Council in Jerusalem
The
Passage: Acts 15:1 –
16:5
Structure:
a. 15:1-2, Circumcision
b. 15:3, Visit
of towns
c. 15:4-6,
report at Jerusalem
d. 15:7-11,
yoke
e. 15:12,
Paul and Barnabas
f.
15:13-21, Words of Jacob/James
e’. 15:22,
Paul and Barnabas
d’. 15:23-29,
burden
c’. 15:30-35,
Report at Antioch
b’. 15:36-41,
Visit of towns
a’. 16:1-5, Circumcision
Historical
and geographical context: Chapter 8 tells us that everyone left Jerusalem during great
persecution but apostles. Two things to note here: first, during these years
Jerusalem church re-gained more people (due to evangelism and return). Two: one
of the strongest parties within the church became the Pharisaic party – Jews
who accepted Jesus as the Messiah but pushed the necessity to obey “the customs
of Moses” to be saved. Their “mission” to Antioch resulted in Jerusalem
council.
Paul and
Barnabas are the main proponents of Una Sancta – One and Holy church. Their
mission experience impacted their theological presuppositions.
On their way
to Jerusalem Barnabas and Paul go through Phoenicia and Samaria. Two Gentile
territories whose representatives accepted Jesus – Syrophoenician woman (Mk.
7:24-29) and the woman at Samaritan well (John 4).
Theology:
Development
of the authority structure in Jerusalem church. It used to be apostles with St.
Peter as a spokesman (see ch. 6 – decision about diaconal office). Now, it is
apostles and elders. Knowing what duties St. Paul assigns to bishops/overseers
(1 Tim.3) and elders (Tit. 2), we need to differentiate elders in the Bible
from the elders in the LCMS (unfortunately). Yet, the point remains – by the
time of Jerusalem council, the church was governed not only by the apostles who
“saw Jesus” but also by the godly men who came to faith later on.
To
understand the point of the story, we need to ask ourselves: what was the
question? The answer: the way people come into the com-unity, not their
sanctification. It was a challenge for “admission office” of the church – who
and how can be counted as a full-right church member. This chapter should not
be used as a background for antinominalism (cp. FC, 6 [both Epitome and SD]).
At the same time, we should not forget the immediate example of Timothy.
Comparing it with Ex. 4, we can see his circumcision as a dedication to a
particular mission.
What does
the restoration of the Tent of David point to? When Jacob refers to theology of
Zion (vv. 16-17) he addresses two questions: first closeness of relationship
with God, as the Tent of David allowed. Second, the other nations will be
attracted to this closeness and will join Israel (cp. Is. 2:2-3).
The very end
of chapter 15 presents a sad story of a major disagreement between St. Paul and
Barnabas. Two strong and godly men had a completely different attitude toward
fitness of John Mark for the outreach ministry. So, this mission split – did it
ruin or multiply the possibilities. The answer is “yes”. On one hand, the
ruined unity was somewhat impactful – right after the unity of the church in
decision over the acceptance of Gentiles into the full membership of the people
of God, we see a story of breaking up the bond of togetherness. On the other
hand, we know that Barnabas and [John] Mark were very active in their ministry.
Therefore, God was able to use even this split for the spreading of the Gospel.
To conclude, it is possible that apostle Paul and [John] Mark got re-united (2
Tim. 4:11; Philemon 23).
Other
themes:
Ecumenical
Councils and Jerusalem council. There is an opinion that 7 Ecumenical councils
are as authoritative as the Council in Jerusalem. This position leads to [at
least] two opposing wrong conclusions: (1) the decisions of the Ecumenical
councils are Divinely inspired. No, they are not. (2) the decision of Jerusalem
council has only “suggestive” character. Again, being a part of the Bible, the
description and the decision is fully inspired.