Acts 21, Acts 15: The Jew-Gentile Divide and The Pagan Temple Context
Greetings and Grace to you in the name of Yeshua,
In my last post, I showed how Paul has to be telling the truth to James. That Paul is neither a liar nor a madman!
Furthermore, we saw that within the text of Acts 21 there is a unique feature in which verse 20 distinctly says the word “Jews” and verse 25 specifically mentions “Gentiles.”
(20) “…You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed, and they are all zealous for the Law.”
(25) “But concerning the Gentiles who have believed, we wrote, having decided that they should abstain from meat sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from fornication”
At First Glance
Here, James is directly appealing to what has already been written during the first Jerusalem council, found in Acts 15. (Please go and read it, if you haven’t).
The particular verses that reference James’ previous judgments are found in Acts 15:19-21, 29.
At first glance, it really appears that there is a distinct difference between what is required for orthopraxy (right practice) between Jew and Greek. The Jews can continue keeping the Law, while the Gentile converts simply have the four requirements. This separation, even though there is supposedly “no separation between Jew and Greek” (Rom. 10:12; Col. 3:11; Num. 15:16), is usually chalked up to Paul simply being “all things to all men” (1 Cor. 9:22). Thus, Paul must be simply making conciliatory actions toward the Jews and Gentiles, so as to not offend their sensitivities. Perhaps he was avoiding a first century version of “cancel culture”?
For the sake of brevity in this post, my sole focus will be Acts 15 and Acts 21. A breakdown of “all things to all men” will have to wait for another post, where we can tackle the so-called “Conciliatory Theory.”
Looking at Acts 15 and the Whole Ruling of James
Again, we must keep context in mind!
Initially, we must understand that, at the time, there was no separation in the synagogue. In fact, there is a heap of historical evidence which shows that the majority Gentile congregations did not split from the synagogue until well after the destruction of the temple.
This is confirmed by a pivotal and often overlooked verse in Acts 15. In Acts 15:21, James writes, “For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath.”
So what is the whole ruling of James in Acts 15?
(19) Therefore, it is my judgement that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles, (20) but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood. (21) For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath."
Next, we must actually understand what is being discussed in Acts 15. A blog post is not really the place to go into great depth, but I’ll attempt to distill it into a few points.
There was a disagreement on whether or not circumcision was required for justification (salvation).
Keep in mind the historical context of 1st century Judaisms. It is vital to understand that there were different sects of Judaism at the time - the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Essens, and now also the sect of the Nazarenes. (Paul identified himself as both a Pharisee and the leader of the Nazarenes - Acts 24:5; 26:5; 28:22; Phil. 3:5).
One commonly held belief, in that day, across the differing sects, was that circumcision was mandatory for salvation, future hope, and participation in the eschatological kingdom. Those who held this position come to be known as the “Party of the Circumcision” here in Acts 15, and they become a main antagonist in Paul’s epistles (particularly Galatians). Oftentimes in Paul’s letters, when he refers to “reliance on the flesh,” he is speaking directly to the false belief that circumcision was the basis of justification.
More specifically, the Party of the Circumcision thought that one had to become Jewish in order to partake in the Covenants of Promise. Thus, a conversion circumcision ceremony needed to be performed to ensure that the new Gentiles made a total break from their idolatrous ways. This is called being a proselyte. It needs to be said right here that this ceremony CANNOT be found in the WRITTEN Torah. It was a ceremony detailed in oral tradition, and later codified in the Mishna and Talmud.
The Apostles, interpreting the Abrahamic covenant, determine that the “Party of the Circumcision” is mistaken, because Abraham was justified by faith BEFORE circumcision. See Romans 4:11-12; Hebrews 11:8-19.
So the whole argument is based on whether or not circumcision is required for salvation of the Gentiles and whether or not the Gentiles could show conversion and renunciation of their former pagan ways without circumcision.
The Apostles rule that the Gentiles do not need to become ethnically Jewish by circumcision to be saved. Salvation is not based on ethnicity, nor is it based on whether one has their foreskin removed. It is 100% by grace through faith.
But, in order for the Jews to be satisfied that the new Gentile converts would not be bringing syncretistic practices from the pagan temple and cultural practices, initial rules (Grk. dogmata, Heb. halachot) needed to be set in place for the Gentiles. (Acts 16:4). This however stands in great contrast to the burdens that could be placed on the Gentiles by ALL the halachot of the rabbis.
Again, it is important to keep the historical context in mind with the myriad of rules that the sages and rabbis had put on top of the people. In fact, Christ describes them as a heavy yoke, while Christ’s yoke is easy and His burden light (Matthew 11:30).
Surely, the Apostles are recalling these words of the Messiah! The theologies of these various sects still imparted this heavy burden.
So you see, the author of Acts 15 is dealing with a confluence of interrelated topics. This is why it is vitally important to know the context, keep the issues clearly in mind, and identify what the Apostles conclusively declared.
FOR A DETAILED ANALYSIS OF ACTS 15 - See Tim Hegg, "The Letter Writer: Paul’s Background and Torah Perspective, 2nd ed. (Tacoma, Washington: Torah Resource, 2008), p. 235-259. Available at torahresource.com
Dogma and Written Rules from the Law
(19) Therefore, it is my judgement that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles, (20) but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood. (21) For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath."
The final list in verse 29 is slightly different.
Abstain from things sacrificed to idols and
from blood and
from things strangled and
from fornication.
What one should immediately notice from the ruling is that the rules come from the Mosaic Law or practical rules (dogma) for following Torah commands.
Acts 16 says of these rules that they are dogmata. Acts 16:4 says,
“Now while they were passing through the cities, they were delivering the decrees (Greek: dogmata) which had been decided upon by the apostles and elders who where in Jerusalem, for them to observe.”
Dogma can mean a couple things, biblically: 1) the rules and requirements of the Law of Moses, which carry a suggestion of severity and of threatened judgment, and 2) these decrees of the Apostles.
What is Law, what is Dogma - The Pagan Temple Context
1) Abstain from things sacrificed to idols. This is not specifically found in the Torah.
This is dogma which follows the “spirit of the letter.” As the eating of meats sacrificed to idols IS participation in pagan worship, it is a violation of the first and second commandments, the Shema (Deut 6:4-9), and the command to not learn the ways of the nations (Deut. 18:9), worshiping God with pagan syncretism. Paul describes it as the Table of Demons (1 Cor. 10:21). This sacrificial meat stands in contrast to the meat which is sold in the marketplace. Now in this time period, the market was often in the pagan temple precinct, but the meats contained therein are not necessarily a result of pagan temple slaughtering. Paul says that those market meats are okay, IF YOU DO NOT KNOW ITS STATUS AND IF YOUR CONSCIENCE ALLOWS. Furthermore, if you are eating at an unbeliever’s house, DO NOT ASK THE STATUS (1 Cor. 10:27), for conscience sake and for your witness to them. If you know, or have been informed that the meat was sacrificed to idols, Paul say DO NOT EAT IT (1 Cor. 10:28).
Paul here refuses to add additional dogma placing a greater burden, but simply following, to the letter, James’ ruling from Acts 15! (No, this text is not speaking about eating unclean meats as many people like to take it out of context. As seen here dogma never violates Torah, but rather is practical application of Torah). Of course, a discussion of Mk. 7:19 (which is commonly interpreted “thus he declared all foods clean”) is beyond the scope of this post and will have to wait until later.
2) Abstain from blood. This law is specifically found in the Torah. (Lev. 3:17; 17:2.) God has forbidden the drinking or eating of blood. Do not do it. In the pagan temples, the ingestion of blood was commonly practiced.
3) Abstain from things strangled. This command is not specifically in the Torah, but is certainly connected to the blood. Given most modern people have no knowledge of butchering, it is easy to see why this is confusing. If you strangle an animal, none of its blood escapes, as the heart stops and no longer is pumping. The meat stays saturated with blood. This is why Kosher killing practices were developed, so that the blood is totally drained out.
Furthermore, the strangulation of an animal causes severe stress for the animal. Simply put, it is inhumane. To place undue suffering on a creature is simply wrong. Inhumane treatment of animals is against the spirit of the Torah and runs counter to the instructions in the Proverbs. Proverbs 12:10 says, “A righteous man has regard for the life of his animal, but even the compassion of the wicked is cruel.” A true man of the land and agriculture never mistreats his animals, even during the butchering process. Having butchered several animals, I can tell you from personal experience that raising and killing the animal with respect and dignity is moral and right. With this in mind as well, there is a growing field of scientific data that shows how the nutritive value of meat is decreased if an animal is stressed, strangled, or electrocuted during the killing process. The best method is draining the blood quickly in a way where the animal simply loses consciousness and dies stress-free. (For an example of electrocution and its horrendous results, see Joel Salatin, Pastured Poultry profits, p. 9-10).
Finally, and most importantly, to torture an animal for the sake of demon satisfaction shows a level of human depravity that can only be overshadowed by human sacrifice. Torture of animals is a violation of the creation mandate (Gen. 1:27-28) and to do it for an idol or demon is simply abominable!
4) Abstain from fornication. (Greek: porneia) - This is found in the Torah. Do not commit adultery.
Pagan temple prostitution is wrong. Sexual promiscuity on top of pagan worship is obviously against the entire biblical thrust of holy living.
5) Observe the Sabbath. (This is not in the list of verse 29, but is included in verse 21.) This is found in the Fourth Commandment. Observe the Sabbath and keep it holy.
Historical Context and Different Rules for Gentiles
Again, we must remember that there were many Gentiles coming to faith in Messiah (Acts 21:19).
Now these new Gentile converts are completely foreign to standards of holy conduct, having been steeped in pagan religion. The very Gentile cities in which Paul had been preaching had both synagogues and pagan temples. These Gentiles were, before coming to faith, participating in pagan rituals (at least a cultural participation), which included all sorts of unclean practices: fornication, strangulation of meats, and drinking blood. All these things are either forbidden by the Torah specifically (blood and porneia) or against the spirit of the Torah (things sacrificed to idols and strangulation).
Could any new convert continue to practice these things while in fellowship with people who follow the Law of Moses?
The answer is an obvious NO!
Furthermore, what is interesting is that these Gentiles have no idea what the Law of God fully contains! When someone gets saved, do they know everything? Of course not.
New believers have to start somewhere.
Knowing that they are saved by faith, not by circumcision, they are allowed entry into the community because they have claimed to attach themselves to the Most High, through Yeshua, and agree to follow his ways. Similar to that of the Israelites when they get to Sinai (Exodus 19), the people agree to do all that the LORD says before they even got the Law! (Ex. 19:8). They were saved out of Egypt and then received the Torah. Likewise, when someone is brought from darkness to light (Acts 26:18), though their knowledge is incomplete, yet they affirm that they will obey what they do not yet fully know.
But they must stop, IMMEDIATELY, pagan temple worship.
In Acts 15:28 this doctrine seems good to the Holy Spirit (primarily because when one gets saved they do not know everything) and it is the Holy Spirit’s role to write the Torah on the heart (Jeremiah 31:31-33). The Holy Spirit’s role is SANCTIFICATION, which indicates that the Gentiles were to grow. The dogma are thus practical applications of specific Torah rules to be applied immediately.
Furthermore, Acts 15:28 gives us another clue, saying, “For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials.”
The Essentials
The Greek word used here for “essentials” is epanagkes. Which carries with it the meaning of necessarily required. In fact, so necessary that they can be compelled! (See Thayer’s Greek Lexicon - G1876).
The rest of the Law would be learned from Sabbath to Sabbath. Thus, the apostles will not compel the Gentiles to follow them.
Rather, it is the job of the Holy Spirit to impel them to obedience! (As the LAW IS WRITTEN ON THE HEART)
The Essentials and The Pivotal Verse: The Need for Sanctification
What can we determine from all this?
1) In order to even have fellowship with the Apostles and the Jews, converts must adhere to some minimum basics. NO PAGAN RITUALS. In fact, they would be compelled to comply or else be kicked out!
2) Entry requirements are not based on the status of the flesh; circumcision is not required to enter. Gentiles, like Jews are justified by grace though faith.
But Here is the Pivotal Verse: A Need for Sanctification
It cannot be overstated: there is a difference between justification and sanctification!
James says in the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:21, and implied again in Acts 21:25)
Acts 15:21 “For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath."
So the question is, if Gentiles only had four laws to observe forever, why should they expose themselves to the Law of Moses every Sabbath?
The answer is obvious, if we consider the need for sanctification. That they would learn the righteous requirements of the Law every Sabbath and would conform themselves to them over time through the work of the Holy Spirit (who approved of this plan)! They would learn the truth by doing the truth!
Ps. 119:142 says “Your righteousness is an everlasting righteousness; and your Torah is Truth.” They would walk in the perfect law of liberty (James 1:25, Psalm 119:45).
The four laws ARE ENTRY REQUIREMENTS ONLY. After salvation, the Gentiles are not to be burdened or barred entry, since they will hear the Law of Moses every Sabbath.
Since the Holy Spirit inspired the writings of the “Old Testament” and writes the Law on the heart (Jeremiah 31:31-33), then surely the Holy Spirit cannot say anything different to the Gentile believers.
Acts 21 and Acts 15, Timothy, Titus, and Circumcision
We already know that Paul did not preach against the Law of Moses to the Jews in the diaspora (see our post: Either a Good Paul, a Liar, or Madman). We also know that he did not burden the Gentiles with circumcision for entry.
It is easy to see why there was confusion and why James was so keen on clearing up the issue.
It is simply a misunderstanding. Since Paul is not lying to James, we can be sure that he never preached against circumcision, rather he only preached against its requirement for justification. If circumcision was not important, then why have Timothy circumcised in Acts 16? The difference is a matter of human COMPULSION and a REQUIREMENT TO BECOME JEWISH.
The argument that Timothy was circumcised only because he was a Jew (because of his mother) is an anachronistic argument based on later rabbinic interpretation. For in the 1st century, Israelite heritage was based on the paternal line, not the maternal line, not to mention that the biblical narrative places status only on the blood lines of the father (which you will notice in every biblical genealogy).
The compulsion factor is perhaps the reason why Titus (directed by Paul) delays his circumcision, so as not to give the appearance of compulsion by the Party of the Circumcision. The Bible never tells whether he ever got circumcised. (See the compulsion of Titus in Galatians 2:3-5. The “false brethren” were spreading the false gospel of salvation by circumcision!)
The Party of the Circumcision wanted to compel circumcision in order for Gentile entry into the congregation. However, what we can determine from James’ judgment is that circumcision for uncircumcised Gentiles should be a matter of conviction by the Holy Spirit.
Additionally, one would will search in vain to find a Law in the Torah that outlines a proselyte ceremony involving circumcision. These proselyte requirements, with circumcision being of the utmost importance for 1st Century Judaisms, were non-Torah doctrines made up by the various sects of Judaism. Again, historical context makes everything clear. There is no law detailing an entry requirement of circumcision for those among the nations. So to require one would actually be an unlawful application!
One-Torah
In closing, we know that Paul did not preach the forsaking (apostasia) of Moses to the Jews in the diaspora. But what the pivotal verse, Acts 21:21, says regarding the new Gentile converts is that,
“For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath."
Which, in effect, says that both Jews and the new Gentile converts are to hear the same Law together every Sabbath.
There is truly no distinction between Jew and Greek. There is one-Torah for the Jew and the sojourner among them. The issue at hand is a matter of justification versus sanctification and compulsory requirements for shared worship of YHWH.
Since the Party of the Circumcision was incorrect in their analysis of the Abrahamic Covenant, the Apostles made a dogmatic ruling to show that just like Abraham, who was saved, being yet uncircumcised, the Gentiles of the day were not to be compelled by human hands to circumcision. Whether they are impelled by the Holy Spirit is another matter. Again, Abraham was not compelled by man, but by God himself (Gen 17).
Given what we have seen, we now know that Paul and James never preached the forsaking of Moses to either Jew or Gentile. Rather, the issue at hand is how the Law of Moses was to be applied (dogma) given the influx of new Gentile converts!
Adonai bless you and keep you.
Adonai make his face shine on you and be gracious to you.
Adonai lift up His countenance upon you and give you shalom.
- Scott McKenzie