Replies

I believe there is much misunderstanding of just exactly what it was (and what was discussed) when it comes to the Council of Jerusalem in 49 A.D.

As Douglas has indicated........the question was, "Should adult Gentile converts be required to undergo circumcision to become part of the New Testament Church." The faction of Pharisees (led by James) [Acts 15:5][Galatians 2:12] felt they must.....according to the Law of Moses. Well.....what did Moses have to say about that?

Moses didn't say much about circumcision but received instructions from Yahweh in two different places [Exodus 12:48] and [Leviticus 12:3]. The part that the Pharisees were having problems with was obviously the first passage:

48And when a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is born in the land: for no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof.

Paul and Barnabas were celebrating Passover in Antioch and were allowing uncircumcised, adult, Gentile converts to participate. If this were not the case then the Pharisees would have no special problem with Gentile converts coming into the Church. It was only this qualification that had anything to do with the "Law of Moses" [Acts 15:5]. They (The Pharisee faction) insisted that these adult, male Gentiles undergo circumcision for this.....and only this reason. It was this demand by the circumcision group that caused the entire Council to be convened [Acts 15:2]. This was the only question at the council.

Peter spoke of significant things.....how the Holy Spirit had been given to the Gentiles (without circumcision) [15:8] and how no distinction was evident [15:9]. He also related a physical condition that the Apostles, the Pharisees nor their fathers had been able to bear.....they were all circumcised as infants.

To understand just what Peter was getting at let's look at [Genesis 34:13-17].

13And the sons of Jacob answered Shechem and Hamor his father deceitfully, and said, because he had defiled Dinah their sister: 14And they said unto them, We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to one that is uncircumcised; for that were a reproach unto us: 15But in this will we consent unto you: If ye will be as we be, that every male of you be circumcised; 16Then will we give our daughters unto you, and we will take your daughters to us, and we will dwell with you, and we will become one people. 17But if ye will not hearken unto us, to be circumcised; then will we take our daughter, and we will be gone.

All of the men of the city consented to be circumcised and Simeon and Levi (brothers of Dinah) killed them all [34:25] while they were recovering....still in agony....and unable to defend themselves. This is what Peter was referring to......"what we nor our fathers had ever been able to bear".....and we should not ask it of adult, male Gentiles who wish to join with us in our worship.

The discussion was regarding the process the gentiles should follow... did the gentiles have to first essentially become Jews? Scripture didn't tell them. The Holy Spirit did. They promulgated a binding new doctrine for all the faithful through their authority as Apostles, not leaning on an authority of Scripture.

I think they did rely on scripture.....and then used common sense. I also believe that new born Gentile babies were routinely circumcised for health reasons. I'm sure their parents were encouraged by the Apostles to maintain this custom. Adult, male converts continued to be excused for obvious reasons.