The Fight for Christian Freedom

ACTS 15:1-6

IT WOULD seem that throughout the Christian era there have been among the followers of the Master varying degrees of discernment with respect to the Gospel, both as it applies to Christians and what it will mean for the world during the “times of restitution of all things” which were to follow the second coming of Christ. It is true even today that those who “come into the truth” are not all able to appreciate its beauty and power to the same extent.

So in the Early Church there were those who became followers of the Master up to a point, but were not able to discern all the “mysteries of the kingdom of heaven” as revealed through him. Among these were certain Jews—mostly of the sect of the Pharisees, who, while professing to accept Jesus as the Messiah, insisted that in order to obtain salvation through him it was necessary also to adhere to the ceremonial features of the Law, particularly circumcision. The Pharisees were noted for their rigidity of profession with respect to the forms and ceremonies of the Law, and probably it was more difficult for them to break away fully from their sectarian background of thought and custom than for others.

That which one has believed for a long time, and what his parents have believed, is often a difficult barrier to surmount in order to make real progress in the way of truth. Paul indicates that there were some in the church in his day who did not believe in the resurrection of the dead. (I Cor. 15:12) This was one of the disbeliefs of the Jewish sect known as the Sadducees; and perhaps it was from among these that converts were made who failed to grasp the full import of the Gospel as it relates to the hope of everlasting life; even as it was from among the Pharisees that the Judaizing teachers arose.

In any event these teachers of error, coming from Judea, found their way to the various groups of Gentile converts which had been brought together by the ministry of Paul and Barnabas, and their “strange” teaching disturbed the brethren considerably. Paul and Barnabas withstood them, as was proper to do; but inasmuch as these false teachers had come from Judea, there seemed to be some question in the minds of the ecclesias as to whose teachings should be looked upon as having the greatest authority.

It was therefore decided that Paul and Barnabas, “and certain others of them,” should go to Jerusalem and confer with the apostles and elders there with the view of reaching an authoritative conclusion, something that could be adopted as a standard for all the churches. While apparently no particular congregation of believers in the Early Church was looked upon as the head, or chief among the others, it can readily be understood why the brethren in Jerusalem would be held in high esteem, and any viewpoint emanating from there would carry weight.

In this account, stress is laid on the thought that the apostles and elders at Jerusalem should be consulted. Not much is recorded after Pentecost with respect to the activities of most of the apostles. Perhaps the majority of them remained with the church at Jerusalem, and on certain needed occasions, such as the one recorded in today’s lesson, served as a board of counselors in questions that would be brought before them.

ACTS 15:22-29

The twelve apostles were given authority in the church to decide doctrinal matters, but it is interesting to note that in reaching a decision with respect to the Gentiles, they do not exclude the other brethren in Jerusalem from having had a share in the deliberation. Thus is revealed a true spirit of humility on their part. The chosen men who were sent back to the Gentile churches with Paul and Barnabas did not go merely as representatives of the apostles, but also of the elders and the “whole church.” While in this instance the authority of the apostles would have been sufficient, the fact that they included the church tends to emphasize the importance the Lord places upon decisions reached by ecclesias of his consecrated people. God’s blessing is certain to be upon any action in which his people as a whole concur.

“Judas surnamed Barnabas, and Silas” were the ones chosen by the brethren at Jerusalem to accompany Paul and Barnabas on their return to the Gentile churches, and together with them bear the message of freedom from the Law which had been decided upon at the Jerusalem conference. Letters were written which, in addition to containing the maximum demands they would make of Gentile converts with respect to conduct, gave the qualifications of those chosen to dispatch the message.

These qualifications are simple, but eloquent. The Jerusalem church did not say that these messengers were brilliant men, or great orators, or efficient organizers. The church merely referred to them as “men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.” What a volume of meaning is in these few words! Men may be great promoters of a cause which offers some opportunity for gain, either of glory or of wealth, and yet not be sincere, not trustworthy. But if they risk their lives, and continue to serve when there is nothing to be gained but weariness, misrepresentation, ignominy, and finally death, well, one can be reasonably sure that such will have at heart the best interests of all those who serve the same cause.

The Gentile converts were admonished to abstain from “meats offered to idols,” from “blood,” from “things strangled” and from “fornication.” This code of morals was designed to meet a peculiar situation which then existed. Gentiles, before conversion, indulged in all these things without sense of shame or wrong. They ate the meat offered to idols because it was cheaper to buy. They drank blood without any thought of its being wrong. And as for things strangled, it didn’t make any difference to them how an animal was killed, they ate and enjoyed the meat just the same. And seemingly fornication was in some instances a part of their religious ceremonies.

But we can readily understand the consternation of Jewish converts if Gentile believers came among them still practicing these things. It would simply be impossible for the church to work together harmoniously under such circumstances. Aside from the ban on fornication, the other requirements seem to have been suggested as a necessary concession to the Jewish viewpoint, and not because they were basically wrong for a Christian.

This thought seems to have been borne out later by Paul, for he wrote that only if it caused his brother to offend, would he refrain from eating meat offered to idols. (I Cor. 8:4-13; Rom. 14:21) Paul was one of the apostles in the group that reached the decision on this point, and from his own attitude later, it is evident that their chief consideration was the feelings of the undeveloped Jewish converts. Surely the blending of viewpoints of Jews and Gentiles in the Early Church imposed a severe test of patience and brotherly love.

GALATIANS 2:16

Justification means to be made right with God. Those who are right with God are at peace with him, being no longer alienated through wicked works. (Rom. 5:1) These have passed from death unto life, thus, by faith, being saved. The whole crux of the controversy in the Early Church on this point was whether or not justification could be obtained simply by faith in the shed blood of Christ and obedience in following in his steps of sacrifice, or whether it was also necessary to subscribe to certain features of the Law, such as circumcision.

Paul’s spiritual vision was very clear on this point, and he wrote emphatically that “by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified.” One of the purposes of the Law was that it might serve as a “schoolmaster” or pedagogue, to teach the necessity of the atoning blood of Christ. It taught this lesson by revealing that no member of the fallen and dying race was able to live up to its righteous requirements. Those to whom the Law had taught this lesson in a convincing manner were glad to accept the provision of escape from its penalties which the Lord had provided through the blood of Christ. And all such will endeavor, therefore, to stand free “in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free.”—Gal. 5:1

QUESTIONS

Why would it seem to be natural for some of the converted Pharisees to insist that Christians must keep the Law?

How much authority did the apostles have in the Early Church, and did they need the additional authority of the church at Jerusalem?

What did the apostles probably have in mind in their listing of the things from which the Gentile Christians should abstain?

How binding did Paul consider this ruling as applied to himself?

What is justification, and how is it attained?

| Home Page | Table of Contents |