Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - Acts 15:22 - 15:29
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Act_15:22-29
b. To send chosen men [to choose and send men]. (’ ÅêëåîáìÝíïíò — ðÝìøáé , is equivalent to: ἵíá ἐêëåîÜìåíïé — ðÝìøùóé . [Winer: Gr. N. T. § 38. 4.]). The resolution to choose messengers among the members of the congregation at Jerusalem, and send them to Antioch, had not been previously proposed. It was a happy thought, although the name of the person who first suggested it, is not given. The congregation of Antioch had sent a deputation, consisting of several of its members to the one in Jerusalem ( êáß ôéíáò ἄëëïíò ἐî áí ̓ ôῶí , Act_15:2.). It was, accordingly, a just and reasonable recognition of this congregational embassy, when the Christians of Jerusalem likewise sent messengers of its own to Antioch, in order to express, in this manner, its fraternal sentiments, and contribute its share in strengthening the bond of union which already existed. It was, moreover, a judicious measure that messengers from Jerusalem accompanied Paul and Barnabas, inasmuch as the testimony of the former fully confirmed the report furnished by the Antiochians on their return; omnibus modis cavebatur, ne Paulus sententiam concilii videretur pro suo referre arbitrio. (Bengel). Comp. Act_15:27 : êáὶ áí ̓ ôïí ́ ò — ἀðáããÝëëïíôáò ôὰ áí ̓ ôÜ .
c. Two men were chosen for this purpose: the first was Judas, surnamed Barsabas, of whom we have otherwise no knowledge whatever; his surname has induced some learned men (Grotius, for instance) to believe that he was a brother of Joseph Barsabas, who had, with Matthias, been proposed as a candidate for the apostleship, Act_1:23.—The other was Silas, well known as, subsequently, a fellow-laborer and companion of Paul in his missionary work among the Gentiles; Paul himself calls him Silvanus (1Th_1:1; 2Co_1:19). Both are here described by Luke as ἄíäñåò ἡãïýìåíïé ἐí ôïῖò ἁäåëöïῖò , i.e., they not only exercised great influence, but were also office-bearers in the congregation, whose duty it was to guide others; compare Heb_13:7; Heb_13:17, where the officers and teachers of the church receive this title [ ἡãïí ́ ìåíïé ]. They were, probably, elders of the congregation in Jerusalem; Luke calls them also prophets, Act_15:32.
Act_15:23. a. And they wrote letters by them [And they placed in their hands the following letter ( ôÜäå ); for the anacoluthon ãñÜøáíôåò instead of ãñ ́ øáíôáò , see Winer: Gr. N. T. § 63. I. 1.—Tr.]. The adoption of a resolution that a general epistle should be addressed to the Gentile-Christians, is another circumstance which had not hitherto, been mentioned in the account of the proceedings, that is, if we assume that ἐðéóôåῖëáé , [see Exeg. note on] Act_15:20, signifies, not literis mandare, but, simply, mandare. An epistle was the most suitable means for conveying to the remote Gentile-Christians, whom the matter concerned, a knowledge of the decision and pleasure of the assembly, in the original form, and in an authentic statement. The document was placed in their hands ( äéὰ ÷åéñὸò áí ̓ ôῶí ), i.e., of Judas and Silas, the two messengers sent from Jerusalem—not in those of Paul and Barnabas. It is the only congregational general letter of the apostolic age, which has descended to us, and the oldest synodical public letter (if we may use the expression), with, which we are acquainted. Luke does not mention the name of the person who composed it, or acted as scribe, neither does he state the language in which it was written. But its genuine Greek epistolary form, beginning with ÷áßñåéí , and closing with ἔῤῥùóèå , and the phrase åõ ̇̄ ðñÜôôåéí (Act_15:29), which so frequently occurred in letters, render it very probable that it was originally written in Greek, and that Luke has, consequently, given us an exact copy of the original itself. We may, besides, easily suppose, as Bengel has already done, (who is sustained by Bleek, in Stud. und Krit., 1836, 1837), that James, the brother of the Lord, composed the letter, in the name and by the authority of the assembly. For he exercised at that time already (comp. Act_12:17), a commanding influence in the congregation, and he had himself, on the present occasion, materially assisted in conducting the assembly to a decision. And, lastly, an analogy, in more than one point, may be found between this letter and the Epistle of James, of which he is unquestionably the author.
b. The apostles, and elders, etc.—The letter is addressed to the Gentile-Christians as to brethren ( ôïßò — ἀäåëöïῖò ôïéò ἐî ἐèíῶí ), and thus their equality with the Judæo-Christians in rank and privileges, is unequivocally acknowledged. They are, further, described as inhabitants of Antioch, of Syria, and of Cilicia. The capital city, the congregation of which had originally brought the matter forward, is appropriately mentioned in the first place; the name of the whole province (Syria) succeeds, and that of Cilicia is then added. It necessarily follows that Christian congregations must, already at that time, have existed in Cilicia, [comp. Act_15:41], and that they, too, had been disturbed by the efforts of the Judaists. On the other hand, the congregations which had been recently formed in the two provinces of Asia Minor, viz., Pisidia and Pamphylia, are not mentioned, although the proceedings in Jerusalem referred also to them; comp. Act_16:4. It is possible that they had not yet been disturbed by the visits of Judæo-Christians, who entertained Pharisaical sentiments.
Act_15:24. As we have heard.—The occasion of the letter is stated in brief, but expressive, terms. The assembly declares that the procedure of those who had molested the Gentile congregations by their Judaizing demands, was unauthorized; ïῖò ïí ̓ äéåóôåéëÜìåèá , i.e., ‘they received no commission, no authority, for such a course, from us.’ Their conduct is described as a ôáñÜóóåéí ëüãïéò —conduct which created disturbances, doubts and scruples; Paul uses the same expression in Gal_5:10; ὁ ôáñÜóóùí ὑìᾶò . The result is, further, described as an ἀíáóêåõÜæåéí ôὰò øõ÷ὰò ῦìῶí , evertere, destruere animas; this verb does not occur in the Septuagint, and is found in the New Testament only in this passage. It signifies: to break down, to destroy, a building, and is, hence, precisely the opposite of ïἰêïäïìåῖí ; comp. Act_9:31. The assembly, accordingly did not spare the authors of those troubles, but disapproved of their conduct and condemned it, as not only altogether unauthorized, but also as adapted solely to disturb the consciences of men.
Act_15:25-26, a. To send chosen men [To choose and send men]. The assembly, on the other hand, unequivocally sanctions, in its general letter, the course pursued by Paul and Barnabas. They are significantly styled ïἱ ἀãáðçôïὶ ἡìῶí . While the Judaistic emissaries had assumed a hostile attitude towards the apostles of the Gentiles, the Judæo-apostles, the elders, and the whole congregation in Jerusalem, emphatically express the ardent love with which they regard Paul and Barnabas, and declare that they were intimately united with them in spirit. Moreover, they commended the unconditional self-devotion of these two men, who were willing to sacrifice even their lives for the Lord Jesus, for the confession of his name, and for His honor. [Men, Act_15:26, ( ἀíèñþðïéò ) in apposition with Barnabas and Paul, not with men ( ἄíäñáò ) in Act_15:25.—Tr.]. ( ÉÉáñáäïῦíáé ôὴí øõ÷Þí means: to deliver up, to jeopard, the soul, the life.). These words were intended to be a recommendation and a justification of the two men, on whom personally their opponents had doubtless thrown suspicion, but for whose integrity the members of the assembly pledge themselves.—The name of Barnabas precedes that of Paul [see Exeg. note on Act_15:12-15. a.—Tr.], as the former had been longer known to the apostles and the congregation, and this arrangement is a plain indication of the genuineness of the letter [of its “diplomatic” precision. (Bleek, Meyer, de Wette).—Tr.]
b. The resolution was adopted by them ãåíïìÝíïéò ὁìïèíìáäüí (an adverb, where an adjective would be expected [Winer: Gr. N. T. § 54. 2.—Tr.]), that is: “after we were of one mind”; the sense is that the resolution was not adopted by a majority, while a difference of opinion still remained, but by a unanimous vote. We must, accordingly, suppose that after those who entertained Pharisaic views, had expressed themselves in very emphatic terms, (see Act_15:5; Act_15:7), they were ultimately silenced by the decisive testimony of the apostles, and the cordial concurrence of the large congregation. Compare Baumgarten [Die Apostelgesch, etc.], II. 1, 159. It is not, indeed, implied that their Judaistic sentiments had been changed or extirpated, but simply, that, at the moment, they felt that they were defeated, and bowed before the power of the truth.
Act_15:27. We have sent, therefore.—The two ambassadors, Judas and Silas, who had been chosen in order to proceed with Barnabas and Paul to the Gentile-Christians (Act_15:25), are directed to announce äéὰ ëüõ , i.e., by word of mouth, the same things ( ôὰ áí ̓ ôÜ ) which the letter contained. The expressions ôὰ áὐôÜ and äéὰ ëüãïõ , belong together, so that the sense cannot be, as Neander supposes: ‘Judas and Silas will tell you the same things that Paul and Barnabas announce.’ The following words, moreover, viz., ἔäïîå ãὰñ , show that the subject to which ἀðáããÝëëåéí refers, can be no other than the substance of the resolution concerning the Christianity of the Gentile-Christians.
Act_15:28-29. a. It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us.—With regard to the grammatical construction, it may be remarked that we should not depart from the most obvious and simple sense (according to which two subjects are placed in juxtaposition, to whom the decision and the resolution are ascribed), unless an unintelligible or inappropriate interpretation of the words would be the result. But the most obvious sense is, at the same time, here appropriate in every respect; see below, Doctrinal and Ethical, No. 4. It is, therefore, not necessary to resort to any far-fetched interpretation and assume that a hendiadys occurs here, i.e., either “to the Holy Ghost in us,” (Olshausen), or, “nobis per Spiritum Sanctum.” (Grotius). The explanation of Neander appears to be even more artificial; he assumes that the words ô . ἁã . ðíåýìáôé occur as an ablative, i.e., “through the Holy Ghost it pleased us also, (as well as Paul and Barnabas).” [Neander recalled or modified his original opinion in a later edition of Gesch. d. Pfl. (History of the Planting, etc. I. 166, text and note 1), and explains: “We have resolved” (not “through,” for then ἐí should precede, according to the N. T. usus loquendi) “under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, to lay, etc.”—Tr.]. The resolution means, in general, that the assembly did not wish to impose any further burden on the brethren among the Gentiles except “these necessary things.” (’ Åðéôßèåóèáé is not passive, imponi per quosvis doctores (Bengel), but occurs here in an active sense, as it does in by far the greatest number of cases in which it is employed.
b. To lay no greater burden.—The whole assembly, accordingly, declares that the Gentile-Christians shall be exempt from any further exactions, as far as a Mosaic legality is concerned, and be required to abstain only from the four things which James had already specified. The enumeration in Act_15:29, differs from that in Act_15:20, merely in substituting åἰäùëüèíôá for åἴäùëá (the former: partaking of sacrifices which had been offered to gods), and in assigning the fourth instead of the second place to ðïñíåéÜ . The words at the close: ἐîὦí — åõ ̇̄ ðñÜîåôå , show conclusively that the term ἐðÜíáãêåò does not refer to any unconditional and absolute necessity of a moral nature, for that language would be very inexpressive and feeble, and, indeed, altogether inappropriate, if the intention was to demand an abstinence which was absolutely and per se indispensable. The last sentence rather seems to give counsel, in a faithful and impressive manner. Ἐî ὦò is not to be understood as in direct connection with äéáôçñåῖí , in the sense of: abstinere a re, for äéáôçñåῖí is always connected with an accusative, only seldom with ìÞ , and never with å ̇ ê ; ἐî ὦí is, therefore, equivalent to “in consequence of,” or, “accordingly.” Åí ̓͂ ðñÜôôåéí does not mean: to do morally right, but, to be in a good condition; it is against the usus loquendi of the New Testament, to regard it as identical with óùèῆíáé (Kuinoel). [ Åíὐ ̄ ðñÜîåôå —says Meyer, who refers to various passages in Plato and Demosthenes,—means: “Ye shall be in a favorable condition,” namely in consequence of the peace and concord which will then prevail among Christians. Ἐῤῥùóèå is the epistolary Valete.—Tr.]
c. With respect to the question: How can the present report of the assembly and its proceedings, be reconciled with the statement of the apostle Paul in Gal_2:1 ff., see my Apost. u. nachap. Zeitalt. 2d. ed. p. 393, [where Lechler devotes more than 40 pages to a successful examination of, and answer to, certain difficulties proposed by Baur, Schwegler, Zeller, etc.—Tr.]
2. The assembly addressed an epistle to the brethren among the Gentiles; the genuineness and authenticity of the alleged decrees of the assembly were thus established by a written instrument. The wish that the report of the proceedings should not be simply verbal, was both wise and benevolent. Although Paul and Barnabas might enjoy the confidence and love of the apostles and the congregation in Jerusalem in the highest degree, and although Silas and Judas might possess very great influence, and really be ἡãïýìåíïé , they were, nevertheless, not infallible men, whose report was necessarily and absolutely trustworthy; the sense of the assembly could be conveyed with perfect accuracy and fidelity only by writing. Our evangelical motto is: Verbo solo. The word of the Scriptures, as inspired by the Spirit—the word in which the Spirit lives, and through which the Spirit can, with power, fulness, and directness, influence accessible souls—is our treasure, and firm ground of faith.
3. True Christian love is not effeminate and feeble in its character, or so spiritless that it does not venture at any time to refuse its concurrence. If the Redeemer could not have pronounced a “Woe!” in the case of perverse men, of Pharisees and Scribes, his “Blessed!” would not possess that heavenly power of love, which it now exercises. If the apostles and brethren had not spoken in opposition to the Pharisees in the assembly, disapproved of their course, and uttered words of stern rebuke (Act_15:24), they would not have displayed sincere love to the Gentile-Christians, and to Paul and Barnabas themselves. But they repelled the former with the utmost decision, in order to add to the freedom and cordiality with which they embraced the latter. He alone who unhesitatingly and consistently honors the truth, is capable of entertaining a genuine, Christian love in his heart, and manifesting it in his life.
4. The declaration: It seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, is of great importance. It has, on the one hand, been often interpreted as an expression of hierarchical arrogance, and has been exposed to censure; it has, on the other, been altered in sense and softened by interpreters, with good intentions, but without due consideration; see Exeg. etc. above, Act_15:28-29. a. In order to ascertain the true meaning of the words, the circumstance should be carefully noted, that the letter speaks of two resolutions adopted by the assembly, only one of which is mentioned in this manner. The resolution to send messengers to the Gentile-Christians, Act_15:25, is introduced only with the words: ἕäïîåí ἡìῖí ãåíïìÝíïéò ὁìïèõìáäüí ; the other, on the contrary, according to which no further burdens should be imposed on the Gentile-Christians, and only abstinence in certain cases should be required, is thus introduced: ἔäïîå ôῷ ἁã . ðí . êáὶ ἡìῖí . It hence follows that the assembly does not ascribe all its resolutions ultimately to the Holy Ghost, but only that momentous decision which so deeply concerned the conscience alike of the brethren among the Gentiles, and of the Judæo-Christians themselves. It is solely this resolution which the assembly recognizes as one not only dictated by human wisdom, but also divinely inspired, or as one which proceeded from the guidance of the Holy Ghost himself. Can it be possible that this expression of the convictions of the assembly, contained an error or a wrong—that it originated in a fanatical self-delusion—or, that it was an attempt to deceive others, suggested by spiritual pride or hierarchical ambition? By no means! It conveys, on the contrary, a striking truth, conceived with entire sobriety of judgment, and announced in a devout spirit after calm deliberation. The assembly recognizes with humility and gratitude to God, and is not ashamed to make the confession before men, that, with regard to the best course, or the true bond of union, that is, such a solution as neither sacrifices truth to love, nor violates love for the sake of truth—a solution which both vindicates evangelical liberty, and secures the unity of the church of Christ—they are indebted, not to themselves, but to the Holy Ghost, who guides into all truth; and thus they give the glory to God. And yet they do not deny that they, too, had labored, had carefully deliberated in common, and honestly sought after the truth—and that the result had not been obtained from above while they slept, but followed after they had themselves ( êáὶ ἡìῖí ) made diligent and earnest efforts. This peculiar language recognizes, accordingly, both the divine and gracious operations of the Holy Ghost, and also the independent action of man in searching and laboring; it furnishes, not a partial, but a complete view of their internal convictions, and combines humility with Christian dignity.—The remark may, finally, be made, that this passage furnishes an indirect proof of the personality of the Holy Ghost. For it is only when this doctrine is admitted, that a äïêåῖí , in the sense in which the word here occurs, can be ascribed to the Holy Ghost, i.e., an intention and determination of the will.
Act_15:23. And they wrote letters by them.—A mere verbal communication, even though upright brethren should be the agents, did not appear to the apostles to be an adequate and sufficiently sure method of conveying the knowledge of doctrinal truths and ecclesiastical ordinances. They deemed it necessary to express their sentiments in writing. The circumstance shows how far the apostles were from entertaining the opinion that any individual could be infallible, although he might even be the most prominent among their brethren. We gratefully acknowledge the wisdom of God, who did not give us merely oral testimony, but furnished us with a “sure word of prophecy” [2Pe_1:19] in a written form. Our faith now rests on a firm foundation, since we can say: “It is written.” (Ap. Past.).
Act_15:24. As we have heard … subverting [in that they unsettle] your souls.—Observe that the Holy Ghost does not send the men who teach works and the law, but says that they confuse and distress Christians. (Luther).—The Holy Ghost does not send false teachers; they come without authority; they do not edify, but only confuse and distress. Even as sound doctrine cheers the heart, and makes it strong in God, so false doctrine unsettles the soul, and does not allow it to find true peace. (Starke).
Act_15:25-26. With our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men that have hazarded their lives, etc.—With the same firmness and decision with which they withdrew from the Christians of Jerusalem who entertained Pharisaic sentiments, they acknowledged Barnabas and Paul. They term them beloved friends; and, for what reason? They delivered up their lives for the name of Christ, not only by exposing themselves to bodily danger, but also by consecrating all the powers of their souls to the service of Jesus. Such a course still continues to constitute the duty and the glory of a servant of Christ. He issues the command: “Die at the post of duty, but gain souls for the Lamb.” (Williger).
Act_15:27. Tell you the same things by mouth.—The oral and the written testimony were intended to sustain each other. It was necessary that the dead letter of the Scriptures should be made alive by the Holy Ghost who spoke through the men of God. And so, too, in our own day, it is not sufficient that the word of God should be read; it must also be heard, when it is spoken by divinely enlightened men. (Williger).
Act_15:28. For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us.—The Holy Ghost is the arbiter and judge in matters of religion.—The decision of a case which believers have considered in the light of the Holy Ghost, may very properly be regarded as a decision of the Holy Ghost.—Our decision should not anticipate, but conform to, that of the Holy Ghost.—Let no one attempt to obtrude his fancies on others, as if they constituted the will of the Holy Ghost. (Starke).
Act_15:29. From which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well.—Even when they mention those few points which they deem necessary, they employ very moderate terms (“Ye shall do well”), as compared with the violent threats of the others (“Ye cannot be saved”, Act_15:1). How tenderly we should deal with the consciences of men! (Rieger).—As we learn from the introductory words of the Epistle, that the command was not intended for all the congregations, so, too, we learn from these concluding words, that it was not to be of perpetual validity, but to endure only until the attachment to the Mosaic ordinances had somewhat abated. (Ap. Past. and Bengel’s Gnomon).—Fare ye well. Through this concluding salutation, expressed in the manner of the Greeks, the Hebrews became Greeks to their Greek brethren. They could, with great propriety, say: “Fare ye well,” to brethren who had found eternal life by faith in the Lord Jesus, and whose fraternal love was the rule of their conduct in all the affairs of this life. “Fare ye well”, that is, Be faithful to Jesus ! (Besser).
The wisdom and the love with which we should deal with errors and the erring, in the Church.—The Church of the Lord possesses legislative powers: I. Because the Spirit of God operates in her, Act_15:28; II. Because it is her duty to decide on the changing affairs of this life with a view to the salvation of mankind, Act_15:24; Act_15:29. (Lisco).—How is that which is temporary in Christianity to be set aside? I. When has the proper time arrived? II. By what considerations are we to be guided? (id.).—The Epistle of the church of Jerusalem to the brethren among the Gentiles, viewed as an adequate and valid charter for mankind, now released from the bondage of the law: adequate and valid, I. On account of the occasion which called it law, forth; (it concerned the question: Moses or Christ? Human traditions, or the work of God?) II. On account of its holy and inviolable source: (it was dictated by the Holy Ghost, Act_15:28). III. On account of its venerable bearers; (they were heralds of evangelical grace and truth, whom God himself had accredited.) IV. On account of the incontestable truth of its contents; (exemption from the temporary ceremonial, but not from the eternal moral law, Act_15:29; release from the yoke of servile obedience, but not from the service which self-denying love renders to the Lord, Act_15:26).—True evangelical liberty: it is, indeed, I. Freedom from human ordinances and a ceremonial service, Act_15:24; Act_15:28, but at the same time, II. Subjection, in love, to the Lord (Act_15:26), to the eternal moral Act_15:29.—The written word of God, and its living bearers; each is attested by the other: I. The Scriptures, by the character of the bearers: II. The bearers, by the character of the Scriptures.
Footnotes:
Act_15:22. [In place of ἐðéêáëïὐìåíïí before B áñó ., of text. rec., from H., fathers, etc., recent editors agree in adopting the simple form with A. B. C. D. E. G., and Cod. Sin., and regard the former as an explanatory correction.—Tr.]
Act_15:23. Five important MSS., A. B.C. D. and Cod. Sin., omit êáὶ ïἱ [of text. rec.] before ἀäåëöáü , as well as several fathers and versions [Vulg., etc.]. Lachmann has therefore cancelled êáὶ ïἱ . But it may easily be conceived that the omission was occasioned by a scruple respecting the coöperation of the congregation with the apostles. [Meyer, whose opinion de Wette adopts, supposes that the omission was the result of a hierarchical feeling, and that the two words are genuine.—Tr.]. E. G. H., and most of the versions and fathers, insert êáὶ ïἱ , and this reading is, with Tischendorf, to be received as genuine. [It is dropped by Alf. as an interpolation. Cod. Sin. (original) omitted it, but it was inserted by a later hand, marked C by Tisch.—Tr.]
Act_15:24. The words: ëÝãïíôåò ðåñéôὲìíåóèáé êáὶ ôçñåῖí ôὸí íüìïí , [of text. rec., and found in C. E.] are wanting in A. B. D. [and Cod. Sin.], in several versions [Vulg. etc.], and fathers; they are a gloss from Act_15:1; Act_15:5, and have therefore been very properly cancelled by Lach. and Tisch. [But both Meyer and de Wette incline to the opinion that the words are genuine; E. even inserts äåῖ after ðåñéôÝì .; the manuscripts vary considerably; Alf. says that the words are “manifestly an interpolation,” and, like Born., omits them.—Tr.]
Act_15:27. [In place of “mouth,” (Tynd., Cranmer, Geneva), the margin of the Engl. Bible proposes “word.” (Wiclif.); äéὰ ëüãïõ is equivalent to “verbally” or “orally.”—Tr.]
Act_15:28. Tischendorf has cancelled ôïýôùí [of text. rec. from E.G.] after ôῶí ἐðÜíáãêåò , but on the authority of only one manuscript, viz. A. [The word is omitted by several minuscules and fathers.]. Lach., in accordance with B. C. D. [and H.], reads ôïýôùí ôῶí ἐðÜíáãêåò [and is supported by Meyer.—D. omits ôῶí . Alf. omits ôïýôùí altogether, as a marginal gloss.—Cod. Sin. (original) reads: ôïõôùí åðáíáãêáéò ; a later hand (C) here inserted ôùí .— åðáíáãêáéò is found also in A. C.—Tr.]
Act_15:29. Tischendorf [with Lach.], in accordance with A (orig.). B. C [and Cod. Sin.].reads êáὶ ðíéêôῶõ , whereas the singular, ðíéêôïῦ [of text. rec.] is found in A. (corrected), as well as in E. G. H. [Vulg.—D. omits êáὶ ðí . Alf. agrees with Tisch., and supposes that the singular is an “alteration for uniformity with Act_15:20.”—Cod. Sin. (original) exhibits the plural, for which a later hand, C, inserted the singular.—Tr.]