BIBLE IN TEN

Acts 15:26

Monday, 27 March 2023
 
men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Acts 15:26
 
In the previous verse, the council explained that they were sending along chosen men to accompany Barnabas and Paul. With that, it next refers to these men, saying, “men who have risked their lives.”
 
The Greek states more clearly what is almost unclear in some English translations. This is not referring to the chosen men accompanying Barnabas and Paul, but to Barnabas and Paul. It is they who went forth carrying the gospel to both belligerent Jews and to areas where Gentiles were hostile to strangers. They faithfully carried the message even to the point of being chased out of cities (such as in Acts 13:50-52), being stoned and left for dead (Acts 14:19, 20), etc.
 
The council had been apprised of these things and the distrust of Paul that once existed had been turned into a wholehearted appreciation for his tireless efforts. Barnabas was already known as a faithful believer, but his status was certainly elevated greatly because of the hardships he was willing to endure. For both of them, the council notes that these things occurred “for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
 
They had gone forth according to the calling of the Spirit upon them, they had continued steadfastly in faith, and they had returned to Antioch and continued to work tirelessly as servants of Jesus Christ. The council recognized this and acknowledged it openly to any and all who were to receive their letter.
 
Life application: If we really have a deep-seated faith in the hope set before us in Jesus Christ, then why would we shy away from proclaiming it? A life of daily work, a good meal, annual vacations, relative ease and security, etc. is almost an intoxicant. It can keep us from striving to do more than we may otherwise be willing to do for the name of Jesus Christ.
 
This doesn’t necessarily mean our faith is lacking, but it sure can affect how we exercise our faith. This is why the author of Hebrews wrote out his strong exhortation –
 
“Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, 2 looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.” Hebrews 12:1, 2
 
Sin can ensnare us, ease can dull our senses, fear of the future can misdirect us, etc. If we fix our eyes on Jesus and lay such weights aside, we will be more purposely fixed to do what we should be doing. This has to be a constant mental state of life. It isn’t easy because of everything that comes at us in our daily walk, but if we just keep tuning our minds back to the prize at the end, we will do well.
 
Focus on Jesus! Don’t be fearful, distracted, or misdirected. Instead, have faith that what lies ahead will replace everything that we give up right now. And what it is replaced with will be so far above what we may lose now that we will never consider the temporary losses we may face. Be assured of this! Eyes on Jesus!
 
Glorious God, help us to fix our eyes on Jesus at all times. May we have unbroken concentration as we press ahead in our hope of what He has set before us. This temporary world has many enticements and distractions, but these things will all fade into obscurity someday. Help us to think clearly about the sure and reliable promises we possess in Christ. Amen.

Acts 15:25

Sunday, 26 March 2023
 
it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, Acts 15:25
 
After explaining the main purpose of the letter in the first sentence, which was the issue of refuting the Judaizers concerning circumcision and adherence to the Law of Moses, the letter now continues, saying, “it seemed good to us.”
 
In other words, it means that the decision was made and was mutually agreed upon to take the appropriate action necessary to rectify the situation. That occurred, as it next says, “being assembled.”
 
Rather, this is more of a paraphrase. The Greek is an aorist participle, more simply reading, “having come.” This state of having come was “with one accord.” It is a single word, an adverb, now seen for the eighth time, all in Acts. It literally signifies “unanimously.” The entire council consisting of the apostles, elders, and then with the agreement of the church, were united in thought concerning the resolution of the matter.
 
And it could be no other way. If they were being led by the Spirit to effect the purposes of God for the church, then what was decided had to be in this unanimous fashion. God is superintending over the process of what will be the standard for the rest of redemptive history concerning the Gentile-led church age. This is because the events are now recorded and included in His word.
 
If the decision was not unanimous, then that would have been stated and explained. But because this was not the case, it is fully apparent that what is recorded here is exactly what God wanted. Though this is a descriptive account of the events that took place, it is a fully explanatory record of what God intends concerning the matter. The only deviation from it is to be taken by subsequent words found in the epistles that may clarify or set aside whatever is decided upon now. For the time being, the church was given its instructions and they were to be what was taught concerning circumcision and law observance.
 
As for the contents of their unanimous decision, that continues with the words, “to send chosen men to you.” Again, an aorist participle is used, “having chosen men to send to you.”
 
The decision was rendered, and it will be explained in the verses to come. However, to demonstrate to all who would hear the decision that it was from the council and no longer a point of debate, there would be men sent from the council itself to confirm the source and the content. These were being sent, as it next says, “with our beloved Barnabas and Paul.”
 
Again, as seen on several occasions, Barnabas is noted before Paul. It is true that Barnabas had a closer and more longstanding affiliation with the church in Jerusalem than Paul, but more, it is certainly Paul with whom the Judaizers had the biggest beef. He was the spokesman for the missionary journeys. He was also out in the front in matters dealing with the Gentiles, having been selected by the Lord to be the apostle to the Gentiles, etc.
 
Therefore, to place Barnabas first in the letter from the church is another implicit confirmation of the rightness of what Paul has been conveying. The order then is from the council, in a written letter, and confirming the letter’s authenticity by men chosen by the council concerning what has been conveyed, meaning acceptance of the stand presented to the council by Barnabas and Paul.
 
Calling these two men “beloved” is a note that not only are they teaching what is proper, but they are doing so with the full blessing and spirit of fellowship by the council itself.
 
Life application: Later councils in church history may or may not have been led by the Spirit of God in rendering decisions. And there may or may not have been a unanimous agreement to what was ordained out of those councils. But that is because the canon of Scripture was eventually decided upon and settled. It is to this word, meaning the word penned by men chosen by God to write it down through His Spirit, that such matters were (and still are) to be decided.
 
If the decisions rendered at such councils are in accord with the word, that becomes evident by an evaluation of the word. If they are contrary to the word, the same is true. The word would reveal it.
 
Even today, councils are held in many denominations, usually called synods, conferences, or something similar. The surest way to tell if they are being led by God is to see if they are being held in accord with the word of God. If the Spirit of God breathed out the contents of the Bible, and if a matter is being debated that is contrary to the word of God, then that council – by default – cannot be led by the Spirit of God.
 
It may be that a faction or an individual is rightly standing on the words of Scripture concerning a matter at the gathering, and that is fine, but if the debate is, for example, over the matter of ordaining homosexuals, then God’s Spirit cannot be guiding the matter. He has already spoken concerning the issue.
 
Think this through when you see members of your church or denomination conducting affairs in a manner contrary to the word. God’s participation in the deliberations is already stated. It is fixed and it is unchanging. To debate contrary to the word is to invite His wrath and condemnation, nothing else.
 
Lord God, Your word is written. Help us to get that through our heads and to accept what it says as the authoritative word to conduct our affairs in all things. May we never be so presumptuous as to make decisions contrary to what You have laid out before us in this sacred and precious treasure. Help us to think clearly on this matter. Amen.

Acts 15:24

Saturday, 25 March 2023
 
Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, “You must be circumcised and keep the law”—to whom we gave no such commandment— Acts 15:24
 
The previous verse cited the introduction to the letter to the Gentile brethren in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia. The main content of the letter begins with this verse. Of note is that some manuscripts (and thus some versions) drop out the highly important words of this verse concerning law observance and circumcision –
 
“Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions.” ESV et al
 
“Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, ‘You must be circumcised and keep the law’—to whom we gave no such commandment.” NKJV et al
 
Although the words are missing here, anyone who reads the full content of the chapter will know exactly what is intended. Whether the words were added by one text for clarity or dropped out of the other for some unknown reason, the intent of the overall passage remains unchanged. Having noted that, the verse begins with, “Since we have heard.”
 
The council immediately distances itself from any connection to those who had brought the false message of circumcision and law observance presented in Acts 15:1 –
 
“And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, ‘Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.’”
 
The council heard about this but had not directed it. That will be explained more fully as the verse unfolds. For now, the words continue, saying, “that some who went out from us.”
 
Those in the council openly acknowledge that the source of the trouble was “from us,” but no further explanation is given. In other words, because the letter is addressed to Gentiles within the church, it could simply mean, “from Jews.” That is probably the way it should be taken, meaning in a general sense and not from either the apostles or elders in Jerusalem. Next, it notes that these unsanctioned people, “have troubled you with words.”
 
These men, whoever they were, did not come with either a letter of authority or with a demonstration of signs and wonders that may have substantiated the message of true apostles. They spoke as if they possessed authority within the church’ but their words were not on behalf of the church. Instead, they brought forth doctrines that had no basis or standing within the doctrines set forth for Gentile converts.
 
In fact, to this point, the matter had not even been established by the apostles and elders. As such, their message was without any basis at all. Because of this, the letter continues, saying that their words were “unsettling your souls.”
 
Here is a word found nowhere else in Scripture, anaskeuazó, translated as “unsettling.” Of this word, Vincent’s Word Studies says –
 
“Only here in New Testament, and not found either in the Septuagint or in the Apocrypha. Originally, it means to pack up baggage, and so to carry away; hence, to dismantle or disfurnish. ... From this comes the more general meaning to lay waste, or ravage. The idea here is that of turning the minds of the Gentile converts upside down; throwing them into confusion like a dismantled house.”
 
Where there was order and harmony at the teaching of Paul and Barnabas, there was suddenly upheaval and turmoil because of the false message of these men. This is perfectly evident from the words of Acts 15:2, “Therefore, when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them.”
 
The Gentile converts probably stood there watching as the two sides sparred over the issue, which, according to these false teachers, was that “You must be circumcised and keep the law.”
 
This is the message they carried as was previously cited from Acts 15:1. If their teaching was true, it would mean that salvation was conditional and up to the works of each person. There would be no security in trusting in the works of Jesus. Hence, it would relegate the cross of Christ to a door that He might have opened, but which would need to be kept open by the power of the individual.
 
And more, if the door was shut again, it would then be up to the individual, not Christ, to reopen it. The utterly ridiculous thought presented by these heretics would mean that “Christ died in vain” (Galatians 2:21).
 
Of these aberrant heretics who carried their false doctrine to the Gentiles, the letter next says, “to whom we gave no such commandment.” Again, Vincent’s Word Studies provides the intent of the statement –
 
“The word originally means to put asunder; hence, to distinguish, and so of a commandment or injunction, to distinguish and emphasize it. Therefore implying express orders, and so always in the New Testament, where it is almost uniformly rendered charge. The idea here is, then, "we gave no express injunction on the points which these Judaizers have raised.”
 
These Jews went forward without any such authority or charge. They had appointed themselves as the arbiter of what God was doing and then they sent themselves out to express their self-appointed authority to others. The council has, through their concise words, completely removed themselves from these false teachers and their doctrine. Their letter, which is now included in Scripture, testifies to the matter as much today as it did when it was written.
 
Life application: The world is filled with exactly the type of people that are described in the letter from the council. They have a certain genealogy or heritage that allows them to appear as if they are specialists in their field, not because of proper training and endowed authority, but because of who they are in relation to some unimportant aspect of their existence.
 
For example, a person may be related to a famous preacher or teacher who rightly handled the word of God. Along comes his son, we’ll call him Dandy Andy. He does not rightly handle the word and he has never established himself in the manner expected of a proper handler of the word. And yet, because of who he is in relation to his dad, he is given an ear and becomes a famous and yet unsound teacher of the word.
 
Another example would be someone who is Jewish. For no other reason than that, he is given an ear. He knows just enough of the word to be able to make illogical connections about what is going on in the world. However, he is a skilled writer and so he writes books about world events, tying them in with his unsound understanding of the Bible. Because the books are tingling to the ear, supposedly based on Scripture, and because he is Jewish, he becomes famous and is sought out as a renowned “scholar” of the Bible.
 
Why do these things happen? The answer is, “Because those who listen to these people are 1) not willing to learn Scripture and find out if what they are being sold is sound or not; 2) starstruck by the figure, joining in to be a part of what is exciting and novel; and 3) find the message pleasing to the ears, sensational, and exciting.”
 
For these, and certainly other reasons, countless people are pulled away from what is sound. Entire denominations of people have followed false teachers and their false messages have continued on for generations, simply because the word is ignored.
 
Read the word! Meditate on the word! Be prepared to evaluate the message of those you encounter against the word! In this, you will keep yourself from harm.
 
Lord God, we are so very thankful to You because of Your wonderful word. It is a guide for our lives, a light for our path, the illumination of Your intent for us, and a solid rock we can stand on against the wiles of false teachers. Help us to treat this word with care. It is what reveals Your heart in the giving of Jesus. That is what we need to pursue. And so, help us to do so all the days of our lives. Amen.

Acts 15:23

Friday, 24 March 2023
They wrote this letter by them:The apostles, the elders, and the brethren,To the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia:Greetings. Acts 15:23
 
Note: The NKJV clears up a lot of the errors of the KJV, but it still doesn’t reflect the Greek as well as it should. The original reads:
 
“Having written through their hand these things:‘The apostles, and the elders, and the brethren.To those in Antioch, and Syria, and Cilicia –Brethren, those from the Gentiles,Greetings!’” (CG)
 
This will be used for the commentary.
 
The previous verse noted the choosing of men who were then to be sent to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. The men were Judas, who was also named Barsabas, and Silas. With that having been stated, it next says, “Having written through their hand these things.”
 
The meaning is not that those carrying the letter also wrote it, but that it was written with the consent of those who will next be named and then transmitted through the hands of those who were selected to carry it, namely Judas and Silas. What is more likely than even that is that one person was chosen to write it, probably James, who did so with the full approval of those named. Whatever is the case, it is the oldest such letter within the church. Luke probably copied directly from the original or a copy of the original.
 
At this point, it would be good to note that there are differences in this opening address in some manuscripts. Going to the more modern versions which often use these variations and comparing the two side by side, one can spot the differences. With this understood, the contents of the letter begin with, “The apostles, and the elders, and the brethren.”
 
It is an acknowledgment that the letter has come from the council in Jerusalem where the apostles were based and that it has the concurrence of the elders of the churches there as well as the understanding and agreement of those within the overall church. This would be perfectly in accord with the words of the previous verse that said, “Then it pleased the apostles and elders, with the whole church.”
 
There is complete harmony among all of the believers, at least for the sake of the letter, concerning the contents of what will be stated. Remembering that Jerusalem is the very heart of where temple worship was still being conducted, the letter’s contents will be an ironclad argument against the requirement for law worship by any Gentile, ever. This will be seen as the letter continues. For now, it next says, “To those in Antioch, and Syria, and Cilicia.”
 
Of these words, Cambridge appears to be correct in saying, “As we have no mention of this decree of the synod of Jerusalem in St Paul’s Epistles, we may suppose that the agitation on the subject, begun at Antioch, had spread only into Syria and Cilicia, and that the authoritative decision of the mother church quieted the controversy there, while it did not arise in the same form in other places.”
 
Equally insightful, Albert Barnes notes that by including Syria and Cilicia, which have not been noted before, it is “showing that churches then existed in Cilicia as well as Syria, which owed their existence, in all likelihood, to Paul's labors during the interval between his return to Tarsus (Ac 9:30) and his departure in company with Barnabas for Antioch.”
 
These reasonable inferences can be derived from just a few short words in the opening of this most important letter. The address next continues with, “Brethren.”
 
It is an acknowledgment that those being addressed are in full and right standing within the church. They are equals in Christ, meaning without distinction`, even if differences exist. The obvious difference is that these are Jews who are writing, and their addresses are “those from the Gentiles.”
 
The reason it is understood that no distinction exists between the two is found later in Paul’s letter to the Galatians –
 
“For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” Galatians 3:26-29
 
However, this is implied in these opening words of the letter with the use of the term “brethren.” With that, the opening salutation ends with the word, “Greetings!”
 
It is the Greek word chairó. It signifies “to rejoice.” However, it is a salutation common in Greek. As such, the word in this context is variously translated as “Greetings.” “Hail,” “Rejoice,” “God Speed,” etc. The word sets the welcoming tone for the main contents to follow. There is an obvious state of brotherly fellowship that is communicated in the letter’s opening statement.
 
Life application: As noted above, translations do vary in this verse. Putting translations side by side, the differences become evident. Note that in the original, the letters were all drawn together with little or no capitalization, punctuation, line change, and so forth, the form of the first translation is to suit a modern reading of such a letter. The second would actually be closer to the way it was originally laid out, despite any textual differences –
 
“Having written through their hand these things:‘The apostles, and the elders, and the brethren.To those in Antioch, and Syria, and Cilicia –Brethren, those from the Gentiles,Greetings!’” (CG)
 
“...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.’” (NASB)
 
Which is actually closer to the original is debated, but the differences do not substantially change anything doctrinally.
 
As for the offsetting of each clause through a line change, some translators find this type of change appalling. Even if the translation is 100% correct, they feel that the form of the original must be maintained. An example of this is that the psalms were originally written in a continuous line and block format familiar to the Hebrew writings.
 
For example, the preface to the LSV says, “The LSV may be the only English translation of The Holy Bible entirely formatted with justified typographic alignment throughout. This same format is maintained in poetic literature. While some readers may prefer paragraph breaks in narrative and line breaks in poetic portions for the purpose of readability, it was the decision of the translators to mimic the style of the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek autographs in presenting God’s word as a continuous text block. This decision wasn’t arbitrary. In formatting the text this way, the LSV sets itself against the modern push for more and more formatting within the text, in favor of simplicity. Furthermore, the modern trend even extended to differentiating the words of Christ in red letters, as if God’s word should be divided in such a way. The LSV is the polar opposite, regarding the entirety of Scripture as God-breathed, with its different genres of literature resting on a level playing field.”
 
The ridiculously stupid nature of this type of thinking is highlighted in several ways. First, just three paragraphs later in the same preface, it says –
 
“For ease of readability, the LSV includes the double pipe (“||”) caesura mark to separate phrases within poetic portions of Scripture. The caesura mark was extensively used this way in ancient Greek, Latin, and English poetry. Verse numbers, periods, colons, semicolons, question marks, exclamation marks, and em dashes generally stand in for caesura marks in these passages if they are followed by a capital letter.”
 
The translators admit that there are purposeful markers within the text that naturally break the flow of the reading for the mind of the reader. Why shouldn’t such marks be variously employed for the modern reader in his own language?
 
But more poignantly, as noted above, there is almost no punctuation or capitalization in the original manuscripts. To use the logic of the LSV stated in the first cited paragraph, they should do exactly the same thing and have everything follow a simple block format with no other markings, including capitalization or punctuation. It would be insane for an English reader to even bother reading such a translation, and so these changes are made.
 
A third hint of the ridiculous nature of their commentary is that between the Old and New Testament in their version, a painting is included in the hard copy translation. Where is that found in the original manuscripts? As nice as the painting is, was that painted by God as breathed out through His Spirit? Obviously not. It is a hypocritical thing to say one thing and do another.
 
As for the text itself with the various formatting differences, at what point does it become “wrong” to make a translation more understandable for the reader? This is the fallacy of the beard and the LSV translators entered into it just when the beard was enough to tickle the faces of baby readers who first pick it up. Others have the beard a bit longer and can tickle even toddlers. While others choose for the beard to be fully grown and mature.
 
Don’t get legalistic! Get into the word! How it is formatted is something each reader will find suitable to his own needs. So, look through the next Bible you want to read, see if it will help you in your reading, and buy that one.
 
O God! Hallelujah for Your word! You have allowed us to translate it, format it for clarity, add red letters to honor the words of Christ Jesus, use colors to differentiate various parts of the text, and so on. We can offset, use block formats, use different fonts, and more, just to make Your word come alive in a way that we can appreciate. Thank You, O God, for this latitude You have granted to us. Thank You for Your precious word. Amen.

Acts 15:22

Thursday, 23 March 2023
 
Then it pleased the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas, namely, Judas who was also named Barsabas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren. Acts 15:22
 
James has just completed his short speech, rendering his decision concerning the matter and explaining why. With that, the narrative now continues, saying, “Then it pleased.”
 
The word translated as “pleased” gives the sense of forming an opinion by using one’s personal perspective. Thus, it more closely reads, “Then it seemed good to the apostles and elders.” The decision had been rendered, and now it needed to be sent out for all the churches to know what that judgment was so that the issue would not cause further dissension.
 
This was the mutual consensus of the apostles and elders who had gathered together as noted in verse 15:6. But more, the matter was agreeable “with the whole church.” The entire body was mentioned in verse 15:4. They had heard the words of the Pharisees and would be curious about what the council’s decision was.
 
Having heard the decision and the idea of sending that decision out among the churches, the matter seemed good to all in the congregation. This is seen in the next words. It seemed good to all “to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas.”
 
Rather, the clause begins with an aorist participle and should be rendered, “having chosen men out of them, to send to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas.” In other words, the choosing of these men is the prime issue. They chose the men to convey the matter. It was obvious that Paul and Barnabas would be returning to Antioch with the decision. But it is the representatives of the council that would be those who would affirm it to the churches.
 
This is an important point because if Paul and Barnabas stopped at other churches, or even in their return to the church at Antioch, and conveyed the decision, without someone sent from the council to confirm their words, the Judaizer could follow on their heels and say, “that’s not at all what the council said.” If they did this, the matter would be in the same state as when it was first raised.
 
The choice of the messengers by those in Jerusalem is the primary issue because it will avoid any such dissension. This is not calling the veracity of Paul and Barnabas into question. The decision was rendered in their favor.
 
Rather, the importance of this is to ensure that those mentioned in verse 15:1 would be silenced. There were “certain men” who came down from Judea. They had obviously gone without approval and their intention was to divide the fellowship and bring in the legalism of law observance. With this understood, the narrative next names those chosen saying, “Judas who was also named Barsabas, and Silas.”
 
The first name, Judas called Barsabas is spelled with one final b in some texts and two in others. And so, it is rendered either Barsabbas or Barsabas. If two b’s are correct, it is assumed that he may be a brother of the person named in Acts 1:23, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was surnamed Justus. If this is so, then Judas, like his brother, could have been a follower of Jesus from early on. If so, he would probably be well-known among the churches. This is speculation, but it is quite possible.
 
Silas is seen here for the first of quite a few times, both in Acts and in the Epistles. The name Silas could be derived from the Hebrew shaul, the same name as Saul. Thus, it would mean Asked For. Or, it could be related to the Hebrew word salal, meaning to cast up highways. If so, then it would mean Highway Maker.
 
It cannot be known for certain if one of these words, or some other, is where the name comes from. He is, however, also known for the Latin version of his name, Silvanus, which is found in several epistles of Paul and Peter. Thus, the name could simply be a contraction of that name.
 
Of these two men, the verse next says that they were “leading men among the brethren.” The verb hégeomai is used. It is one leading the way, going before others as the chief. One can see the root of our word hegemony. They were responsible individuals who would be well respected among those they encountered along the way. In verse 15:32, it will note that they were both prophets and men able to exhort and strengthen others.
 
Life application: If a commanding general were to have a meeting of his commanders in the field, giving them a decision and sending them back to their troops with the decision, one would expect these men to accurately convey what the general decided. However, if it was known there were spies who were out causing division, they could come along behind the various field commanders and tell the troops that what was conveyed was incorrect.
 
Thus, sending out known staff from the command to affirm the general’s orders might be needed. This would not be done to question the integrity of the various commanders, but to reassure those under the commanders. Today, modern communication makes such a thing less necessary. Face-to-face communication around the world is possible. But the idea remains the same, even in the church.
 
Obviously, if the church is following the word of God and not books of discipline or other such things, the matter would be less likely to occur. But even varying interpretations of the Bible are as common as cots in a barracks, and so ensuring that what is decided on a matter is properly conveyed to those who will hear it is important.
 
The devil loves to divide people and congregations, so be aware of this and always do your best to not get caught up in the “he said, she said” mentality. If a matter concerning what someone says arises, check directly with that someone. What may seem small or trifling can cause great dissension.
 
Heavenly Father, be with us and keep us from divisions and dissensions that are harmful to the fellowship. And, Lord, we pray that those who would otherwise come into the fellowship and purposefully try to tear it apart be kept from us. Give us wisdom and discernment in such things, just in case such people do come. Thank You, O God. Amen.
Thursday, 23 March 2023
 
Then it pleased the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas, namely, Judas who was also named Barsabas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren. Acts 15:22
 
Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)
 
You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at "Discern the Bible" on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).
 
James has just completed his short speech, rendering his decision concerning the matter and explaining why. With that, the narrative now continues, saying, “Then it pleased.”
 
The word translated as “pleased” gives the sense of forming an opinion by using one’s personal perspective. Thus, it more closely reads, “Then it seemed good to the apostles and elders.” The decision had been rendered, and now it needed to be sent out for all the churches to know what that judgment was so that the issue would not cause further dissension.
 
This was the mutual consensus of the apostles and elders who had gathered together as noted in verse 15:6. But more, the matter was agreeable “with the whole church.” The entire body was mentioned in verse 15:4. They had heard the words of the Pharisees and would be curious about what the council’s decision was.
 
Having heard the decision and the idea of sending that decision out among the churches, the matter seemed good to all in the congregation. This is seen in the next words. It seemed good to all “to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas.”
 
Rather, the clause begins with an aorist participle and should be rendered, “having chosen men out of them, to send to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas.” In other words, the choosing of these men is the prime issue. They chose the men to convey the matter. It was obvious that Paul and Barnabas would be returning to Antioch with the decision. But it is the representatives of the council that would be those who would affirm it to the churches.
 
This is an important point because if Paul and Barnabas stopped at other churches, or even in their return to the church at Antioch, and conveyed the decision, without someone sent from the council to confirm their words, the Judaizer could follow on their heels and say, “that’s not at all what the council said.” If they did this, the matter would be in the same state as when it was first raised.
 
The choice of the messengers by those in Jerusalem is the primary issue because it will avoid any such dissension. This is not calling the veracity of Paul and Barnabas into question. The decision was rendered in their favor.
 
Rather, the importance of this is to ensure that those mentioned in verse 15:1 would be silenced. There were “certain men” who came down from Judea. They had obviously gone without approval and their intention was to divide the fellowship and bring in the legalism of law observance. With this understood, the narrative next names those chosen saying, “Judas who was also named Barsabas, and Silas.”
 
The first name, Judas called Barsabas is spelled with one final b in some texts and two in others. And so, it is rendered either Barsabbas or Barsabas. If two b’s are correct, it is assumed that he may be a brother of the person named in Acts 1:23, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was surnamed Justus. If this is so, then Judas, like his brother, could have been a follower of Jesus from early on. If so, he would probably be well-known among the churches. This is speculation, but it is quite possible.
 
Silas is seen here for the first of quite a few times, both in Acts and in the Epistles. The name Silas could be derived from the Hebrew shaul, the same name as Saul. Thus, it would mean Asked For. Or, it could be related to the Hebrew word salal, meaning to cast up highways. If so, then it would mean Highway Maker.
 
It cannot be known for certain if one of these words, or some other, is where the name comes from. He is, however, also known for the Latin version of his name, Silvanus, which is found in several epistles of Paul and Peter. Thus, the name could simply be a contraction of that name.
 
Of these two men, the verse next says that they were “leading men among the brethren.” The verb hégeomai is used. It is one leading the way, going before others as the chief. One can see the root of our word hegemony. They were responsible individuals who would be well respected among those they encountered along the way. In verse 15:32, it will note that they were both prophets and men able to exhort and strengthen others.
 
Life application: If a commanding general were to have a meeting of his commanders in the field, giving them a decision and sending them back to their troops with the decision, one would expect these men to accurately convey what the general decided. However, if it was known there were spies who were out causing division, they could come along behind the various field commanders and tell the troops that what was conveyed was incorrect.
 
Thus, sending out known staff from the command to affirm the general’s orders might be needed. This would not be done to question the integrity of the various commanders, but to reassure those under the commanders. Today, modern communication makes such a thing less necessary. Face-to-face communication around the world is possible. But the idea remains the same, even in the church.
 
Obviously, if the church is following the word of God and not books of discipline or other such things, the matter would be less likely to occur. But even varying interpretations of the Bible are as common as cots in a barracks, and so ensuring that what is decided on a matter is properly conveyed to those who will hear it is important.
 
The devil loves to divide people and congregations, so be aware of this and always do your best to not get caught up in the “he said, she said” mentality. If a matter concerning what someone says arises, check directly with that someone. What may seem small or trifling can cause great dissension.
 
Heavenly Father, be with us and keep us from divisions and dissensions that are harmful to the fellowship. And, Lord, we pray that those who would otherwise come into the fellowship and purposefully try to tear it apart be kept from us. Give us wisdom and discernment in such things, just in case such people do come. Thank You, O God. Amen.

Acts 15:21

Wednesday, 22 March 2023
 
“For Moses has had throughout many generations those who preach him in every city, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath.” Acts 15:21
 
In the previous verse, James listed several things that the Gentiles should refrain from to live holy lives in the Lord. In each instance, it was more than apparent that James was distancing his ruling from law observance, the very issue that had brought about this council in the first place. Now, to nail that coffin shut once and for all, he continues with, “For Moses.’’
 
The word “for” explains the reason for the statement to follow. Although most explanations of James’ words limit this verse to an explanation of the giving of the prohibitions to the Gentiles stated in the previous verse, it surely goes beyond that to his entire statement which began in verse 15:13.
 
As for the word “Moses,” It is not referring to the man, but to the teaching of the man, the Law of Moses. The law is now being set against the doctrine of the church in the matter at hand. The two are incompatible. The law (Moses) is of works; the gift of God in Christ (the gospel) is of faith (15:7). The law is a yoke and a burden; the grace of Jesus Christ is freedom to live in His righteousness (15:10). Of this law, James next says it “has had throughout many generations.”
 
More literally, it reads, “from ancient generations.” It is a way of saying, “All the way back, and until this day, this has come about.” The point is that the thing he will next describe never changed a thing. Israel was to be a light to the nations, bearing the name of the Lord.
 
And yet, that never came about. They remained a small, isolated group of people. They were at war and at enmity with those around them for their entire history. The only thing the law did was to further isolate them and cause a wall of division to grow between them and those around them. James himself is relaying this because it is what had been the case.
 
Now, the Gentiles were coming to know the true God in ever-increasing numbers. It was in a manner that provided freedom, not bondage. How could imposing on the Gentiles a law that they were never under bring them anything but the same as Israel had faced?
 
With this thought in mind, he continues with “those who preach him in every city.” This is not limited to the cities of Israel. Rather, it means every city where there was a synagogue, especially those where Gentiles had come to listen and maybe even become proselytes. Within the Law of Moses that was read there, the prohibitions that James had just set forth could be found.
 
Therefore, those who attended the synagogue wouldn’t need instruction on the prohibitions given by James. They were already observing Moses, which was stricter than what he had decreed. And more, the law was “being read in the synagogues every Sabbath.” As this was so, and as the Jews would be opposed to the idea that the Law of Moses was now set aside in Christ, it would be appropriate for the Gentiles to abstain from those things James mentioned in the previous verse so that the Jews would not needlessly take offense at the acceptance of these Gentiles.
 
In other words, and stated from the opposite side, the Gentiles who had come to Christ were given these prohibitions as a means of evangelizing the Jews, not the other way around. The Jews in the synagogues were bound under the Law of Moses. The Gentiles had come directly to Christ without ever having been under the law. How could a Gentile be anything but an offense to Jews if the Jew thought the law was still binding?
 
And so, if a Gentile said, “I have been accepted by the Messiah of Israel,” living according to these prohibitions now stated by James would be the least he could do to demonstrate that he was living in that saved state in a holy manner. Once the Bible was complete, that would become the standard for all people to live by. The epistles would provide the necessary explanation of how to be saved and then how to live rightly in that salvation.
 
Life application: James has, through his words which agree with the statement of Peter and the words of Barnabas and Paul, shown the total superiority of life in Christ over the Law of Moses. He has given the Gentiles a reasonable set of standards to live by so that those Jews who were under the law could see that Christians lived in a reasonable manner while not being burdened with the innumerable laws found within the Mosaic Code.
 
Further, he has placed salvation chronologically before the requirement for right conduct, as it should be. And he has shown that the conversion of the Gentiles by grace through faith came in the exact same manner as it did for the Jews. And more, the fact that these Gentiles were considered saved and yet expected to live to a certain standard in order to not offend the Jews meant that the Gentiles were actually being witnesses of the gospel of Jesus Christ to those unsaved Jews.
 
It is this state of things, meaning the Gentile-led Christian church, that would continue from this point on in the church age. Peter will no longer be seen in Acts. Rather, Paul – the apostle to the Gentiles – began to take center stage in Acts 13. That will continue until the end of the book of Acts. The banner is now passing from Jew to Gentile in carrying the message of the One true God to the nations of the earth.
 
Lord God, You are the God of the surprising! When we fail You, instead of bringing about our end, You make a path for restoration available back to You. When the world is to be destroyed by water, You save it through an ark that prevails over the flood. While the law is found to bring only condemnation, You have sent Jesus to remove that obstacle from us. Every step of the way, You are the God of the surprising! Thank You, O God, for Your wonderful hand of tender care toward us. Amen.
 

Acts 15:20

Tuesday, 21 March 2023
 
“but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood. Acts 15:20
 
In the previous verse, James said that believers should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God. The meaning was to not require them to be circumcised and observe the Law of Moses. With that stated, he continues with a short list of things that would bring about defilement within the church and which should thus be abstained from. He says, “but that we write to them.”
 
More precisely, it merely says, “but to write.” It is something that is general in nature to be written down and conveyed to anyone at any time the matter arises. In this decision, there is a new word in Scripture, epistelló. It signifies to send by letter. One can see the root of the word epistle in it.
 
This was needed to avoid any confusion and to firmly set what was decided. Knowing the propensity of man to add or take away from such a matter, James wisely directed that the decision would be written down as an authoritative word from the council. Understanding that he continues with, “to abstain from things polluted by idols.”
 
The original reads, “to abstain from the pollutions of idols.” The word translated as “pollutions,” alisgéma, is found only here in the Bible. It is also not found in any classical Greek literature. It is a word associated with defiled food. This then doesn’t merely mean practicing idolatry, but to abstain from anything that is connected to the service of idols, such as partaking in sacrifices and offerings, etc.
 
James does not go into the depth of the Law of Moses concerning this. Rather, it is a general statement set forth as a guideline for right living among believers. He is clearly distancing the decision of the council from the weight of the law in his words.
 
In general, anything that could be considered as being connected with idols should be abstained from. This, however, will be clarified by Paul in 1 Corinthians 8 & 10. James continues with his short list, saying, “from sexual immorality.”
 
The word in Greek is porneia. It signifies “selling off (surrendering) of sexual purity, promiscuity of any (every) type” (HELPS Word Studies). Quite often, it is associated with idolatry. James gives this general word, never mentioning the very strict laws associated with such things as set forth in the law of Moses. As such, it was another clear indication that the Law of Moses had no bearing on the decision.
 
The next item is “from things strangled.” Rather, the words are singular, “and the strangled.” It is another new word in Scripture, pniktos. It signifies something killed without letting the blood out. Vincent’s Word Studies extends the thought to animals killed in snares. This is an inference, but it is probably the case.
 
The laws within the Law of Moses are detailed and explicit on how to treat the blood of animals sacrificed or simply slaughtered for meat. James, once again, gives a general statement concerning the matter, completely distancing the decision from the Law of Moses. Finally, and in connection to the previous thought, he says, “and from blood.”
 
Once again, a general statement is made concerning a matter that is carefully detailed in the law. It is stated many times and in exacting ways what was to be done with the blood. James’ decision completely separates the matter from the Law of Moses. But its main intent was surely to have the people consider why they were drinking blood. Several reasons surely were behind the matter.
 
One is that to drink blood was, and even today in some cultures is, intended to assimilate the power of the one whose blood was being drunk into the person drinking. Another reason is idolatry where the blood of an animal that was sacrificed was consumed by the offeror as a way of fellowshipping with their god or gods.
 
Also, the shedding of blood has almost universally been considered a means of atoning for sin. This is seen in cultures around the world. But Christ’s blood is the only effectual sacrifice for the atonement of sin. This then is an object lesson concerning the nature of Christ’s sacrifice as much as anything else.
 
Luke’s narrative provides a description of what occurred, but James’ letter is prescriptive in nature. However, this must be considered with what will later be included in the canon of Scripture. In other words, just because James’ words are prescriptive at the time, if they are later qualified in Scripture, it renders the decision as a prescription that is temporary in nature.
 
And more, these things were not a matter of salvation, but of life after salvation. Thus, they have no bearing on the gospel which is by grace through faith.
 
Life application: Of the words of this verse, Charles Ellicott writes –
 
“The grounds on which the measure thus defined was proposed are not far to seek. (1) It was of the nature of a compromise. The Gentiles could not complain that the burden imposed on them was anything very grievous. The Pharisee section of the Church could not refuse admission to those who fulfilled these conditions, when they had admitted the proselytes of the gate on like conditions to their synagogues, and had so treated them as no longer unclean. (2) The rules on which stress was now laid found a place among the seven precepts traditionally ascribed to Noah, and based upon the commands recorded in Genesis 9:5. These were held to be binding upon all mankind; while the Law, as such, was binding on Israel only. These, therefore, had been thought sufficient for the proselytes of the gate before, and were urged now as sufficient for the Gentile converts by the teacher who represented the most rigid type of Judaism.”
 
His words concerning admission into the church must be highlighted. The matters conveyed by James do not address the issue of salvation but of life within the church. A violation of the sexual immorality issue addressed above is found in 1 Corinthians 5. The person was a saved believer in Christ, but he was in violation of the mandate concerning sexual immorality. Therefore, Paul explained that he was to be cut off from the fellowship of believers.
 
And yet, he clearly indicates that this person was saved and would remain saved, even if he continued in his present lifestyle. Also, as noted above, some of the matters in James’ decision are more fully clarified by Paul, demonstrating to us that the decision in Acts is now a descriptive account of what was determined necessary at the time to maintain proper order and decorum within the church.
 
The later writings, meaning the epistles, are set forth for the doctrine of the church. It is to them that we should turn when matters of dispute arise among believers.
 
As a final note, certain cults, such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses, will not accept blood transfusions because of this verse. Drinking blood and the transfusion of blood are completely different issues and one cannot be conflated to mean the same as the other. The decision is as stupid as a football bat and is to be rejected outright.
 
Lord God, help us to rightly divide Your word, applying precepts that pertain to the time in which we live. Those things that are set aside or obsolete are no longer binding on us. But those things that You have given for our right conduct within the church are matters that we should carefully attend to. Help us in this so that we will be pleasing to You in all ways. Amen.
 

Acts 15:19

Monday, 20 March 2023
 
“Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God, Acts 15:19
 
The NKJV follows enough of the errors of the KJV to make it unsuitable for analysis. It should read, “Therefore, I judge not to trouble those from the Gentiles [who] are turning to God.”
 
James had just stated. “Known to God from eternity are all His works.” With that, he will now begin to express his judgment of the matter at hand, starting with, “Therefore.” It is the conjunction dio, coming from dia (through, or across to the other side) and hos (which). Thus, it signifies “through which thing.”
 
James has reviewed the matter from the beginning to the end, taking in all of the reasonings provided. Based on those things, he has concluded and will now render what he has determined, saying, “I judge not to trouble those from the Gentiles.”
 
Here, James uses a verb found nowhere else in Scripture, parenochleó. It signifies to annoy or harass. It is as if the Judaizers were being instigators in a poking contest, treating those who have come to Christ as if their faith was insufficient and untrustworthy in and of itself. “Look at our circumcision! This makes us way better than you. If you don’t get circumcised, your faith is definitely not genuine.”
 
The words of James indicate that the view of the Judaizers was, in fact, a view that had caused, and would continue to cause, trouble among the Gentiles. It would be a hindrance to some, and it would become a burden upon all. James, as a law-observant Jew, knew this. He was fully aware of the yoke of the law that rested upon his people, and he would save the Gentiles from being burdened with it as well.
 
But more, and without need to repeat what was presented by Peter and also by Barnabas and Paul, it was a burden that God Himself had not imposed upon the Gentiles when they first believed. Rather, He had saved them apart from any works of the law. James graciously, and without pointing any accusing fingers, is implying that to add the law to what had occurred among the Gentiles could only diminish and disgrace the work of Jesus Christ.
 
This is implicit. However, Paul will eventually make it explicit in his writings. As this is understood, even if unsaid, James says that this applies to all Gentiles who “are turning to God.” The verb is a present participle. They were turning to God from moment to moment as the work continued on. By adding in legalistic standards, this momentum would begin to flounder and eventually capsize in a sea of turmoil.
 
Life application: The attitude of the Judaizers in the world today is just like those at the time of the council in Jerusalem. The Hebrew Roots Movement, the Seventh Day Adventists, and all others who reinsert the Law of Moses in varying degrees have an arrogant, haughty attitude of their superiority over those who do not conform to their unbiblical and high-handed form of legalism.
 
Their doctrine looks down on others who live by faith alone in what Christ has done, claiming it is insufficient to please God. But this attitude extends also to those who claim that “good works stem naturally from saving faith.” Without ever defining what “good works” means, the attitude of these people is that if you aren’t doing stuff to prove you are saved, then you are probably (or certainly!) not saved.
 
This can be targeted, such as those who do not tithe, or it can be general, such as “you are not living in accord with what I believe a Christian should be doing.” Such fallacious thinking denies the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith alone. It adds works as an afterthought, but still something necessary to signify Jesus really saved the person.
 
Don’t be misled either way. Stand firm on the simple gospel. If you have believed that you don’t need to worry about what other people think. Having said that, it is biblically right and good that you should mature in your Christian walk. You should be growing in Christ and in holiness. But this is not to prove you are saved. It is to be a demonstration of your gratitude to the One who has saved you.
 
Jesus died to save you. Live for Jesus henceforth!
 
Heavenly Father, how thankful we are for the simple gospel of our salvation. You have done the work; we are the recipients of that. Henceforth, may we live our lives for Jesus, growing in our knowledge of Him, deepening our faith in You because of Him, and walking rightly in a world that is constantly trying to pull us back from You. Help us in this, O God. Amen.

Acts 15:18

Sunday, 19 March 2023
 
“Known to God from eternity are all His works. Acts 15:18
 
The previous verse cited Amos, concluding with the words, “Says the Lord who does all these things.” With the end of the citation, James now speaks, saying, “Known to God from eternity are all His works.”
 
As a note for clarification, the wording of the previous verse and of this verse are not the same in various texts normally used by more modern versions. The difference is more noticeable when they are taken together and placed side by side –
 
“’So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord,And all the Gentiles who are called by My name,’18 Says the Lord, who makes these things known from long ago.” (NASB)
 
“’So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord,Even all the Gentiles who are called by My name,Says the Lord who does all these things.’18 “Known to God from eternity are all His works.” (NKJV)
 
As can be seen, the NASB and other translations make the verse a part of the citation of Amos with words added as a part of the citation by James. On the other hand, the NKJV, et al., have more words in James’ additional thoughts which form a separate sentence altogether. 
Going with the latter thought for commentary purposes, the meaning is that everything God has done or will do has been known from beginning to end by God, even since the very beginning. This thought is fully supported throughout Scripture, but an example from each testament will show this –
 
“Remember the former things of old,For I am God, and there is no other;I am God, and there is none like Me,10 Declaring the end from the beginning,And from ancient times things that are not yet done,Saying, ‘My counsel shall stand,And I will do all My pleasure,’” Isaiah 46:9, 10
 
“All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” Revelation 13:8
 
As the words of Amos agree with the thought that the Gentiles were to be a part of what God was doing before the raising up and rebuilding of the “tabernacle of David,” meaning re-establishment of the Davidic rule, then it would be wrong for the apostles to judge against that by demanding that Gentiles observe the Law of Moses.
God had poured out His Spirit upon the Gentiles in the presence of Peter apart from the law. Paul and Barnabas had seen many converts and the Lord had worked signs and wonders through them on behalf of the Gentiles apart from the law. As these things were indisputable, it would be working contrary to God to suddenly stop this work of the Lord and impose a law upon them that had been fulfilled and set aside by the work of Jesus.
 
Life application: Various commentaries on Acts 15:17, 18 make a claim that “the best texts” support their translation which varies in content from the other texts. That is a subjective claim. Who is to determine the “best text” when they have no idea which is original?
 
Rather, unless their view is supportable by the original, which isn’t available and cannot be known, they need to simply state that there is a variation in source texts and state why they support one over the other. If this is not done, then a bias in the mind of the reader of the commentary will arise.
 
This is not a sound approach when explaining the Bible. This same thought carries through to one version or another. Even if the same source texts are used for two translations, it is inappropriate to say “This is the better version” without providing a full explanation as to why it is so. If it is true, that is fine, but to arbitrarily make the claim without support will lead to bias in the mind of the one being instructed.
 
Be careful to not inject subjective thoughts into your teaching. This is important because if those thoughts are found to be incorrect, it will often be too late to undo those biases in the minds of students who have moved on.
 
Heavenly Father, help us to look at Your word with a passion and desire to know it more each day. And if we are going to instruct others in what we have learned, help us to do so from an objective point of view, telling what we know is certain and not being dogmatic about what is uncertain. Be with us in this, O God. Amen.
 

Acts 15:17

Saturday, 18 March 2023
 
So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord,
Even all the Gentiles who are called by My name,
Says the Lord who does all these things.’ Acts 15:17
 
In the previous verse, James began his citation of the prophet Amos. That now continues with, “So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord.”
 
The Hebrew of this verse from Amos reads, “That they may possess the remnant of Edom.” However, the Greek translation reads as James has cited. The name of Edom and the word “man” are very similar in the Hebrew. Thus, the Septuagint translators seem to have understood the extended meaning of what lay ahead.
 
Further, this word translated as “mankind” is a plural noun, men. There is no reason for the NKJV to have changed it from the earlier rendering of the KJV except, most likely, political correctness. The singular is to be rejected. In the Greek, the masculine stands for all.
 
Despite this, the meaning seems clear. The previous portion of the quote began with, “After these things.” James has shown that there is a time when Israel will again be exalted under Davidic rule, meaning under Jesus their Messiah. That will occur after certain events take place.
 
He now says what those events will be. Until the time when that comes about, there is an opportunity for the rest of mankind to seek the Lord. Amos had talked about the punishment of Israel for rejecting the Lord leading up to the restoration of Israel.
 
Hence, the restoration comes after the time of punishment. But during that timeframe, the redemptive plan won’t just be put on hold, waiting for Israel to get its act together. Rather, while Israel is being punished according to the Mosaic Law which they agreed to remain under when they rejected Jesus, the nations (the rest of mankind) would be seeking the Lord. That is next further explained with the words, “Even all the Gentiles.”
 
It is the same word as in Acts 15:14, ethnos. Unlike in that verse, there is an article before the word. Rather than “nations” as was argued to be the better rendering there, this is rightly translated as “the Gentiles.” The reason is that even if there are Christian nations, it is not nations that are being called through the gospel, but individuals.
 
As nations have come and gone, the salvation of the Gentiles has remained unaffected. When the Lord calls for His people, they will rise, even if the nations they belonged to disappeared millennia earlier. James next continues the quote from Amos saying that it is these saved believers of this dispensation “who are called by My name.”
 
The words are reminiscent of James 2:7 where he uses the same Greek word –
 
“Do they not blaspheme that noble name by which you are called?”
 
Though James wrote to the Jews of the church, they are still members of the church. Being called by the name of the Lord means that the name of the Lord rests upon the person. Those who call upon the name of the Lord through faith become those who are called by the Lord’s name. With this understood, James finishes the citation with, “Says the Lord who does all these things.”
 
It is the Lord who called Israel and covenanted with them. It is the Lord who faithfully blessed Israel when they sought Him out. It is the Lord who punished Israel according to the covenant made between them. It is the Lord who sent Jesus to initiate a New Covenant. It is the Lord who, when rejected by Israel, fulfilled the words of the prophecy concerning Israel’s second exile and punishment. It is the Lord who called out a people for Himself from the Gentiles during Israel’s time of having rejected Jesus. It is the Lord who will once again return Israel to His favor and exalt them when they call upon the name of the Lord. Everything comes back to the wisdom and hand of the Lord.
 
As noted in the previous commentary, this must be the interpretation of these verses. The words of the citation from Amos cannot be referring to the replacement of Israel by the church. This is absolutely certain from the continued words of Amos 9, which close out the book of Amos –
 
“‘Behold, the days are coming,’ says the Lord,‘When the plowman shall overtake the reaper,And the treader of grapes him who sows seed;The mountains shall drip with sweet wine,And all the hills shall flow with it.14 I will bring back the captives of My people Israel;They shall build the waste cities and inhabit them;They shall plant vineyards and drink wine from them;They shall also make gardens and eat fruit from them.15 I will plant them in their land,And no longer shall they be pulled upFrom the land I have given them,’Says the Lord your God.” Amos 9:13-15
 
In saying that He will bring back the captives of Israel (of which Amos 9:1-10 are the focus), it means Israel the people and none other. There is no provision for exile for the people of the church. There is no land grant bestowed upon the church. Israel, the nation, will be replanted in Israel the land.
 
And more, this cannot be referring to their first exile. This is because of the final verse of the book of Amos – 
 
“I will plant them in their land.
And no longer shall they be pulled up.”
 
There is no time in history that this has occurred. After the first exile, they were pulled up a second time, something prophesied by Isaiah even before the first exile –
 
“It shall come to pass in that dayThat the Lord shall set His hand again the second timeTo recover the remnant of His people who are left,From Assyria and Egypt,From Pathros and Cush,From Elam and Shinar,From Hamath and the islands of the sea.” Isaiah 11:11
 
Life application: Replacement theology is a failed system of biblical interpretation because it does not take into consideration the whole counsel of God. Nor does it rightly divide the word. But even during the time when Israel was deep in her second exile, at a time when there was seemingly no possibility that the nation would ever again be restored, John Gill (1697-1771) said the following concerning Amos 9:15 –
 
“...by which it appears that this is a prophecy of things yet to come; since the Jews, upon their return to their own land after the Babylonish captivity, were pulled up again, and rooted out of it by the Romans, and remain so to this day; but, when they shall return again, they will never more be removed from it; and of this they may he assured; because it is the land the Lord has, "given" them, and it shall not be taken away from them any more; and, because he will now appear to be the ‘Lord their God.’”
 
Likewise, Adam Clarke (1762-1832) says of this verse –
 
“Most certainly this prophecy has never yet been fulfilled. They were pulled out by the Assyrian captivity, and by that of Babylon. Many were planted in again, and again pulled out by the Roman conquest and captivity, and were never since planted in, but are now scattered among all the nations of the earth. I conclude, as the word of God cannot fail, and this has not yet been fulfilled, it therefore follows that it will and must be fulfilled to the fullness of its spirit and intention. And this is established by the conclusion: ‘Saith the Lord thy God.’ He is Jehovah, and cannot fail; he is Thy God, and will do it. He can do it, because he is Jehovah; and he will do it, because he is Thy God. Amen.”
 
Despite the wave of poor theology concerning the reestablishment of Israel, these voices cried out, “The Bible is to be taken literally! God has spoken and His word cannot fail.” Now, what will you proclaim? The men who could not have foreseen the reestablishment of Israel with their earthly eyes, wholly trusted the Lord, focusing their spiritually attuned eyes on what He had spoken.
 
Today, even today after the reestablishment of Israel to their land – exactly as the Lord prophesied would take place – much of the church refuses to accept that what was written has been fulfilled. They must receive their judgment for their lack of discernment and faith concerning God’s word. But they will remain saved despite their wholly tainted theology. This is the greatness of God who saves us despite ourselves.
 
Whether you like the Jewish people or not, something much greater is at stake in the world today. That something is the integrity of the word of God and the promise of God that He would never fully reject His people, Israel. He will bring them into the New Covenant. Have faith in this. Don’t be silly but be steadfast in your acceptance of the truth of God’s precious word.
 
Lord God, how could it be that You would reject Israel when You covenanted with them? If that were so, You could also reject us when we fail You. Our salvation would be up to us. But no! You have spoken and it is done. Thank You for the wonderful assurance we possess in Christ. Thank You, O God. Amen.
 

Acts 15:16

Friday, 17 March 2023
 
‘After this I will returnAnd will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down;I will rebuild its ruins,And I will set it up; Acts 15:16
 
James just noted that the words of the prophets agree with the idea that God first visited to take out of nations a people for His name. With that, he now cites Amos 9:11 & 12 to confirm this. As is often the case in the New Testament, the quote is from the Greek text, not the Hebrew. Further, there is even a bit of deviation from the Greek in verse 15:16.
 
That verse begins with, “After this I will return.” Rather, the word translated as “this” is a plural demonstrative pronoun. It reads, “After these things I will return.” The reference is to what is said in the earlier verses of Amos 9. They speak of Israel’s destruction and exile. In those verses, the Lord says –
 
“‘Are you not like the people of Ethiopia to Me,O children of Israel?’ says the Lord.‘Did I not bring up Israel from the land of Egypt,The Philistines from Caphtor, And the Syrians from Kir?’” Amos 9:7
 
In essence, the Lord is saying to Israel, “You are just like any other people. Other than your relationship with Me, you are just people.” To show them this, He was going to take a different direction, working among the Gentiles of whom they thought they were better. Because of their sinful state, rejecting the Lord, they would enter a time of punishment, being scattered among the nations. It is “After these things” that the Lord will return.
 
The meaning of that is that He will revisit Israel. It is as if he had departed from them and was now returned to them. His attention was on their destruction, but it would be changed to their re-establishment and prosperity. It is at this prophesied time that it next says, “And will rebuild the tabernacle of David.”
 
The tabernacle is a booth or temporary shelter used during the Feast of Tabernacles. This was a feast where the people gathered in Jerusalem, meeting to acknowledge that the Lord was Israel’s protector. They had been brought out of Egypt, having been rescued from their bondage. They were wholly dependent on the Lord and were living in close and intimate contact with Him.
 
The “tabernacle of David” is specifically speaking of the royal house of David. Despite being the king, he too would have participated in the annual festival, dwelling in a tabernacle in this intimate fellowship with the Lord. What is being conveyed is that the rule and authority of Israel under the House of David would be restored to Israel, but it would be in a way that resembled the tabernacle, or booth.
 
Thus, it refers to the Person of Jesus, the Messiah who is the Greater David. For example, the verb form of the word is used when speaking of Christ in John 1 –
 
“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” John 1:14
 
The noun form is used when referring to the intimate dwelling together of God and man in Revelation 21 –
 
“And I heard a loud voice from heaven saying, ‘Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people. God Himself will be with them and be their God.’” Revelation 21:3
 
It is the intimate fellowship between the House of David and the Lord that would be rebuilt. Understanding this, the next words read, “which has fallen down.”
 
The Davidic line of kings ceased at the time of the Babylonian exile. From that time on there was no Israelite king over David, in the sense of leading the nation. The line of kingship in the house of David was prophesied to end by Jeremiah –
 
 “‘As I live,’ says the Lord, ‘though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, were the signet on My right hand, yet I would pluck you off; 25 and I will give you into the hand of those who seek your life, and into the hand of those whose face you fear—the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and the hand of the Chaldeans.’” Jeremiah 22:24, 25
 
However, the line of David itself was not cut off. After the exile, it continued on as is testified to in Haggai –
 
And again the word of the Lord came to Haggai on the twenty-fourth day of the month, saying, 21 “Speak to Zerubbabel, governor of Judah, saying:‘I will shake heaven and earth.22 I will overthrow the throne of kingdoms;I will destroy the strength of the Gentile kingdoms.I will overthrow the chariotsAnd those who ride in them;The horses and their riders shall come down,Every one by the sword of his brother.23 ‘In that day,’ says the Lord of hosts, ‘I will take you, Zerubbabel My servant, the son of Shealtiel,’ says the Lord, ‘and will make you like a signet ring; for I have chosen you,’ says the Lord of hosts.” Haggai 2:20-23
 
The royal line was cut off in Coniah, but it was re-established after the exile to Babylon in Zerubbabel. It is Zerubbabel who is listed in Jesus’ genealogy in Luke 3:27, continuing this royal line leading to Israel’s Messiah.
 
This does not mean, however, that Zerubbabel was the rebuilt tabernacle signifying the rule of the House of David. Israel had no Davidic king again. Rather, they were ruled by other nations. Even when Herod ruled over Israel this is true. He was neither of the line of David nor was he the final authority over Israel. His rule fell under the jurisdiction of Rome.
 
With this understood, the words of the prophet being cited by James continue with, “I will rebuild its ruins.” Again, it is referring to the tabernacle of David, meaning the intimate fellowship with the Lord of the kingship of Israel over the people. The wording is speaking of a time when Davidic rule would again be realized in the land. This has never occurred since the time of Coniah whom Jeremiah referred to.
 
Of these words, Albert Barnes rightly states, “The ruins thereof - Heb. ‘close up the breaches thereof.’ That is, it would be restored to its former prosperity and magnificence; an emblem of the favor of God, and of the spiritual blessings that would in future times descend on the Jewish people.” This is what James is saying would occur. With that, the words of this verse end with, “And I will set it up.”
 
As with the previous clause, it is still referring to the tabernacle of David. There is a time prophesied that will come when the Davidic rule will again be established over Israel. It must be remembered that the words “After these things” set the tone for what is being debated in the council. It is based on these words of the prophet now being cited by James. That is based on the words of verse 15:14 that God first visited to take out of nations a people for His name.
 
In other words, the things being cited from Amos are not referring to the time leading up to the coming of Jesus and His spiritual rule over the church at this time, but to the second coming of Jesus and a literal rule over Israel. This is important to understand. Equating these words with the church is a completely false notion that is not supported by the words of Amos nor by the rest of Scripture. This will be seen more clearly with the evaluation of the next verse.
 
Life application: It is true that much of the church rejects a literal re-establishment of Israel and a millennial reign of Christ. These things are spiritualized forming the doctrine of replacement theology which says the church has replaced Israel and that everything spoken of in the past was referring not to Israel’s future, but to the current state of the world where Christ rules the church.
 
This cannot be. The surrounding words of Amos do not support this, nor do the rest of the words of Moses and the prophets. Even the New Testament cannot be seen to agree with this. If God has rejected Israel as a nation, it means the words of the covenant made between the Lord and Israel cannot be trusted. If that is true, then the words of the New Covenant cannot be trusted either. The same Lord who established the Mosaic Covenant is the Lord who has established the New Covenant.
 
Have faith that despite Israel’s failings, the Lord will never reject them as His people. Likewise, despite your failings, the Lord will never reject you because of what He has done through Christ Jesus. When the terms of the covenant are met, the deal is done. If you have believed the gospel, you have been saved, once and for all time.
 
Lord God, thank You for the lesson of Israel. Despite their continued unfaithfulness, You have remained faithful to them. We can learn from this that despite our unfaithfulness, You will always remain faithful to us. Thank You for this assurance in our hope of eternal life. Thank You! Amen.
 

Acts 15:15

Thursday, 16 March 2023
 
“And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written: Acts 15:15
 
James, speaking to the assembly in Jerusalem, just noted how God first visited to take out of the nations a people for His name. He now continues, saying, “And with this the words of the prophets agree.”
 
James has noted what occurred. He has indicated that it is ongoing since the coming of Jesus. But to demonstrate that his conclusion will not simply be a reasoned deduction or best guess as to what he will determine, he supports what he will say with words already prophesied hundreds of years earlier.
 
By saying “prophets” in the plural, even when he will only cite one prophet, he is indicating that the prophetic writings are a unified whole, inspired by God. What Jeremiah says may be different in content than what Amos says, but they are from the same source and are harmoniously in agreement in thought. With that understood, he next says, “just as it is written.”
 
As is normally the case, the verb is perfect – “as it has been written.” The words are complete, finalized, and recorded for all time.
 
Life application: If we treat the Bible as James has done, we would be more fixed and determined to treat it as the complete and unchanging holy document that it is. The Greek perfect verb is always a true perfect and cannot be substituted for the simple past. There is a sense of absolute completeness that will not be added to or amended.
 
This is how the word of God is. God has spoken. Those words have been written. With the final words of the final book penned, the Bible has been completed. The completed Bible has become the final authority for all matters pertaining to life and godliness in Christ.
 
Think of the many cults, denominations, and churches, and even individuals active today that claim a word from the Lord, a vision, a dream, etc. What is it that tells us they are false? Only the Bible can do so. If revelation from God is an ongoing process in the church today, then the Bible is not the final word for believers. Think of the mayhem that this line of thinking has brought forth!
 
Let us not get diverted by anyone who claims an authority over Scripture, such as the RCC. Let us not get misled by anyone who claims additional revelation beyond Scripture. Rather, let us hold fast to the word of God. Even if those people’s claims were true, we have lost nothing in the end. But if they are not, we have been diverted from the soundness of God’s fully revealed word. It is sufficient, so stand on it alone and you will do well.
 
O God, because of our failure to rightly divide what is said, there is already enough confusion in the church over what You have inspired in Your word. How much more confused we would be if we accepted that You are still breathing out words to direct us. Rather, help us to hold fast to Your word alone, and then to spend our time meditating on it and maintaining context as we evaluate it. Help us in this, O God. Amen.