Talk:Apostolic Council

Disputed
I find a lot of factual errors in this article, in addition there is another article titled Council of Jerusalem which has its own problems.

Claim 1: The Apostolic Council of ca. 48 AD settled the issue of whether non-Jewish Christians had to follow Jewish traditions.

False, the council settled the issue of whether Gentile converts needed to be circumcised.


 * It's not that clear cut. A literal reading of just this text supports your position; however, when you bear in mind that circumcision was a mark of belonging to the Jewish community, and the fact that James addressed other issues of the Law in his conclusion, an argument can reasonably be made that the council was clearly about more than just the practice of circumcision. This article should probably present both the literal reading and at least this common broader interpretation of what was happening. Wesley 16:26, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Agreed, there is more to circumcision than just circumcision, but I think the article should start with Acts 15, then move out into interpretations or expansions since the account in Acts is sparse, hopefully with documentation of where they come from. For example, the claim above is that the Council settled the issue of whether non-Jewish Christians had to follow Jewish traditions. How is that derived from Acts 15 and by whom? Aren't some of James' decree still Jewish? Is circumcision the only Jewish tradition? Isn't the concept of Messiah Jewish? ... Did this council decree Marcionism? 64.169.0.206 06:41, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Claim 2: This came out of a debate between the apostles Paul and Peter.

False, the debate was between some from Judea who said Gentiles had to be circumcised to be saved (Legalism) in combination with some of the Pharisee sect who said they have to be circumcised in order to keep the Law of Moses versus Peter and Paul who objected to circumcision for Gentiles. James judged (note James is in charge of the Jerusalem Church) not to burden new Gentile converts but that they should observe a subset of the Law of Moses, what would later be called the Noahide Laws.


 * I agree, Peter supported Paul's position at this council. Wesley 16:26, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Claim 3: It was decided that gentile Christians did not have to keep the Mosaic law, but that they should still refraim from idolatry, fornication, things strangled, and blood.

Right, a subset of the Mosaic Law, also known as the Noahide Laws. And this applies to new converts, i.e. Gentiles turning back to God.

Claim 4: Acts states that Paul was the head of a delegation from the Antiochene church that came to discuss whether Christians should continue to observe Mosaic Law, most important of which were the practice of circumcision and dietary laws.

False, the issue was specifically whether Gentiles needed to be circumcised.


 * Again, there are arguments for the council having considered a broad or narrow scope; see my answer to Claim 1. Wesley

Claim 5: It appears that he wanted to make sure that what he had been teaching to the Gentile believers in previous years was correct — that Christ's fulfilment of the Mosaic Law, death and resurrection had freed Christian believers from the need to obey Mosaic Law and "for fear that (he) was running or had run (his) race in vain" (Gal 2:2).

Instead of "it appears" it should be: One theory is that ...

Some people view Paul as anti-Torah while others view him as pro-Torah. For the pro-Torah view you have Acts 15 (Paul agrees that a subset of the Torah should apply to new Gentile converts), Acts 16 (Paul *personally* circumcises Timothy even though his father is Greek because his mother is of the Jewish faith) and Acts 21 (James challenges Paul on the rumor that he is teaching rebellion against the Torah, Paul goes to the Jerusalem Temple to show that he is pro-Torah, however some people from Asia Minor where Paul is from spot him and a riot occurs). The greatest advocate of the Paul was anti-Torah position, indeed even Jesus was anti-Torah, was Marcion and Marcionism. The concept that Christians are no longer subject to any law is Antinomianism.


 * I agree, "One theory is that..." is probably preferable. Far better would be to state whose theory it is, by naming an author, or at least a broad group or movement. Wesley 16:26, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It looks like the main work is happening at Council of Jerusalem, then this title (Apostolic Council) will probably get redirected there, or maybe it should be already redirected? Is there anything of value here that should get copied into Council of Jerusalem? 64.169.0.206 06:41, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Any objection to redirecting this article to Council of Jerusalem?63.201.24.151 05:35, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Condensation of Acts 15, NASV translation
Some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brethren, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved." And when Paul and Barnabas had great dissension and debate with them, the brethren determined that Paul and Barnabas and some others of them should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders concerning this issue. ... When they arrived at Jerusalem, they were received by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they reported all that God had done with them. But some of the sect of the Pharisees who had believed stood up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them and to direct them to observe the Law of Moses." ... Peter stood up and said to them, "... why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? ..." ... Barnabas and Paul ... were relating what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles. After they had stopped speaking, James answered, saying, "Brethren, listen to me. Simeon [Peter] has related how God first concerned Himself about taking from among the Gentiles a people for His name. With this the words of the Prophets agree, just as it is written: [Amos9:11-12,Jer12:15,Deut28:10,Isa45:21,63:19,Jer14:19,Dan9:19] Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles, but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood. For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath." Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to choose men from among them to send to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas--Judas called Barsabbas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren, and they sent this letter by them, "The apostles and the brethren who are elders, to the brethren in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia who are from the Gentiles, greetings. Since we have heard that some of our number to whom we gave no instruction have disturbed you with their words, unsettling your souls, it seemed good to us, having become of one mind, to select men to send to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore we have sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will also report the same things by word of mouth. For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials: that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication; if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will do well. Farewell."