Introduction: This will be a shock. Our lesson this week, our second
lesson in our study of Romans, has no readings in Romans! Here is
what we are doing, and I think you will agree this is a good idea: to
better help us understand Paul’s letter to the Romans we are studying
the background for Paul’s letter. Our main study is the record in
Acts 15 about the biggest controversy in the early Christian church.
Let’s plunge into our study and learn more!
- The Showdown
- Read Acts 15:1. This is a pretty serious charge –
salvation turns on being circumcised! What is the basis
for this claim? (“The custom taught by Moses.”) - Would you rely on a “custom” for your theology?
- Is it true that they were merely relying on a
“custom?” (Hardly! Read Genesis 17:9-10 and
Genesis 17:12-14. Now we can understand why the
pro-circumcision party claimed you could not be
saved. Genesis 17:14 says that if you are not
circumcised, even if you are a “foreigner” who
is part of the household, you have broken your
covenant with God and are “cut off” from God’s
people.) - Read Acts 15:2. What is Paul’s view on this issue? (He
strongly disagrees (“sharp dispute”).) - How do they propose to solve this dispute? (By taking
it to church leadership.) - One of the precepts of the Protestant Reformation is
the “priesthood of all believers.” (See 1 Peter 2:9.)
Why does Paul go to the “apostles and elders” in
Jerusalem? I know lots of people who merely change
churches when they disagree with the church policy.
(Two things. First, the current policy had not yet
been decided in the early Christian church. Second,
Paul would not have gone to the leadership if he
thought that the position of the church was
unimportant. I’m reading a book right now that argues
that the idea that everyone can be his or her own
“pope” is a theological problem. I’m not far enough
along in the book to judge the merit of its
argument.) - Read Acts 15:4-9. What is the basis for Peter’s argument?
What authority is he claiming?(That the Holy Spirit
revealed the will of God on the issue.) - What event do you think Peter is talking about? (Skim
Acts 10 to learn more about Peter’s vision of the
sheet with unclean animals and his visit to Cornelius
the Roman centurion. Read Acts 10:44-47. I think this
is Peter’s point of reference.) - We need to consider this. Genesis 17 is very plain
and part of the written text of the Bible. Against
this, Peter relies on his vision and the working of
the Holy Spirit among humans. What would you decide
if you were among the Jerusalem leaders? (In general,
this would make me very nervous. The written word is
plain, and God says that He does not change (James
1:17).) - Read Acts 15:10-11. What argument is Peter making here? (A
pragmatic argument: no one is able to keep all of the
laws. He argues that righteousness by faith is correct,
because the “yoke” of the law is something the Jews have
not been able to carry.) - Read Acts 15:12. What is the implied argument made by Paul
and Barnabas? (The Holy Spirit approves going to the
disciples because He powers “miraculous signs and wonders”
among them.) - Read John 10:25-27. Jesus used miracles to prove He
was the Son of God. Should miracles be conclusive
proof? (Read Jesus’ warning in Matthew 24:24-25. Paul
cites miracles as evidence that God approved the work
among the Gentiles.) - We have three recorded arguments: the working of the Holy
Spirit, practical considerations and miracles. These are
opposed to the plain teaching of the Bible. How would you
decide if you were facing those kinds of opposing
arguments today? - The Decision
- Read Acts 15:13-18. What does James add to Peter’s
arguments? (He adds the part I consider to be the most
important test of a theological argument. He cites the
written word of the Bible ( Amos 9:11-12) to show that God
intended the gospel to go to the Gentiles.) - Read Acts 15:19-21. Who is speaking on behalf of church
leadership? (James. “It is my judgment.”) - How does James decide? (He agrees with the no
circumcision argument.) - Consider carefully James’ conclusions. Is he voting
for the leading of the Holy Spirit in opposition to
the text of the Bible? (No! He cites the Bible and
the leading of the Holy Spirit for the decision of
the church. This, I think, is an incredibly important
point. To create a doctrine based solely on the
claimed leading of the Holy Spirit, when the uniform
teaching of the Bible is contrary, is a mistake.
However, if the Bible is uncertain, and has arguable
conflicts, then the Holy Spirit is the place to look
for a correct conclusion.) - With regard to this area of conflict. Is Genesis 17
in conflict with the prophecy that the gospel will go
to the Gentiles? (When American judges consider
whether there is an irreconcilable conflict between
statutes, they ask if both can be enforced. Here,
both could. You could have the gospel go to the
Gentiles and you could require them to be
circumcised.) - I’m not suggesting that James and the early
church made the wrong decision. But if I’m
right that there is no irreconcilable conflict,
what is the lesson for us today in resolving
major conflicts in the church? - Re-read Acts 15:20-21. Is that it? I’m a Gentile. Is this
odd group of rules the only ones that are to be imposed on
me? - Consider the Ten Commandments. Read Exodus 20:3-6 and
compare it with Acts 15:20. Of all of the
requirements to worship only God and not worship
idols, are the Gentiles only required to abstain from
meat offered to idols? All other idol interaction is
just fine? (This conclusion is just too ridiculous to
accept. When you look at the very limited list James
makes, it seems that he is describing some very
limited application of the ceremonial law transmitted
through Moses. The specific reference in Acts 15:21
to Moses being read in the synagogues reinforces that
idea.) - Read Acts 15:22-23. What does this tell us about the
authority of James’ conclusion? (This is the decision of
the leadership of the early Christian Church.) - Let’s read the official letter in Acts 15:24-29. What is
the conclusion with regard to circumcision? (Clearly,
circumcision is not a requirement that is listed.) - Why do you think circumcision is not even mentioned
in the letter? Why not mention the very issue upon
which the debate centered?(Read again Acts 15:5. The
actual issue was not just circumcision, it was also
obeying “the law of Moses.” Thus, the official
opinion letter covered the issues debated.) - What do you think is meant by the “law of Moses?” (If
you scan Exodus 19 and 20 you will find that God
spoke ( Exodus 20:1)the Ten Commandments in the
hearing of the people. I don’t think that any serious
student of the Bible believes that Moses made up the
rules and regulations contained in Exodus and
Leviticus. They all came from God. But, the fact that
only the Ten Commandments were spoken by God directly
to the people could form the basis for arguing that
they are not part of the “law of Moses.”) - Read Galatians 2:11-13. Those readers regularly following
the GoBible.org lessons know that we just finished
studying Paul’s letter to the Galatians. What controversy
do we find in Galatians? (The same issue! Peter is even
temporarily on the wrong side of things. The text says
that the pro-circumcision people came from “James.” We can
see this was a big issue in the early church, with even
the main players sometimes uncertain.) - Friend, how do you approach disagreement in the church? If
you are in opposition to the leadership of the church,
what does the Acts 15 example teach you? What does the
Acts 15 resolution teach about the sources of authority
for conflict resolution? Will you apply these principles
to today’s conflicts? - Next week: The Human Condition.
