The church consultation at Jerusalem

Acts 15:6-28 the church consultation at Jerusalem

Verse 6: “came together for to consider” The church had already heard a general report from Paul and Barnabus. Now they come together for a formal consultation. The “council” at Jerusalem is a commonly recognized terminology used to describe this meeting in Acts 15. However, this biblical council of the apostles, elders, and church at Jerusalem should not be confounded with later historical usage in a more technical sense, such as various ecclesiastical councils held as judicial proceedings.[i] Perhaps the use of terms like assembly, conference, or consultation would help relieve the confusion and conflation of the different events.

**

Which James? This James must be either the second James among the twelve apostles (the son of Alphæus; Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), or James “the Lord’s brother” (cf. Galatians 1:19; Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3; Acts 1:14). The other apostle James, brother of John, has been executed (Acts 12:2). The James mentioned in Acts 12:17 and 21:18 (and probably 1 Corinthians 15:7) seems to be the same person as the James in Acts 15. James identified as “the Lord’s brother” in Galatians (1:19; 2:9, 12) might be the best identification. He, Cephas (Peter), and John, are described as pillars in the church at Jerusalem.[ii]

** 

Verse 28: The decision and conclusion was not of man, but of God.[iii] “it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us” What seems good to the Holy Ghost should seem good to us.

The “Jerusalem Council” is not the “pattern” for associations and conventions, but it a pattern of brotherly consultation. It is the meeting of representatives of two churches, with good counsel for all. The church at Jerusalem corrected error taught by her members – “certain men which came down from Judæa … certain which went out from us” (verses 1, 24). The church at Jerusalem advised that her representatives were wrong, and informed others that a gathering of apostles and elders, with the whole church, corrected and condemned those errors.

---

[i] Such as the Councils of Nicaea, Constantinople, Chalcedon, and so on.
[ii] That this is James the Lord’s brother seems to be the current consensus. However, older commentators such as Calvin, Gill, Barnes, Ripley, et al. see him as James the son of Alphæus. Calvin accounts James of Alphæus and James the Lord’s brother as the same person, writing, “…I do not doubt but that he was son to Alphæus, and Christ’s cousin, in which sense he is also called his brother. Whether he were bishop of Jerusalem or no, I leave it indifferent…”

[iii] The consultation at Jerusalem resolved the question of circumcision without any mention of or reference to the idea of baptism now standing in place of circumcision as the new covenant sign. Surely, were that a valid theological construct, baptism replacing circumcision should have been mentioned in this context.