Author: Charlie Garrett

Virginia countryside.

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

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).

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 the false teachers had 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; or 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.

Building. Downtown, Virginia – close to capitol.

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: 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).

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 likely happened 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 it is Jews who are writing, and their message is to “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.

Executive mansion plaque. Virginia capitol.

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 – arriving along with Paul and Barnabas – that would be the ones 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 were 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.

Executive mansion. Virginia capitol.

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

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).

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.

Early on woke statue at Virginia capitol.

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

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).

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 in the first place. 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 offerer 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.