COUNCIL in JERUSALEM

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.