An exposition of Acts 15:22-29
After James’ recommendations, the resolution involved a decision by the Apostles and the church to choose some “
men from among them to send to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas—Judas called Barsabbas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren” (Acts 15:22). These two men were from the leadership at Jerusalem. It is felt by many that Judas was the brother of Joseph Barsabbas (1:23). Silas being a Hellenist would give him better insight into the Greek environment and situation. We do know that Silas became a companion of Paul. Whatever the case, these two were chosen to authenticate the decision made at Jerusalem.
With these men there was a letter recorded by Luke which had the following features:
· The senders: “
The apostles and the brethren who are elders…” (Acts 15:23). There can be no question this came from the leadership and congregation in Jerusalem.
· A regional address: “
to the brethren in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia who are from the Gentiles.” It was addressed regionally because the problem was not strictly a local problem. Bock suggests it was widely distributed to inform as well as prevent the spread of this problem.
We also know that it had a much wider circulation because Paul circulated it in the cities that he visited (cf. Acts 16:4). We also know that Silas traveled with Paul on the second journey probably to authenticate the letter (cf. Acts 15:40-41). The intent was to reach all the churches that may have had this problem.
· The reason for the letter: “
Since we have heard that some of our number to whom we gave no instruction have disturbed you with their words, unsettling your souls, it seemed good to us, having become of one mind, to select men to send you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 15; 24-26). This is one sentence in the Greek text. In this we see two things: First, they identified and acknowledged the problem caused by their own number. Who were these that came from Jerusalem? The phrase indicates that they were
Jewish Christians, likely Pharisees who still thought that the gospel needed to be supplemented by the Law, especially by circumcision. It is also clear that while they may have claimed authority from the apostles, however, this was not the case. A disclaimer is found in the phrase: “to whom we gave no instruction.” Thus, any claim of authority from James or any apostle was a misrepresentation to say the least. The result was that they had disturbed and unsettled their souls of the Gentile believers. This was clearly a reference to the teaching of circumcision. Second, they made a unified decision. The apostles and leadership were of “one mind.” They are sending the decision with Paul and Barnabas and two other men whose integrity is beyond question. The feelings of the apostles and the church for Barnabas and Paul are indicated by a statement of love (beloved), and respect by the phrase, “men who risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
· Identity of their representatives: “
Therefore we have sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will also report the same things [by word of mouth]” (Acts 15:27). By stating the names of the representatives in the letter, it gives these men authority to authenticate the letter and the events that took place at the council. By giving their names, Barnabas and Paul could not be accused of substituting others in their place. This also indicates the importance of the document. It clearly reinforces the decision made as a approval by the Twelve and the Jerusalem church of the ministry of Paul and Barnabas to the Gentiles apart from the Law.
· Their report: “
For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials: that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication; if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will do well. Farewell” (Acts 15:28-29). The words “
it seemed good” should not be taken as opinion, but it is language of a formal decree.
This decree is significant in that: (1) this decree is divinely sanctioned. Note it is not just the formal decree of men, but of God the Holy Spirit. (2) That “
no greater burden” be placed upon the Gentiles; meaning circumcision and the Law. The Greek is stronger than the English translation, it is a present infinitive, thus indicating now and in the future there will be no greater burden placed upon you. The evangelism of the Gentiles and the message of grace would be without hindrance. (3) What are conveyed to them are the essentials. These are not mere suggestions. The Greek word is
epanagkes meaning necessary things and carries the idea of compulsion. The Greek word is found in the N.T. only here. It is necessary not only in sensibility to the Jews, but to the worship of God; to prevent offending Him. It is the avoidance of idolatry and immorality, especially in reference to pagan ritual and religious practices. They are to abstain (
apechesthai) from things sacrificed to idols, blood, strangled meats, and fornication. We see the fourfold repeated use of the word “
from,” a genitive of separation. The prohibitions speak of sanctification, not salvation. (4) These will have a unifying benefit. “
The idea seems to be that keeping the prohibitions would be spiritually and relationally beneficial. By keeping the prohibitions, Gentile believers would be in harmony with the Holy Spirit, the Jerusalem church and other Jewish believers.”
They would not offend God or the Jews if they keep these prohibitions, thus keeping the door of evangelism open to the unbelieving Jews. (5) They have an encouraging benefit among the Gentile churches. (6) It had the effect of establishing Paul’s apostleship to the Gentiles.
