Recently, I had an online interaction with someone who saw some posts I had made about the spring holy days… the person brushed everything aside saying “that was all settled at the Jerusalem Conference in Acts 15”. This is a very common way of saying that Sabbaths and holy days are no longer to be taught or promoted as an outworking of Godly living by Christians.

What Did The Jerusalem Council Decide?

The Jerusalem Council was a meeting of church leadership convened sometime between 45 AD. and 55 AD. The meeting was called to settle some doctrinal disputes related to the inclusion of non-Jews into the church. A brief report on the council and its decision is found in Acts Chapter 15.

The Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 is very often presented as a turning point in church history in which supposedly a distinct break was made with the principles of teaching obedience to God's law. The Jerusalem Council argument is trotted out to justify abandoning the 7th day Sabbath, and the annual Sabbaths we call holy days.

Our purpose today is to demonstrate that the Council's discussion and decision was limited to defining the role of circumcision in God's formation of a special assembly of people which would be composed of both Jew and non-Jew. It was not written to address the entirety of God’s commands, judgments and statutes.

Context & Setting

The reason for calling the conference was to settle a doctrinal dispute which first flared up the the city of Antioch. Which is a town about 300 miles north of Jerusalem, almost at the southern border of modern Turkey. A large vibrant congregation of the church had started in this cosmopolitan town and they were doing all kinds of great work proclaiming the message and drawing people to the truth... both Jews, Greeks, native people etc.

Christian teachers who had formerly been Pharisees came to the city of Antioch from Jerusalem. They probably had heard the positive news about Antioch. They wanted to make sure the folks up there were doing things the Jewish way!

Acts 15:1-2 these self appointed teachers said, "You're doing this all wrong. Non-Jewish people have to be circumcised in order to be saved". This brought them into a dispute with 2 leaders in Antioch, who said "NO!”: Paul and Barnabas.

The fact that they were from Jerusalem  probably made people think "there must be something to this"... Paul however, knew better. The only way to settle the dispute in Antioch was to go back to Jerusalem and get a ruling.

Paul Was A Team Player

Before he ever ventured off to preach and teach up north Paul had met with the leaders in Jerusalem, made sure they were all on the same page doctrinally.  

1. Galatians 1:18-21 Paul had a 15 day long meeting with just Peter at the very beginning of his ministry. 
2. Galatians 2:1-3 After about 10 years Paul went back to Jerusalem for a private meeting with the church leaders there to tell them what was going on up in Antioch and to ensure they were all on the same page. Circumcision appears to have been one of the issues discussed.

Paul was not charging off to teach his own thing contrary to what the other churches were doing. He was working in cooperation with the leaders of the church with an approved message and practice.

Off To Jerusalem For An Official Ruling

Acts 15:3-5 The accusation and charge is put on the table.

Note: I believe there are two ways you can interpret verse 5: circumcise them and also keep the law of Moses OR circumcise them and thereby keep the law of Moses.

Peter, Paul & Barnabas Testify Before The Council

Acts 15:6-11 Peter recounts his personal experience with gentiles. He is speaking of the conversion of the Roman centurion Cornelius and family. That gentile household had  received the life giving deposit of the holy spirit even though they were uncircumcised. The occasion was marked by signs and wonders provided by God to prove it this was His will Acts 10:44-48 ... Acts 11:1-3... verse 17-18.

Salvation: the self appointed teachers had said circumcision was necessary for a person to be saved. The truth is that a person is saved from death through repentance and acceptance of Jesus' atoning sacrifice for sin... but a necessary second step is that the person receive the deposit of indestructible, eternal life... which is the active presence of the holy spirit in them.

Baptism: notice also that the non-Jewish household of Cornelius received the life giving holy spirit without having undergone the rite of circumcision… but then followed up immediately with baptism. God still works with rites and ceremonies to mark special occasions.

Under the administration of the new covenant baptism replaces circumcision. A change has been made as it was with the priesthood and the sacrificial system. Baptism is now the outward sign of inclusion in the people of God.

Colossians 2:11-12 circumcision has been replaced by baptism

Acts 15:12 next Paul & Barnabas testify using a very similar argument to Peter's. 1) There were baptized gentiles in the Antioch church 2) they had received  the holy spirit and 3) God had clearly ratified the change in procedure through signs and wonders.

James Proposes A Settlement

James affirms Peter's testimony which is that God is calling gentiles into the Israel of God. The church is now the holy nation called and chosen by God. And it is to be composed of people of all nations… not just Jews. James then refers to one of many prophecies which foretell this change of administration [Amos 9:11-12].

James goes on to propose they pass a resolution and confirm it in writing saying Gentiles do not have to undergo circumcision. However, they do have to continue observing the other regulations from the law of Moses concerning gentiles who choose to live peaceably among the people of Israel. These regulations are found in Leviticus chapters 17-18… part of the holiness code.

Finally in verse 21 James calls upon the law of Moses as justification for making this resolution. Saying in effect: “everyone knows what the law of Moses says on these matters since it is preached to people on a weekly basis”.

So, rather than doing away with the law of Moses the council {through James] are justifying the content of their resolution by appealing to the law of Moses as validation!

Acts 15:13-21

The Regulations Required of Gentiles

1. Leviticus 17:1-8 food polluted by idols
2. Leviticus 17:10 Eating blood
3. Leviticus 17:13 meat from strangled animals which still have their blood in them/wild game not drained of blood
4. Leviticus 18:1-30 [esp. verse 26] sexual immorality

These are laws of cleanness and holiness for Israel which even sojourners, travelers, migrant workers had to observe if they were in the land. So, a non-Jew who was only there temporarily had to do these things so they would not defile the land. But such people would not for example be expected to observe the Passover. If they wanted to observe the Passover [and thereby participate in the covenant] they would have to be circumcised Exodus 12:48.

Circumcision had been the sign of inclusion in the holy nation and covenant people. Under the new covenant that sign was changed to baptism. Think of it like the changing of the Passover symbols… the symbolic lamb of the OT Passover was changed to the symbolic bread and wine of the NT Passover.

The Church Passes The Resolution

Acts 15:22-23 the church council agrees to this proposal, formalizes it in writing, and sends Paul and Barnabas back with the resolution settling the matter. They also include two witnesses from Jerusalem to verify the letter lest Paul and Barnabas be accused of trickery.

Here is the resolution: Acts 15:24-29.

1. Refers to the controversy that precipitated the decision
2. Identifies the witnesses sent along to verify
3. Renders the decision which is only 2 verses long: no to circumcision, yes to the other regulations related to cleanness and holiness before God

An Appeal To Your Reason

Some say this resolution recorded in the book of Acts formalizes the abolishing of any and every  commandment, statute, and judgment found in the old covenant [except of course idolatry and perverted sex]. The is a teaching of lawlessness… and it is wrong. 

First, that interpretation broadens the scope of the resolution far beyond what was actually being discussed. The subject is the role of circumcision in the salvation for the non-Jewish world.

Second, It absurdly proposes that of all the commandments, judgments, and statues found in the law these 4 are the only ones that really matter. Using this logic… since there is nothing about about lying, stealing, honoring parents, covetousness... those don't matter either.

Third, this false interpretation depicts the Jerusalem Council as supposedly rejecting the law of Moses but also calling upon the law of Moses as a form of validation for what they resolve.

Why Was Circumcision Dispensed With?

The first and most compelling reason is because God said so and verified the change with signs and wonders. But there is more…

Circumcision was a physical mark made in the flesh signifying a covenant between God and all the physical descendants of Abraham. God promised to: greatly increase their numbers, give them physical blessing of the promised land, and He would enter into a contractual covenant with these descendants at Mt. Sinai.

Circumcision is for Abraham's family and his household. It signifies a covenant and promise not available to anyone outside Abraham's bloodline and household. That leaves out the majority of people on the planet.

Galatians 3:5-9 within God's promise to Abraham is a reference to the Messiah verse 16. This descendant of Abraham would be a blessing for all people's, not just the bloodline of Abraham. At the appointed time, through Christ, God would initiate the new covenant... one which ALL people could enter into [Jew, Gentile, slave, free, male, female]. The basis of their inclusion was FAITH... that they would hear, they would believe, and do.

Such people would be considered the spiritual children and offspring of Abraham: as Jesus said to the Jews "if you were true children of Abraham, you would do what Abraham did. But you don’t” [John 8:39]. Abraham had faith and he acted on that faith by keeping God's commands, statutes and judgments... and in matters of heart he practiced justice, mercy and faithfulness.

Deuteronomy 10:16, 30:6 a change of mind has always been the real goal.

The sign of that change of mind is baptism… it’s the sign of the new covenant for everyone who repents, believes and allows God to write His laws on their heart and mind.

That’s what the resolution of the Acts 15 council is about.