ACC ~ Acts 15 v1 - 5

OVERVIEW:

Commentators usually consider this chapter to be the center of Luke’s story and its turning point. There are problems in that this is not the only account of this event. Paul, in Galatians 2:1-10, gives another version that lays the initiative with himself (due to a revelation), whereas Luke’s version makes it a decision of the Antiochene church to consult the apostles and elders in Jerusalem. Paul’s account seems to say that the controversy arose not in Antioch but first in Jerusalem. Over who started the controversy (“some from Judea” in Acts, “false brothers” in Paul) there is disagreement. Some interpreters see none of these discrepancies as great enough to establish these as accounts of separate events, while others think that Luke and Paul speak of different events. Luke’s account of the great event of Acts 15 raised many questions for the early Christians. Origen and Chrysostom handle historical questions, while others, such as Ammonius, raise questions about the need for a discerning authority that weighs matters of law and custom. Chrysostom even attempts to solve the problems, much discussed among modern commentators, about the congruity of this chapter and Paul’s letter to the Galatians, though he approaches the problem differently. The early days of the church were not innocent of disputes and disagreement. While it is not uncommon for Christians to hold a romantic view of the church as small and settled in uniformity, for the pagan Celsus these disputes became an argument against the sincerity of the Christian faith (ORIGEN). Origen’s response implies a process of development and a need for a living authority guided by the Spirit. Ammonius notes how the Antiochians turned to Jerusalem as their source of authority. Ammonius’s comments on Jerusalem as the center of authority give a different view of Paul than does Chrysostom, who sees Paul as in no way confused or seeking enlightenment from Jerusalem.

15:1 | Teaching the Believers

THE EARLY CHURCH NO STRANGER TO DOCTRINAL DISPUTES. ORIGEN: Observe what he alleges as a proof of his statement: “Christians at first were few in number and held the same opinions, but when they grew to be a great multitude, they were divided and separated, each wishing to have his own individual party. This was their object from the beginning.” That Christians at first were few in number, in comparison with the multitudes who subsequently became Christian, is no doubt true. . . .

He also says that “all the Christians were of one mind,” not noticing, even in this particular, that from the beginning there were differences of opinion among believers regarding the meaning of the books held to be divine. At all events, while the apostles were still preaching and eyewitnesses of Jesus were still teaching his doctrine, there was no small discussion among the converts from Judaism regarding Gentile believers and whether they ought to observe Jewish customs or reject the burden of clean and unclean meats as not being obligatory on those who had abandoned their ancestral Gentile customs and had become believers in Jesus. AGAINST CELSUS 3.10-11.

15:2 | Paul and Barnabas Go to Jerusalem

RECONCILING ACTS AND GALATIANS. CHRYSOSTOM: How can he say in his letter to the Galatians, “I did not go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before me, nor did I move”? We suggest this: in the first place because he had not gone up spontaneously but had been sent by others; and in the second place because he did not come in order to learn something but to persuade others. Indeed, from the beginning he held that opinion that the apostles approved later, namely, that it was not necessary to circumcise. Until that day, however, it had seemed to them that [Paul] was not worthy of faith, but they rather listened more to those who lived in Jerusalem. So [Paul] went up, not in order to gain what he had been ignorant of before but in order to persuade his opponents because those who were in Jerusalem agreed with them. He had recognized from the start what had to be done and needed no teacher. And he had a clear and sure idea, beyond any discussion, of what the apostles would have decreed after a long discussion. Since it had seemed opportune to the brothers that he might learn something about them, he went up not for himself but for them. Even though he says, “I did not go up,” we can explain that. He did not go up at the beginning of his preaching or in order to learn. And he means both these things when he says, “I did not go immediately in flesh and blood.” He did not simply say, “I did not go” but “I did not go immediately.” CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 15.2-4.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE LAW. AMMONIUS: It is to be noted that the early believers, with much searching and great eagerness, discussed dogmas, and that they benefited to such an extent through their discussions and that the Antiochians did not hesitate to send [someone] to Jerusalem to inquire about the controversy. And yet their inquiry was not, in the first place, about the Godhead, or the providential incarnation of the Son, or the Holy Spirit, or angels, or powers, or heaven, or anything like this, but about circumcision, about the least part of a man’s genitals. They were aware of the fact that the words “a single iota and a single point of the law” were full of a great spiritual meaning. The Antiochian disciples were afraid to take authority, but they took so much thought even for questions that seemed to be trifling, seeing that those from Antioch sent Paul and Barnabas to consult those in Jerusalem, while the disciples from Jerusalem sent Judah and Silas back to Antioch with their letters. CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 15.7-8.