capable of much damage. We can find ourselves thinking in terms that are strikingly similar to the Judaisers: new converts must become like us in every way, since our expression of Christian faith is the only authentic one.

So you have Africans made to worship in Western style, unspoken rules about what to wear in church, the right way of doing church and so on. Those examples are only the tip of what is probably a very large iceberg but they illustrate the point being made.

Are we seeking proselytes or converts? Do we even sub-consciously add anything to faith in Jesus for salvation? Are we in danger of making the church in our own image, instead of the diverse body God has created? Part of the glory of the gospel is that it unites people from all races in the one family of God.

4. The Decree
Gentiles who become Christians remain Gentiles. But if new converts stay in their particular culture, does that mean anything goes in terms of that culture? That issue is also addressed here and we'll close by briefly looking at it.

The stipulations that James mentions and that are laid down in the letter that is sent have attracted a lot of comment. What are they referring to and why are they mentioned?

One possibility is that they simply refer to certain ceremonial matters under Jewish law that the Gentiles need to observe in order to not upset the sensibilities of Jewish Christians.

But that position is not easy to sustain. So what do they refer to? When James speaks of abstaining from food polluted by idols, it seems likely that he is referring to an occasion (a public feast perhaps) where animals are offered to idols and the food is eaten.

The other things he mentions fit into that scenario too: at such pagan feasts, animals would often be strangled and their blood consumed, and people would often indulge in all sorts of sexual immorality. To partake at such feasts as they had done in the past would pose grave problems to these new believers.

So whilst they are not being required in conversion to leave their culture, they are not to just simply go along with it. Their new faith is to critique their culture; within their old culture they are to live counter-cultural lives that witness to the transforming grace of God.

The implications of this for us are also far-reaching. Within our culture, do we live distinctively Christian lives that critique the culture or do we simply go with the flow? We need wisdom as we seek to live in the world whilst not being of it. May God give it to us! Amen.