James, Leader in the Jerusalem Church

ACTS 15:13-20

IT IS quite evident that James, although not one of the twelve apostles, was looked up to in the church at Jerusalem, and that his views were highly respected. On the occasion of the first general conference of disciples, James seems to have served as chairman, and after there had been much deliberation over the question at issue, it was James who summed up the findings of the conference and made a recommendation of what seemed to him a reasonable course to follow. His suggestion was accepted and made the official edict of those gathered, and was sent to all the churches.

The question at issue was concerning Gentiles who were accepting Jesus and coming into the various congregations of the believers. It may be a bit difficult for us at this end of the age to comprehend why the conversion of Gentiles should present a problem to Christians, but when we take into consideration the circumstances which existed at that time, we can understand why this issue became one which called for careful consideration. And certainly the brethren gathered at Jerusalem, under the direction of James, dealt with it in an admirable manner.

One of the most significant speeches made at the Jerusalem conference was that of the Apostle Peter. Peter really had something outstanding to report, for God had especially directed him to go to the home of Cornelius, the first Gentile convert, and preach the Gospel to him. In obeying the “vision” which the Lord had given to him, Peter witnessed an outstanding demonstration of the fact that it was God’s will to accept Gentiles into the church, and to bless them with an infilling of the Holy Spirit. When Peter was given this experience, he remarked that it warms evidence to him that God is no respecter of persons, that now Jew and Gentile were alike acceptable to him—Acts 10:34

Peter reported this wonderful experience to the brethren at the Jerusalem conference, explaining that God had given the Holy Spirit to the Gentiles even as he had given it to them as Jews, and that now he put no difference between them, that he was purifying their hearts by faith, even as he was doing for the Jewish converts. This being true, Peter reasoned, why should they put a yoke upon the necks of these Gentile converts which no Jew had been able to bear, past or present?

It was at this point that James stood up, and building upon Peter’s argument, said that the words of the prophet agreed with what Peter (Simeon) had said, quoting, “After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down … that the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord.”

We have in this statement a good example of close reasoning by James in which he quotes from the prophecy of Amos 9:11,12. James does not say that this prophecy was being fulfilled by the fact that a sprinkling of Gentiles were then coming into the church. His argument is that the prophecy of Amos showed clearly that God intended to bless Gentiles; for it revealed that “after this,” that is, after that which they were then witnessing, and which would continue throughout the Gospel age, the Lord would return, build again the tabernacle of David, and then “all the Gentiles” would be given an opportunity to be blessed.

The point James seems to have been stressing was that if, in the outworking of the divine plan, a time was coming later when all the Gentiles would be blessed, it should not be considered strange that he was accepting some of them into the church then. True, it had always been possible for a Gentile to become a proselyte to the Jewish faith, but that was on condition of obedience to all the ordinances of the Law; now, however, both Peter and James argued that this requirement should be abolished.

While in principle this was the proper viewpoint, James recognized that it could not be expected that Jewish converts would at once become entirely free from their Jewish training and background, and that if these Gentile converts were to be accepted into their fellowship, they should be required to refrain from certain of their former customs which were particularly objectionable to Jewish Christians.

These were “pollutions of idols”—that is, eating meat offered to idols, which, according to the Jewish viewpoint, caused the meat to be polluted; “fornication,” which in any case was contrary to the will of God, but practiced by Gentiles in connection with some of their religious rites; “things strangled, and from blood.” For Gentile converts to associate with Jewish Christians while continuing to practice all, or even any of these things, would have presented too severe a test upon the spirit of unity which James and others wanted to see abide in the church. So the recommendation James made to the conference was to abstain from these things. The wisdom of his suggestion was recognized.

From this incident we therefore get the thought that to no small degree James’ influence in the church was due not to any effort on his part to lord it over the brethren, but because they recognized his balanced judgment, particularly in dealing with critical situations.

GALATIANS 2:9-12

WHILE a certain procedure was adopted at Jerusalem, James having recommended a course of moderation in dealing with Gentile converts, the putting into practice of what was there agreed upon was not an easy task. Even Peter was rebuked by Paul for refusing to eat with Gentiles when he thought it would discredit him in the eyes of certain Jewish Christians. The opinions of others concerning ourselves often have a great deal more influence over what we do than they should.

In the incident referred to in Galatians, Peter seems to have been led to dissemble by the arrival of certain brethren who “came from James.” Apparently Peter was particularly anxious to please James, although it is difficult to understand why he thought James would be displeased to hear that the apostle ate with Gentiles, for it was James who argued most effectively that they should be received and fellowshipped—provided, of course, that they observed the few simple restrictions which the Jerusalem conference named.

It may be, however, that James, having suggested this minimum of restrictions, was rigid in his insistence that Gentile Christians observe them, and possibly the Gentiles with whom Peter had been eating, and from whom he now dissembled, were not adhering to the requirements. We know that as a matter of fact, the Jerusalem edict did not put an end to eating meat offered to idols, for we find Paul discussing the issue in his letter to the Corinthian church. Although Paul saw nothing fundamentally wrong with this custom, he explained that if eating such meat would cause his weaker brethren to offend, he would refrain from so doing.—I Cor. 8; Rom. 14:13-23

There was a noteworthy difference in this viewpoint from that of Peter’s when he dissembled. Paul was thinking of the spiritual safety of his weaker brethren; while Peter was concerned over what James and his friends would think of him. Paul’s motive was love—a love which prompted him to sacrifice his preferences for the spiritual good of others. Peter’s motive was selfishness—a selfishness which in this instance caused him to seek the favor and praise of man. Paul rebuked him for it, and we may assume that Peter learned his lesson well.

James was a power for good in the Early Church, and so far as his personal admonitions and conduct are concerned, there is nothing in them to indicate that he was seeking a position of power or influence among the brethren. It is doubtful if James would have approved Peter’s course in dissembling. James has not been the only brother in the church whom others have tried to please in ways often contrary to what they would have “approved.”

QUESTIONS

Relate an important incident in the Early Church which indicates that James occupied a position of respect and influence.

In what manner did James indicate that the prophecy of Amos 9:11,12 was in agreement with what Peter had testified concerning God’s acceptance of Gentiles into the church?

What were the minimum requirements James suggested should be placed upon Gentile converts, and why?

Explain the difference between Paul’s refraining from eating meat offered to idols and Peter’s refusal to eat with Gentiles when certain Jews were present who were friends of James.

| Home Page | Table of Contents |