Acts 15:1-16:5
.jpg)
Some men came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the brothers: "Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved." This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question. The church sent them on their way, and as they traveled through Phoenicia and Samaria, they told how the Gentiles had been converted. This news made all the brothers very glad. When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done through them. – Acts 15:1-4
Last week, we talked about how Paul and Barnabas returned from their missionary journey. Paul was much worse for wear, beaten to within an inch of his life, and left for dead, in Lystra. But God had done remarkable things through them and the gospel was spread through what is now Cypress and Turkey. We left them back in Antioch, reunited with the church body that had sent them off on their journey.
Now men came from Judea to say that circumcision was necessary to be saved. Paul and Barnabas begged to differ. The Greek says it was “no small dispute or debate.” The dispute and debate did not settle the question, it seems. So Paul and Barnabas, it says, were chosen to go with some other believes to Jerusalem and discuss it with the apostles and elders there to get final word.
Why was this such a contentious issue? For the Gentile believer, it was clearly a big deal. If they needed to be circumcised in addition to having faith, they needed to know. And circumcision as an adult is not something you do unless you are absolutely sure you need to do it. Just take a look at Genesis 34, where the people of Hamor, father of Shechem agree to be circumcised as a group so that Hamor could marry Dinah, a daughter of Jacob. In verse 25, it says, “three days later, while all of them were still in pain…”
What about those propagating this teaching? They were confusing the Law of Moses with the salvation found in Jesus Christ. We have no idea of their motives. It could have been an honest misunderstanding, or it could have been for one of many dishonorable reasons – to have a following, because of a dislike of Gentiles, pride over Pharisee customs, etc.
It is interesting to me how, on the way, Paul and Barnabas share the news of how multitudes of Gentiles became saved in Cypress and Turkey. Were they met by some lukewarm responses? Were some thinking, “You say so, but they aren’t really saved, Paul.” No, this didn’t happen. All the brothers were glad at the news. This false teaching seemed to be more limited at this time.
Note that if this was still news to the people along the way, it seems likely that Paul and Barnabas had not been back in Antioch very long. Yet, as a spiritual father, Paul goes on this journey, despite the hardships, because action is required, and he, given his experiences, is the best man for the job (and Barnabas is, too). On this Father’s Day, I think the appropriate application is this:
1. A spiritual father does not leave his children to the wolves.
What are some practical applications of this? First, it applies to fathers and their children. A father should take personal responsibility for their children’s faith. How do you do this? What are some things a father can do? By seeing that they grow in faith through their own personal quiet times or through family devotions. By asking spiritual questions at dinnertime. By their own example.
Second, this applies to “spiritual” fathers and “spiritual” children. I think all of us who are “older” in the faith have a responsibility to build friendships with those who are “younger” and just be available – available for advice, prayer, etc.
What happens if we don’t do this? Well, what might have happened if Paul and Barnabas didn’t go to Jerusalem? This errant belief might have spread, and spread, and spread. The believers would have been "left to the wolves."
The natural extension of believing that circumcision was necessary for salvation was to believe that observing the entire Law of Moses was necessary. And what did Paul say about that? Turn to Galatians 1:6.
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned! – Galatians 1:6-9
"We who are Jews by birth and not 'Gentile sinners' know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified. – Galatians 2:15-16
So what happens if we don’t do it? Do we need to watch “It’s a Wonderful Life” again? I hope we have all seen this movie enough times to get the point. Our children, our actual children and our “spiritual” ones, need us. We need to be there for them – protecting them from error, incorrect views of God, of salvation.
Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the Law of Moses." The apostles and elders met to consider this question. – Acts 15:5-6
This time salvation is not specifically mentioned. Instead it is questions about following the entire Law of Moses.
After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: "Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are." – Acts 15:7-11
Peter is referring to what is described in Acts 10: Peter’s vision, Cornelius and his group becoming saved, confirmation by the Holy Spirit. Peter points out that it was just like it was with them – no distinction. So he asks them, “Why do you try to test God by putting on their necks a yoke that we and our fathers could not bear?”
It is by the grace of Jesus that they (and we) are saved. You can think of Peter’s testimony as Proof #1.
The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. When they finished, James spoke up: "Brothers, listen to me. Simon has described to us how God at first showed his concern by taking from the Gentiles a people for himself. The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written: "'After this I will return and rebuild David's fallen tent. Its ruins I will rebuild, and I will restore it, that the remnant of men may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who bear my name, says the Lord, who does these things' that have been known for ages. – Acts 15:12-18
Then Barnabas and Paul explained how God did miracles and led many Gentiles to faith on their missionary journey. Again, it was by faith, through the grace of God. This can be viewed as Proof #2.
After this, James quotes from Amos 9 to argue that the Old Testament prophets agree that God would call Gentiles to salvation. There are many other Old Testament scriptures that point to the same fact. This can be viewed as Proof #3.
Three distinct proofs that we are not under the law.
"It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath." – Acts 15:19-21
For a long time, when I read this, and hit verse 21, I had absolutely no idea how it fit in with what comes before. Do any of you have this problem?
To see how it fits in, here is a summary of the whole passage: Because of the three proofs, we should not make it difficult for Gentiles turning to God, but should keep rules minimal. We need to write these rules to them because the Law of Moses is preached everywhere and will be confusing for them if we don’t write them.
Does this make sense? Do you follow the flow? If not, read the passage and this explanation again.
So what are the rules? Here they are: No food polluted by idols, no sexual immorality, no eating meat from strangled animals, no drinking blood. Now this invites a bunch of questions. Here are a few I can think of.
Does this mean that everything else was OK, like murder? No. Jesus’ teachings and the teachings of the New Testament are filled with other commands and principles. But salvation is based solely on faith in Jesus Christ.
Why those four particular things? There are several theories out there. One is called the Noachic theory, which states that there were a variety of laws for people declared at the time of Noah. Proponents of this theory may mention the seven Noachic Laws – idolatry, incest/unchastity, shedding blood, profaning God's name, robbery, injustice, and eating the flesh of a living animal – listed in the Talmud, a Jewish collection of writings. But the Talmud was written much, much later than Acts (more than 1000 years later). And they don’t match. For example, shedding of blood is mentioned instead of its consumption. Some of the others come closer, but the argument is pretty weak. Others mention Genesis 9, which does mention not consuming blood, but the other rules are not there.
Another theory is the Leviticus theory, based on Leviticus 17-18. Loosely, Lev. 17:2-9 corresponds with sacrifices to any god except the Lord, Lev. 17:10 prohibits blood, Lev. 17:3-5 might possibly relate to game strangled in snares, and 18:6-26 prohibits incest, homosexual sex, and other specific perversions. And each of these laws, unlike much of the Law of Moses, applies to alien gentiles as well as Israelites. But the connections are again weak in some cases. The rule about sexual immorality (porneia in Greek) is more general that that in Leviticus, and the strangling is a bit of a stretch. Also, this theory cannot really be used to prove why it is these four rules, because there were other rules in Leviticus left out. There was also a rule to keep the Sabbath (Ex. 23:12 and Deut. 5:14), to keep the annual festivals (Lev. 16:29 and Deut. 16:11-14), to be cleansed by the ashes of a red heifer (Num. 19:10), and to give sacrifices (Num. 15:27-29). And if they wanted to observe the Passover, they also had to be circumcised! (Ex. 12:48-49) Again, it doesn’t explain why these four rules are chosen and not some of the other ones, such as the Sabbath.
Yet another theory is that the issue was Jews and Gentiles eating together. But porneia is unrelated, the other three were insufficient to make eating together harmonious (what about all the other laws, like no pork, etc.?), and they were unnecessary – all the Gentiles had to do was let the Jews cook and eat what was served!
One more theory is that the real issue was separation from the practices of paganism. Strangling animals was used in pagan rituals in Alexandria and Macedonia, Greek cults believed that eating blood was to eat the food of demons, so that to do it would enable you to feed along with the spirits of the underworld. And porneia could refer to the widespread cultic prostitution practices of that time. And of course, not eating food sacrificed to idols fits right in. Also, this is not based specifically on the Law of Moses, although there is overlap – this makes sense if part of the whole argument is refuting the idea that Gentiles must keep the Law of Moses.
Do these things apply to us? This is perhaps the most important question. What do you think? I think the connection with paganism makes the most sense, and in this sense, we should do the same. Christians should refrain from activities that involve worshiping other gods. For us the particulars have changed, but the idea remains. I don’t think it is sin to have a nice juicy steak, but we definitely should not participate in séances. For another example, in China and Taiwan, people often consult fortune tellers before agreeing to marry someone and also use them to pick the date. These fortune tellers are basing what they do on religious practices, consulting spirits, ancestors, etc., and so, I think Christians should not do this. (I think this is different than opening a fortune cookie.)
Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, two men who were leaders among the brothers. With them they sent the following letter: The apostles and elders, your brothers, To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia: Greetings. We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. – Acts 15:22-26
There is so much I like about this opening to the letter. It is calming – we heard you were disturbed and troubled, so we decided to do something about it. The message is, “Don’t be disturbed and troubled.” And then it is encouraging to know that your leaders are “dear friends” and to appreciate that they have risked their lives for Jesus.
Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell. – Acts 15:27-29
Then the letter is short and sweet. You will do well to avoid these four things. Why? I believe, because they were pagan practices.
The men were sent off and went down to Antioch, where they gathered the church together and delivered the letter. The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message. Judas and Silas, who themselves were prophets, said much to encourage and strengthen the brothers. After spending some time there, they were sent off by the brothers with the blessing of peace to return to those who had sent them. But Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, where they and many others taught and preached the word of the Lord. – Acts 15:30-35
The people were encouraged and glad. And Judas and Silas stayed for a while, building up the church and encouraging them further. That is so great! And it leads to my second application this Father’s day:
2. A spiritual father encourages his children in the Lord.
What are some practical applications of this? Again, it first applies to fathers and their children. A father should encourage his children. How do you do this? What are some things a father can do? How do you encourage sons? How do you encourage daughters? There are countless ways. I think we will each find natural opportunities to do this if we have it set on our minds to do so. The opportunities will come. Our job is to not miss them, but act on them.
And again, this also applies to “spiritual” fathers and “spiritual” children. We all need encouragement! Let us encourage one another in the Lord.
Some time later Paul said to Barnabas, "Let us go back and visit the brothers in all the towns where we preached the word of the Lord and see how they are doing." Barnabas wanted to take John, also called Mark, with them, but Paul did not think it wise to take him, because he had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not continued with them in the work. They had such a sharp disagreement that they parted company. Barnabas took Mark and sailed for Cyprus, but Paul chose Silas and left, commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord. He went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches. – Acts 15:36-41
It is so easy to be hard on Paul here, isn’t it? Paul, lighten up! Get over it! Give him another chance! I don’t know that it is fair. We weren’t there. Honestly, it’s not our business. Our culture pushes this judgmental outlook on us all the time. Are you aware of it? Our fascination as a culture with people who are famous just because they are famous is related to this. This is especially true for our fascination as a culture with famous people who fall and do stupid things. And I think one can argue that the separation of Paul and Barnabas was a good thing – it led to covering a greater area with their return journeys.
What I really want to point out is Paul’s heart here. “Let us go back and see how they are doing.” In Paul’s letters over and over you see his heart. He would do anything for the believers he has helped disciple in the past. And I think this is the third mark of a spiritual father:
3. A spiritual father’s work is never done.
Our children will also be our children. Our relationship with them changes as they grow up, but they are always our children. We should always want to “go back and see how they are doing.” And the same holds for our “spiritual” children. I have been convicted recently in the need for me to do a better job maintaining friendships with people who have moved away. Men in general tend to be poor at doing this. But let us have the heart of Paul (which really is the heart of Jesus) towards our spiritual children. It doesn’t need to be frequent contact, but periodic contact.
He came to Derbe and then to Lystra, where a disciple named Timothy lived, whose mother was a Jewess and a believer, but whose father was a Greek. The brothers at Lystra and Iconium spoke well of him. Paul wanted to take him along on the journey, so he circumcised him because of the Jews who lived in that area, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. As they traveled from town to town, they delivered the decisions reached by the apostles and elders in Jerusalem for the people to obey. So the churches were strengthened in the faith and grew daily in numbers. – Acts 16:1-5
Did you notice that Paul went back to Lystra? That took a lot of guts. This was where had had been pummeled almost to death. Isn’t it interesting that it is here that Paul finds a young guy, a “child” in the faith, named Timothy. I’ll talk a little next week about Paul’s decision to circumcise Timothy. Without reading too much into the passage, it appears that Timothy’s real father was not a believer. Paul became Timothy’s spiritual father, writing him several letters (I and II Timothy). In I Timothy 1:2, Paul opens with “To Timothy, my true son in the faith…” and in II Timothy 1:2, he opens with “To Timothy, my dear son…” This is a powerful example for us. Men: may we be true spiritual fathers by not leaving our children to the wolves, by encouraging our children in the Lord, and by never relinquishing our role as spiritual fathers.
Last week, we talked about how Paul and Barnabas returned from their missionary journey. Paul was much worse for wear, beaten to within an inch of his life, and left for dead, in Lystra. But God had done remarkable things through them and the gospel was spread through what is now Cypress and Turkey. We left them back in Antioch, reunited with the church body that had sent them off on their journey.
Now men came from Judea to say that circumcision was necessary to be saved. Paul and Barnabas begged to differ. The Greek says it was “no small dispute or debate.” The dispute and debate did not settle the question, it seems. So Paul and Barnabas, it says, were chosen to go with some other believes to Jerusalem and discuss it with the apostles and elders there to get final word.
Why was this such a contentious issue? For the Gentile believer, it was clearly a big deal. If they needed to be circumcised in addition to having faith, they needed to know. And circumcision as an adult is not something you do unless you are absolutely sure you need to do it. Just take a look at Genesis 34, where the people of Hamor, father of Shechem agree to be circumcised as a group so that Hamor could marry Dinah, a daughter of Jacob. In verse 25, it says, “three days later, while all of them were still in pain…”
What about those propagating this teaching? They were confusing the Law of Moses with the salvation found in Jesus Christ. We have no idea of their motives. It could have been an honest misunderstanding, or it could have been for one of many dishonorable reasons – to have a following, because of a dislike of Gentiles, pride over Pharisee customs, etc.
It is interesting to me how, on the way, Paul and Barnabas share the news of how multitudes of Gentiles became saved in Cypress and Turkey. Were they met by some lukewarm responses? Were some thinking, “You say so, but they aren’t really saved, Paul.” No, this didn’t happen. All the brothers were glad at the news. This false teaching seemed to be more limited at this time.
Note that if this was still news to the people along the way, it seems likely that Paul and Barnabas had not been back in Antioch very long. Yet, as a spiritual father, Paul goes on this journey, despite the hardships, because action is required, and he, given his experiences, is the best man for the job (and Barnabas is, too). On this Father’s Day, I think the appropriate application is this:
1. A spiritual father does not leave his children to the wolves.
What are some practical applications of this? First, it applies to fathers and their children. A father should take personal responsibility for their children’s faith. How do you do this? What are some things a father can do? By seeing that they grow in faith through their own personal quiet times or through family devotions. By asking spiritual questions at dinnertime. By their own example.
Second, this applies to “spiritual” fathers and “spiritual” children. I think all of us who are “older” in the faith have a responsibility to build friendships with those who are “younger” and just be available – available for advice, prayer, etc.
What happens if we don’t do this? Well, what might have happened if Paul and Barnabas didn’t go to Jerusalem? This errant belief might have spread, and spread, and spread. The believers would have been "left to the wolves."
The natural extension of believing that circumcision was necessary for salvation was to believe that observing the entire Law of Moses was necessary. And what did Paul say about that? Turn to Galatians 1:6.
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned! – Galatians 1:6-9
"We who are Jews by birth and not 'Gentile sinners' know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified. – Galatians 2:15-16
So what happens if we don’t do it? Do we need to watch “It’s a Wonderful Life” again? I hope we have all seen this movie enough times to get the point. Our children, our actual children and our “spiritual” ones, need us. We need to be there for them – protecting them from error, incorrect views of God, of salvation.
Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the Law of Moses." The apostles and elders met to consider this question. – Acts 15:5-6
This time salvation is not specifically mentioned. Instead it is questions about following the entire Law of Moses.
After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: "Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are." – Acts 15:7-11
Peter is referring to what is described in Acts 10: Peter’s vision, Cornelius and his group becoming saved, confirmation by the Holy Spirit. Peter points out that it was just like it was with them – no distinction. So he asks them, “Why do you try to test God by putting on their necks a yoke that we and our fathers could not bear?”
It is by the grace of Jesus that they (and we) are saved. You can think of Peter’s testimony as Proof #1.
The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. When they finished, James spoke up: "Brothers, listen to me. Simon has described to us how God at first showed his concern by taking from the Gentiles a people for himself. The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written: "'After this I will return and rebuild David's fallen tent. Its ruins I will rebuild, and I will restore it, that the remnant of men may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who bear my name, says the Lord, who does these things' that have been known for ages. – Acts 15:12-18
Then Barnabas and Paul explained how God did miracles and led many Gentiles to faith on their missionary journey. Again, it was by faith, through the grace of God. This can be viewed as Proof #2.
After this, James quotes from Amos 9 to argue that the Old Testament prophets agree that God would call Gentiles to salvation. There are many other Old Testament scriptures that point to the same fact. This can be viewed as Proof #3.
Three distinct proofs that we are not under the law.
"It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath." – Acts 15:19-21
For a long time, when I read this, and hit verse 21, I had absolutely no idea how it fit in with what comes before. Do any of you have this problem?
To see how it fits in, here is a summary of the whole passage: Because of the three proofs, we should not make it difficult for Gentiles turning to God, but should keep rules minimal. We need to write these rules to them because the Law of Moses is preached everywhere and will be confusing for them if we don’t write them.
Does this make sense? Do you follow the flow? If not, read the passage and this explanation again.
So what are the rules? Here they are: No food polluted by idols, no sexual immorality, no eating meat from strangled animals, no drinking blood. Now this invites a bunch of questions. Here are a few I can think of.
Does this mean that everything else was OK, like murder? No. Jesus’ teachings and the teachings of the New Testament are filled with other commands and principles. But salvation is based solely on faith in Jesus Christ.
Why those four particular things? There are several theories out there. One is called the Noachic theory, which states that there were a variety of laws for people declared at the time of Noah. Proponents of this theory may mention the seven Noachic Laws – idolatry, incest/unchastity, shedding blood, profaning God's name, robbery, injustice, and eating the flesh of a living animal – listed in the Talmud, a Jewish collection of writings. But the Talmud was written much, much later than Acts (more than 1000 years later). And they don’t match. For example, shedding of blood is mentioned instead of its consumption. Some of the others come closer, but the argument is pretty weak. Others mention Genesis 9, which does mention not consuming blood, but the other rules are not there.
Another theory is the Leviticus theory, based on Leviticus 17-18. Loosely, Lev. 17:2-9 corresponds with sacrifices to any god except the Lord, Lev. 17:10 prohibits blood, Lev. 17:3-5 might possibly relate to game strangled in snares, and 18:6-26 prohibits incest, homosexual sex, and other specific perversions. And each of these laws, unlike much of the Law of Moses, applies to alien gentiles as well as Israelites. But the connections are again weak in some cases. The rule about sexual immorality (porneia in Greek) is more general that that in Leviticus, and the strangling is a bit of a stretch. Also, this theory cannot really be used to prove why it is these four rules, because there were other rules in Leviticus left out. There was also a rule to keep the Sabbath (Ex. 23:12 and Deut. 5:14), to keep the annual festivals (Lev. 16:29 and Deut. 16:11-14), to be cleansed by the ashes of a red heifer (Num. 19:10), and to give sacrifices (Num. 15:27-29). And if they wanted to observe the Passover, they also had to be circumcised! (Ex. 12:48-49) Again, it doesn’t explain why these four rules are chosen and not some of the other ones, such as the Sabbath.
Yet another theory is that the issue was Jews and Gentiles eating together. But porneia is unrelated, the other three were insufficient to make eating together harmonious (what about all the other laws, like no pork, etc.?), and they were unnecessary – all the Gentiles had to do was let the Jews cook and eat what was served!
One more theory is that the real issue was separation from the practices of paganism. Strangling animals was used in pagan rituals in Alexandria and Macedonia, Greek cults believed that eating blood was to eat the food of demons, so that to do it would enable you to feed along with the spirits of the underworld. And porneia could refer to the widespread cultic prostitution practices of that time. And of course, not eating food sacrificed to idols fits right in. Also, this is not based specifically on the Law of Moses, although there is overlap – this makes sense if part of the whole argument is refuting the idea that Gentiles must keep the Law of Moses.
Do these things apply to us? This is perhaps the most important question. What do you think? I think the connection with paganism makes the most sense, and in this sense, we should do the same. Christians should refrain from activities that involve worshiping other gods. For us the particulars have changed, but the idea remains. I don’t think it is sin to have a nice juicy steak, but we definitely should not participate in séances. For another example, in China and Taiwan, people often consult fortune tellers before agreeing to marry someone and also use them to pick the date. These fortune tellers are basing what they do on religious practices, consulting spirits, ancestors, etc., and so, I think Christians should not do this. (I think this is different than opening a fortune cookie.)
Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, two men who were leaders among the brothers. With them they sent the following letter: The apostles and elders, your brothers, To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia: Greetings. We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. – Acts 15:22-26
There is so much I like about this opening to the letter. It is calming – we heard you were disturbed and troubled, so we decided to do something about it. The message is, “Don’t be disturbed and troubled.” And then it is encouraging to know that your leaders are “dear friends” and to appreciate that they have risked their lives for Jesus.
Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell. – Acts 15:27-29
Then the letter is short and sweet. You will do well to avoid these four things. Why? I believe, because they were pagan practices.
The men were sent off and went down to Antioch, where they gathered the church together and delivered the letter. The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message. Judas and Silas, who themselves were prophets, said much to encourage and strengthen the brothers. After spending some time there, they were sent off by the brothers with the blessing of peace to return to those who had sent them. But Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, where they and many others taught and preached the word of the Lord. – Acts 15:30-35
The people were encouraged and glad. And Judas and Silas stayed for a while, building up the church and encouraging them further. That is so great! And it leads to my second application this Father’s day:
2. A spiritual father encourages his children in the Lord.
What are some practical applications of this? Again, it first applies to fathers and their children. A father should encourage his children. How do you do this? What are some things a father can do? How do you encourage sons? How do you encourage daughters? There are countless ways. I think we will each find natural opportunities to do this if we have it set on our minds to do so. The opportunities will come. Our job is to not miss them, but act on them.
And again, this also applies to “spiritual” fathers and “spiritual” children. We all need encouragement! Let us encourage one another in the Lord.
Some time later Paul said to Barnabas, "Let us go back and visit the brothers in all the towns where we preached the word of the Lord and see how they are doing." Barnabas wanted to take John, also called Mark, with them, but Paul did not think it wise to take him, because he had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not continued with them in the work. They had such a sharp disagreement that they parted company. Barnabas took Mark and sailed for Cyprus, but Paul chose Silas and left, commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord. He went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches. – Acts 15:36-41
It is so easy to be hard on Paul here, isn’t it? Paul, lighten up! Get over it! Give him another chance! I don’t know that it is fair. We weren’t there. Honestly, it’s not our business. Our culture pushes this judgmental outlook on us all the time. Are you aware of it? Our fascination as a culture with people who are famous just because they are famous is related to this. This is especially true for our fascination as a culture with famous people who fall and do stupid things. And I think one can argue that the separation of Paul and Barnabas was a good thing – it led to covering a greater area with their return journeys.
What I really want to point out is Paul’s heart here. “Let us go back and see how they are doing.” In Paul’s letters over and over you see his heart. He would do anything for the believers he has helped disciple in the past. And I think this is the third mark of a spiritual father:
3. A spiritual father’s work is never done.
Our children will also be our children. Our relationship with them changes as they grow up, but they are always our children. We should always want to “go back and see how they are doing.” And the same holds for our “spiritual” children. I have been convicted recently in the need for me to do a better job maintaining friendships with people who have moved away. Men in general tend to be poor at doing this. But let us have the heart of Paul (which really is the heart of Jesus) towards our spiritual children. It doesn’t need to be frequent contact, but periodic contact.
He came to Derbe and then to Lystra, where a disciple named Timothy lived, whose mother was a Jewess and a believer, but whose father was a Greek. The brothers at Lystra and Iconium spoke well of him. Paul wanted to take him along on the journey, so he circumcised him because of the Jews who lived in that area, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. As they traveled from town to town, they delivered the decisions reached by the apostles and elders in Jerusalem for the people to obey. So the churches were strengthened in the faith and grew daily in numbers. – Acts 16:1-5
Did you notice that Paul went back to Lystra? That took a lot of guts. This was where had had been pummeled almost to death. Isn’t it interesting that it is here that Paul finds a young guy, a “child” in the faith, named Timothy. I’ll talk a little next week about Paul’s decision to circumcise Timothy. Without reading too much into the passage, it appears that Timothy’s real father was not a believer. Paul became Timothy’s spiritual father, writing him several letters (I and II Timothy). In I Timothy 1:2, Paul opens with “To Timothy, my true son in the faith…” and in II Timothy 1:2, he opens with “To Timothy, my dear son…” This is a powerful example for us. Men: may we be true spiritual fathers by not leaving our children to the wolves, by encouraging our children in the Lord, and by never relinquishing our role as spiritual fathers.
No comments:
Post a Comment