Blow the trumpet!

“Announce in Judah and proclaim in Jerusalem and say: ‘Sound the trumpet throughout the land!’ Cry aloud and say: ‘gather together! Let us flee to the fortified cities! Raise the signal to go to Zion! Flee for safety without delay!’

For I am bringing disaster from the North, even terrible destruction. A lion has come out from his lair; a destroyer of nations has set out. He has left his place to lay waste your land. Your towns will lie in ruins without inhabitant. So put on sackcloth, lament and wail, for the fierce anger of the Lord has not turned away from us.” (Jeremiah 4:5-9)

This is Jeremiah at his strongest and most confident; delivering a broadside in the early days of his ministry when news had reached Jerusalem that the Babylonian army was on the march. The whole pronouncement is in poetry, which would no doubt have made it more striking for those who heard it in Jerusalem, at a time of complacency and comparative prosperity.

It is difficult to date this passage but the indications are that it came soon after the untimely death of Josiah and early in the reign of his son Jehoiakim, which puts it in the period 607-600 BC. The Babylonians were busy acquiring sections of the old Assyrian Empire and steadily moving towards Judah (the Northern Kingdom of Israel having already been scattered by the Assyrians).

This proclamation from Jeremiah is a perfect example of the prophetic ministry in action, performing his role as the ‘watchman’ of the nation and messenger of God. It is a series of announcements, each in the imperative to add drama to the news being conveyed: “A lion has come out of his lair; a destroyer of nations has set out” (v7). But this was no ordinary piece of news. The Babylonians may have been the army that was threatening Judah and the holy city of Jerusalem, but the agent was God!

Claiming Immunity

Ever since the Temple, envisioned by King David but built by Solomon, was dedicated, it had been more than just a place of worship for the God of Israel. It was a living monument to the covenant between God and the house of David – the dynasty that David founded, that was endorsed and blessed by the Lord.

Hear God’s solemn promise at the dedication: “If My People who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land” (2 Chron 7:14).

This proclamation from Jeremiah is a perfect example of the prophetic ministry in action

That promise had become the focal point of a ‘royal-temple ideology’¹ that screened out covenantal reality and permitted self-deception. The aristocratic families surrounding the King who were in charge of the national government, and the priestly aristocratic families who were in charge of the Temple, were all under the deception that Jerusalem (represented by the Temple) was inviolable and that Judah as the Promised Land could never be invaded by a foreign army because it was under the protection of Almighty God. It was this delusion that Jeremiah’s harsh poetic pronouncement aimed to dispel.

Jeremiah alone seemed to perceive that they had failed to recognise that their covenantal relationship with God was conditional! It was conditional upon the people of Israel being totally faithful to the Torah, with the Decalogue at its centre – especially having no other God than Yahweh, the God of Israel.

Judgment Inevitable

The royal-temple ideology assumed that the covenantal conditions were fulfilled through morning and evening prayers in the Temple, conducted by the priests on behalf of the nation. But this was a mere religious ordinance.

This was the message that Jeremiah was called by God to proclaim (hence the imperative in his poetry): “Sound the trumpet throughout the land!” The purpose of sounding the trumpet was not simply to warn of the dangers on the international horizon, but to bring a message of warning from God: “I am bringing disaster from the north, even terrible destruction”.

There is no call for repentance in this pronouncement – only a call to put on sackcloth and lament. Jeremiah perceived the inevitability of judgment upon the nation and he knew the hardness of the hearts of the people. He had already called for them to break up their un-ploughed ground - the hardness of their hearts - but there had been no visible response.

Without repentance and turning, the covenantal relationship between God and Israel was dead. In fact, it was worse than that: it was a dangerous delusion that would bring disaster upon all the people, the priests and the prophets as well as the King and his family. No-one would be spared.

But the stark message of this pronouncement was that it was not the Babylonians who should be feared, but the God of Israel who had been deserted through the idolatrous practices of the people. There were even hints of this within the Temple itself, which showed the utter spiritual corruption that had become embedded into the nation.

Jeremiah perceived the inevitability of judgment upon the nation and he knew the hardness of the hearts of the people.

Depths of Conviction

The poetic pronouncement concluded with a declaration from God himself, beginning with the apocalyptic phase “In that day”. It stated the stark reality of the judgment that was about to descend upon Judah: “The King and the officials will lose heart, the priests will be horrified, and the prophets will be appalled.”

The fact that there is no ‘unless’ - no call for repentance or softening of the message - shows the depths of conviction that Jeremiah had received in his time of standing in the council of the Lord. In those moments in the presence of the God of Israel, time had been suspended, the future had become the present, shadow had become reality. The full horror that was about to descend upon the nation had been revealed to the Prophet. Like the Apostle Paul some 500 years later, he could not keep silent: “Woe unto me if I do not declare the truth of the word of God!” (1 Cor 9:16).

Of course, Jeremiah knew that if there were repentance in the nation, the Babylonian army could not penetrate the walls of Jerusalem or bring devastation to the cities of Judah, because there was no power on earth that could defeat the God of Israel. But he also knew the hardness of the hearts of the king and the priests and the leaders of the nation, who were blinded by a powerful spirit of corruption from the world that prevented them from perceiving the truth.

We Need Prophets!

The New Testament has many warnings of a similar blindness coming in the days leading up to the Second Coming of Jesus. 2 Timothy 3 speaks of this and the letters of Peter have strong warnings of the delusion that will drive the nations into a time of darkness and infect the Church with different forms of corruption.

Those who have prophetic gifts today need to spend more time in the council of the Lord, as Jeremiah did, and then to declare boldly what they are hearing and seeing revealed. In these days when the leaders of the Western nations have turned away from truth, and when many church leaders are also blinded by various forms of spiritual delusion so that they are unable to declare the word of the Lord, the greatest need is for the Lord to raise up prophets in our midst.

May those who have learned to stand in the council of the Lord, to recognise his voice, to understand how he is working out his purposes today – be given boldness by the Holy Spirit to declare the word of the Living God in this godless generation that is hungry for truth, but does not know where to find it.

References

1 E.g. Brueggemann, 1999. A commentary on Jeremiah: Exile and homecoming. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

This article is part of a series. Click here to read previous instalments.

Simon Pease reviews ‘The Unseen Realm’ by Michael Heiser (Lexham Press, 2015).

In this extensively researched book, Dr Michael Heiser tackles the ambitious subject of explaining the entire biblical narrative in terms of the supernatural realm. Seeking to do so from the theological and cultural perspective of the original authors, he offers insights which have largely been overlooked by mainstream Christianity, stimulating interest in a neglected field of study.

According to Heiser, God has a “divine council” (Psa 82:1) of spiritual beings (elohim in Hebrew) who rule with him and are superior to the angels (who serve as messengers). God’s intention was always for his divine family to be mirrored on earth and for the two to live in harmony. The Bible charts the history of rebellion within this ‘divine council’, the corruption of humanity and God’s unfolding plan of salvation and ultimate triumph.

Thought-provoking Conclusions

Within this narrative, Heiser presents many thought-provoking, perhaps controversial conclusions. For example, he suggests that the serpent in the Genesis Creation account was a powerful spiritual being, not a literal animal.

He claims that humanity’s rebellion against God at the Tower of Babel provoked the Lord to split mankind into nations and subject them to the rule of the rebellious elohim, ‘disinheriting’ them and choosing to start afresh with Israel.

Dr Michael Heiser tackles the ambitious subject of explaining the entire biblical narrative in terms of the supernatural realm.

Joshua’s military campaign in Canaan was, in Heiser’s view, targeted specifically at eradicating the anakim, the surviving giant offspring of the union between elohim (the ‘sons of God’, Genesis 6) and women which started at Mt Hermon. As a result of this union, God’s spiritual ground had to be reclaimed, which is why Jesus was transfigured on this same mountain – in which vicinity he also described his followers’ mission as an assault on the “gates of Hell” (Matt 16:18).

Similarly, Jesus sending out the 70, the traditional number of nations in Jewish religious belief, signified the commencement of reclaiming the nations for Yahweh.

A Systematic Theology

At just over 400 pages, this is a big book in every way. Heiser holds a PhD in Hebrew Bible and Semitic languages and is the academic editor for Logos Bible Software, but succeeds in making his research accessible to scholars and lay-people alike. Always keeping his overall theme in view, he builds his case in clear and logical steps, breaking down his message into groups of short chapters, each followed by a section summary, and assigning more academic content and references to footnotes.

The book proceeds chronologically and is split into eight parts. The first three establish Heiser’s overall view about God’s ‘divine council’ and the way the supernatural realm is structured, particularly with regard to Creation and the Fall. The second three sections consider the Old Testament narrative, from the calling of Abraham through to the Babylonian exile. The final two sections look at the New Covenant and the situation for believers today, including Heiser’s own interpretation of the end times.

Altogether, the book amounts to a systematic theology of the supernatural - and Jesus features prominently throughout (including in earlier chapters through his pre-incarnate appearances).

Some Problems

Heiser’s basic approach, outlined in the introductory chapters and epilogue, is to allow Scripture to speak for itself. He takes Zechariah’s prophecy of Jesus returning to fight at Jerusalem literally, and believes Armageddon is actually a reference to the city. However, these interpretations are perhaps surprising in light of his statement that not all prophecy is to be taken literally – as well as his apparent commitment to Replacement Theology.

According to Heiser, God has a “divine council” (Psa 82:1) of spiritual beings who rule with him.

For instance, he says that the “sordid” history (p216) of Israel (the Jews) has ended in “release” (p159), and that God’s eternal promise to Jacob concerning the Land is fulfilled by Jewish and Gentile conversion to Messiah. Heiser asserts that believers are now the “true Israel” (p158), meaning that Romans 11:28, which states that “all Israel will be saved”, can be interpreted in terms of the Church. His idea that Jesus’ incarnation and sacrificial death were only necessary because of Jewish failure to establish God’s kingdom on earth is more concerning.

Eye-opening Overview

Notwithstanding these points, the book contains much valuable and eye-opening material, providing a generally coherent and helpful overview of a complex subject and bringing to the fore the idea of God’s ‘divine council’ and its importance to the entire meta-narrative of Scripture.

Heiser is to be commended for the sheer scale and thoroughness of his research – the book includes a 12-page index of Scripture references. For the less ambitious reader, he has published Supernatural, a shorter version which he describes as including practical applications.

The author’s claims, though not always comfortable, deserve attention; The Unseen Realm will undoubtedly prompt widespread debate for years to come.

‘The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible’ (hardcover, e-book, audiobook, 413pp) is available on Amazon for £17.99 (hardcover). Find out more on the book’s companion website: www.moreunseenrealm.com.

Some thoughts from Kensington and Chelsea.

One of our regular readers writes from the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, reflecting on the aftermath of the tragic fire at Grenfell Tower six months ago.

It is six months since the fire at Grenfell Tower on 14 June which was caused by a catalogue of faults and failings currently being investigated.

More than anything else, it revealed a broken Council, a broken Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (the smallest and one of the most dense boroughs in Britain, and home to a number of very wealthy individuals) and, more widely, a broken Britain.

Given the magnitude of the fire and the number of displaced, it is very doubtful whether any council could have coped with the aftermath without help, the more so given the number of social houses available in the Borough (roughly one year’s supply for new tenants was destroyed in one night).

However, while the Inquiry will give its verdict on the causes of the fire, no-one would dispute that it took much too long for senior staff to assess the magnitude of the disaster, and act accordingly. The response of the Council was at best poor – it was slow, cumbersome and bureaucratic, whereas the response of both the wider and local community and of all the faith communities was fast, assured and compassionate.

Decades of Neglect

With a relatively narrow remit, the Inquiry is not likely to look at the origins of the lack of trust, lack of hope, latent anger, hatred and much more, prevalent among residents of North Kensington: some of these go back decades, and even longer.

North Kensington has always been poorer than South Kensington. Adjacent to Grenfell Tower is the site of the old potteries and piggeries – a really tough, deprived area in the late 19^th Century and early 20^th Century.

With its narrow remit, the Inquiry is not likely to look at the longer-term relationship between North Kensington residents and the Government, national and local.

In the 1950s Peter Rachman helped make Notting Hill notorious for his treatment of immigrants and others in low quality, privately rented flats, around the same time as the Notting Hill race riots (1958). Some of those involved founded the Notting Hill carnival in 1966.

The sense of neglect by local and central Government was also well exemplified by the building of the Westway (the M40 running into London) in the late 1960s, and the resultant demolition of many terraced houses in the area, running along an east-west corridor half a mile south of Regent’s Canal.

Notwithstanding the investment in the north of the Borough, for at least the last half-century there has not been any real sense of local people being listened to or given any empowerment.

Asking Difficult Questions

The reality is that many cities, towns and boroughs have ugly parts. Indeed, we all have ugly histories, and love to airbrush out that which does not accord with how we like to present ourselves – whether as individuals, churches, towns, cities or nations.

Given what has happened, we need to ask some difficult questions: how aware is much of the Borough of the problems within its boundaries, both historic and current? How aware are most residents a couple of miles away in South Kensington of the complexity of the situation in the north, and of their very different life chances, including life expectancy?

How are local Councillors and MPs to be judged? If we were elected, and held office, and judged, how would we fare? In this instance, given the resources of the Borough, what is the right way to evaluate the Council’s legacy? Could we - should we – expect more of our elected representatives? Indeed, can we do more? Or is Government trying to do too much, and being disingenuous by not admitting its inability to fulfil its promises?

Given what has happened, we need to ask some difficult questions about the Borough, its history and the capacity of those currently in power to effect change.

And yet…the failings evident in the Grenfell tragedy are also, in part, a consequence of the limits of local Government, which raises only about ¼ - ⅓ of its total revenues locally. Central Government (HM Treasury) seeks to control so much of what local Government aspires to do. This relationship requires a complete revamp - what are the purposes of each and therefore how should they be funded?

Wake-Up Call for Radical Change

The Grenfell fire needs to be seen as a wake-up call, indeed as a call for radical change, at least for the Kensington and Chelsea Council, if not for all levels of Government.

At the Council, such change is undoubtedly underway. Of its 37 Conservative councillors, at least 17 are not standing again – an unprecedented proportion – and it is far from given that all who stand will be re-elected. A number of senior staff too have moved on since June.

Time will tell the degree to which the change forced on the Council following the Grenfell tragedy was an opportunity taken or missed. But many of the issues facing residents of the Borough – lack of trust, lack of hope, not being listened to, not being empowered – apply throughout Britain! While there are undoubtedly many individual examples of good practice in local Government, they are rare.

Time will tell the degree to which the change forced on the Council following the Grenfell tragedy was an opportunity taken or missed.

In this case at least, the hope must be that the Council implements in full the essential changes needed to its structure and culture – and can in the future humbly encourage other councils to look honestly at their own shortcomings.

Where Are the Churches?

However, while radical change is needed in the Council, it also needs to be asked whether radical change is needed in other groups serving the community. The churches responded well to the Grenfell tragedy, but the differences among those closest to the fire are great and their beliefs are so diverse that it is doubtful whether they should all be called ‘Christian’.

This is a delicate issue that goes to the heart of the direction in which different parts of the Church are progressing – and implicitly raises the issue of what sort of a god they worship. The Grenfell Tower fire was a local issue of national importance, but to those with ears to hear, God was also speaking to us through it, trying to get our attention. If we don’t hear God’s words, maybe we have to endure his works.

There is an irony that the Grenfell tragedy took place in the smallest Borough, but which is also home to two of the largest churches in the country. Kensington and Chelsea is home to both Kensington Temple and Holy Trinity Brompton (HTB), but both have been conspicuous by their absence since the initial aftermath of the fire.

Why Did God Allow It?

A key question that needs to be asked is why God allowed the Grenfell tragedy. Partly, it is because we live in a very fallen world. He is a holy God and we are sinners. Partly, it is because God was exposing the sin that lay behind the fire and its aftermath. If there was one sin of which the Council (in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea) was perhaps guiltier than most, it was pride; itself the root of all sin.

Partly, it is because God wants our attention. He wants this, as with all judgment, to be restorative, but that requires us all, believer and non-believer, to repent. And it is undoubtedly partly because he wants us to seek his face more seriously than we have thus far.

The Grenfell Tower fire was a local issue of national importance, but to those with ears to hear, God was also speaking to us through it, trying to get our attention.

In what sort of a society do we want to live – and how do we change it? What place should Christianity have in the public square? More widely, in what sort of a God do we believe? In terms of national politics, what are God’s purposes for the UK, particularly through Brexit, and also in relation to Israel?

Lessons for the Church

Where do we go from here? Locally, churches need to evangelise the lost – whether rich or poor, from whatever ethnic background or culture. Evangelism needs to be an ongoing commitment that characterises everyday Christian life. This should not need to be said – yet it is not the case everywhere. Such evangelism - for the whole country - needs to be the responsibility of all, not just the professional leaders of churches.

It is critical that the true Gospel, the Gospel of the Kingdom, is preached and put into practice – which will mean some congregations in the country having much to learn as they start to evangelise. Likewise, for some churches, this will necessitate a radical repentance, pleading to God for mercy for their own sin - possibly not ever having evangelised - individually and collectively.

All churches need to engage with meaningful spiritual warfare, for the Church and for the nation: if we don’t, others, whose purposes may be nefarious, will do so. And all churches need to prepare for tougher times, or the faith of many current believers will not be sufficient for the days ahead.

The true Church needs to discern the wider significance and importance of Grenfell, to confess and repent as appropriate – in a way that has not yet been conceived, yet alone done.

Those in the true Church need to acknowledge the severity of the hour.

The Severity of the Hour

Those in the true Church need to acknowledge the severity of the hour – which means getting back to our biblical roots and renewed commitments to the word of God and its application to every area of our lives; to evangelism (particularly of those from a Muslim background); to engaging in spiritual warfare; to standing with Israel in prayer and action; to standing for Christians around the world who are persecuted for their faith; and to being a Body genuinely characterised by grace and truth.

Finally, we need to be aware that the Second Coming of Christ might be much sooner (irrespective of how sudden it is) than many Christians seem to be expecting. Clearly, it is 2,000 years nearer than when Jesus was crucified and resurrected - but it is hard to know that from the way in which most churches operate.

Clifford Denton continues the study of Acts 15 by considering the context and conclusion of the meeting of apostles and elders in the First Century.

Recap

In the first part of our study, we argued that the Acts 15 meeting of apostles and elders was according to Jewish tradition for settling disputes, whose origin can be traced to the time of Moses. It was perhaps the first council of its kind in the emerging Christian community. We can adopt this view providing we maintain a balanced perspective of continuity from biblical origins rather than a breaking away to form a new religion. The apostles and elders were responsible, as are Church leaders today, to shepherd the body of disciples, including both Jews and Gentiles, to be the authentic manifestation of the covenant community of faith.

The outpouring of the Holy Spirit had begun in the Gentile world and the leaders met in Jerusalem to consider together what the God of Israel was now doing, and what he was expecting of his people.

The apostles and elders met in Jerusalem in accordance with Jewish tradition, to consider what God had begun in the Gentile world and what he was expecting of his people."

All this was happening in the context of the Jewish world of the Sanhedrin and the Rabbis, who to that time had interpreted biblical teaching into a set of rules for living. This was the world into which Jesus came, challenging the Rabbis but recognising their authority – that is until the coming of the Holy Spirit to empower his disciples in a new and living way.

Let us consider a little more of the rabbinical teaching of the day to further understand the need for the council of Acts 15.

Rules and Obligations

Jewish tradition has it that there are two aspects to Torah: the Written Torah, recorded by Moses, and the Oral Torah passed on from Moses through reliable men. The Oral Torah was codified (developed in written form) in the Second Century into what is known as the Mishnah. This was some time after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD when concerns arose as to whether oral traditions would be remembered with the Jewish nation scattered throughout the world. Once the teaching was passed on orally, but now it was codified for fear that the teaching would be lost to future generations.

In our own generation, we can read the Mishnah to study these oral traditions. Here we find much of what was taught by the Rabbis at the time of Jesus and his Apostles. A study of the Mishnah gives us information that helps us to understand the basis of Jesus' challenges to the Rabbis. For example there is an incident recorded in Matthew 12 concerning the rabbinic definition of work and its relationship to the Sabbath Day. The disciples of Jesus, in the eyes of the Pharisees, contravened a number of their definitions of the work of harvesting when they ate grain as they walked through the fields. This incident and others are understood most clearly through reference to the Oral Traditions recorded in the Mishnah.

In Jesus' day, to be a Jew implied obedience to the authority of the oral traditions and extra rulings of the Rabbis."

Jews were expected to govern their lives through obedience to oral traditions and other rulings of the religious leaders. The different schools of Rabbis formulated rules by which their disciples were obliged to live – the legal halakhah of the day. To be a Jew implied that such obligations were authoritative. Circumcision for men was the entry point into the Jewish family and everything else followed. This is the background to Acts 15.

The Perceived Authority of the Mishnah

In the introduction to Danby's translation of the Mishnah (OUP, 1933), there is a passage that relates the chain of the Oral Torah's passage down through the centuries. Because the Oral Torah was considered to go back to Moses it was considered just as authoritative as the written Torah.

Recall that Jesus referred to the teaching of the Rabbis sometimes as, "You have read" and sometimes, "You have heard it said", reflecting both the written and oral nature of rabbinic teaching:

The Mishnah's own account of its origin and history of the Oral Law is given in the tractate Aboth. At the same time that the Written Law was given from Sinai, the Oral Law, too, was delivered to Moses, and handed down (orally) in turn to the leaders of successive generations – to Joshua, to the Elders (Joshua 24:31), to the Prophets, to the 'Men of the Great Synagogue' (the body of teachers who administered and taught the Law after the time of Ezra), to Simeon the Just (c.280 or 200 B.C., one of 'the remnants of the men of the Great Synagogue'), to Antigonus of Soko; then, in turn, to the five 'Pairs of leaders' – Jose ben Joezer and Jose ben Johanan (c.165 B.C.), Joshua ben Perahyah and Nittai the Arbelite, Judah ben Tabbai and Simeon ben Shetach, Shemaiah and Abtalion, and Hillel and Shammai. Thus the chain of tradition was brought to the threshold of the Christian era.

On account of this chain of reliable men it is considered that the Oral Torah is of equal authority to the Written Torah in Judaism. As the Introduction to the translation of the Mishnah states, after the above paragraph:

The Mishnah, in other words, maintains that the authority of those rules, customs, and interpretations which had accumulated around the Jewish system of life and religion was equal to the authority of the Written Law itself, even though they had no place in the Written Law.

Students of the Rabbis

Along with the culture of oral traditions went the zeal for the Scriptures of every student from a Jewish background. The abiding issue was to know just what was expected in how to live in every part of life. The Mitzvot (Commandments) were obligatory and binding and it was a person's duty to apply them into his or her life.

Even though both the Written and Oral Torah were assumed to have been passed on flawlessly they still needed to be interpreted in every generation. Hence the Councils of Elders determined halakhah, whether in the Synagogue Bet Din at local level, or through the Sanhedrin, on more weighty matters, at national level. Though the origin of the term halakhah (also spelled halachah) is to walk out one's duty to God, it became a legal term meaning, to a Jew, those things that were legally binding on his life.

As each generation interpreted the Torah into halakhah, to know just how to live, halakhah became less about relationship with God and more an expression of legal duty."

On matters of Torah, a member of the Jewish community should seek guidance from his Rabbi on matters which needed interpretation. There were also rules for whose interpretations were binding. For example, in Popular Halachah: A Guide to Jewish Living (edited by Avnere Tomaschoff and sponsored by the World Conference of Jewish Organisations, 1985) it states:

The halachic decision of a contemporary Rabbi is binding upon the person who poses the question; he may not attempt to receive a more lenient opinion by bringing the same question to another Rabbi unless he advises the second Rabbi of the opinion that he had previously received.

This was the background to the Jewish world of the Apostles in Jerusalem at the meeting recorded in Acts 15. They met as a Bet Din to discuss how the Gentiles coming to faith should be brought into the community where the laws and traditions of Torah were to be interpreted and it was to be discovered what was obligatory and binding.

This was the background of the Bet Din in Jerusalem in Acts 15: how should Gentiles be brought into the community steeped in the interpreted laws and traditions of the Torah?

The most prominent issue was whether circumcision was necessary for Gentile converts, but implicit in the deliberations was every aspect of the Torah, since to be circumcised in the flesh implied coming under the authority of the teachers of Judaism according to the current traditions.

Freedom to Learn

With these thoughts in the background, we realise that the Acts 15 meeting was simply a meeting in Jerusalem of those with authority from Jesus, guided by God's Spirit (in the continuity of Covenant history and Jewish tradition), to see how Gentile converts should approach Torah. Was there a new way or should Gentile converts come under the authority of the rabbis?

An inspired conclusion was reached. A letter was sent out to new believers in the Gentile world, after which the Gospel continued to go out into the Gentile world with spiritual power. The four things that are mentioned in the letter were not binding in the sense of normal Jewish halakhah, but very important and necessary, nevertheless, for the good of every believer:

The apostles, the elders, and the brethren, To the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia: Greetings. 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 -- it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who will also report the same things by word of mouth.

For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell. (Acts 15:23-29)

Both the content of the letter and the spirit of the letter are important. The four things mentioned are also known as the Noahide Laws, principles traditionally thought to have been given to Noah after the Flood, and so for all mankind. This does not mean that these are the only four things relevant to believers from the Old Testament. Noah was a man of faith and fellowship with God, just as Abraham was; faith was the major principle of the Old Testament as well as the New. Neither Noah nor Abraham knew the Torah ('Law') in the sense that it was given through Moses, but they both had a heart to walk closely with the living God (the true halakhah, one might say).

In all generations, the one thing of which a person must be careful in seeking to walk with the true God is to avoid those things that might be a seduction towards following false gods. The four injunctions contained in the letter were typical of the traps to avoid if one was to not be seduced into idolatry. Thus the letter, the ruling from the Acts 15 meeting (so to speak), warned new believers to beware of following false gods so that they might learn to walk out their faith in fellowship with the One True God of Israel.

Each of the four Noahic principles given to new believers referred to typical traps which might seduce them into following false gods. They were intended to protect and support their faith and fellowship with the One True God."

Secondly, we see in the spirit of the letter that was foreseen by Jeremiah of the New Covenant:

But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more. (Jer 31:33-34)

The reason why other aspects of Torah were not specifically mentioned is that the Holy Spirit inspired the elders in Jerusalem to see that, in future, Torah would be studied in terms of New Covenant revelation, in which the Holy Spirit would be the agent of such revelation. The emphasis was to be on teaching those with a heart to learn more than through externally imposed obligations.

The remainder of God's law would not be externally imposed, but written on the hearts of believers through the revelation of the Holy Spirit, as Jeremiah had previously prophesied. "

Relevance Today

It was not that a new religion was beginning, but that the faith and walk of Abraham was to be brought to the Gentile world by the power of the Holy Spirit. This was nevertheless a continuity of Covenant history within the context of the Jewish traditions of authority and searching out the interpretation of Torah for the emerging sect of the Jews into which Gentile converts were grafted.

We continue to live in the flow of Covenant history. We are connected to our history through the Council of Jerusalem of Acts 15. Through this Council, or Bet Din (as we now understand it), we learned not about the departure from the Jewish Roots of our faith but how Torah and halakhah would be taken to the Gentile world by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Through Acts 15, we learn not about departing from the Jewish roots of our faith, but how Torah and halakhah - the faith and walk of Abraham - would be taken to the Gentiles through the power of the Holy Spirit."

With freedom to learn for everyone who is a disciple of Yeshua, our Jewish and Hebraic roots are as secure as for anyone in the Covenant community, right through from Abraham's day to our own.

For Study and Prayer

1. In the light of what we have considered concerning the context and interpretation of Acts 15, how should Christians approach study of the Old Testament?
2. Do you see any parallels with the way the rabbis exercised authority through tradition with what happens in some branches of the Christian Church today?

Next time: Paul and the Torah

These studies are developed from the course Christianity's Relationship with Israel and the Jews, first prepared for Tishrei Bible School.

In the first part of a study of Acts 15, Clifford Denton considers the pivotal moment in the First Century when the apostles and elders met to consider conditions for membership of Gentile converts in the covenant family of Israel.

Acts 15

Acts 15 records a decisive moment in the First Century Church. The gospel was going out into the Gentile world for the first time, and many were coming to faith. The New Covenant ministry of the Holy Spirit was a new experience. These rapid developments were raising many questions amongst Jewish believers in Messiah: how did they relate to the accepted teaching of 'the Law' according to rabbinic tradition? What were the obligations on new believers in Israel's Messiah?

In Jerusalem, the apostles and elders gathered to consider these questions. Not only was this a significant moment for the Christian Church, but it also marked a point of separation between Jews and Christians. But do we have a clear understanding of what was going on at the so-called 'Council of Jerusalem'?

Councils have played a prominent role in Church history, but what was happening in Acts 15? Was this the first Church Council, or was it a typically Jewish way of resolving disputes? Indeed, was it even a biblical way of resolving disputes? Let us consider how the meeting of the apostles and elders in Jerusalem was an application of an already-existing principle, through which those in authority met to consider issues of importance, leading to rulings on behalf of the community.

The 'council' held in Acts 15 was a significant moment for the early Church. But was it a point of separation and departure, or unity and continuity?

A Church Council?

In Our Father Abraham (Eerdmans, 1989), Dr Wilson describes the Council of Jerusalem as "the watershed for the entire book of Acts" (p48). He continues:

The council handed down its decision: Non-Jews entering the Church should not have the Jewish rite of circumcision imposed on them. In its decision the council emphasized the principle of God's free grace in Christ. Gentiles were to know that to stand in the liberty of Christ meant no preconditions or potentially entangling qualifications. So stated, the council ruled out any theological necessity of circumcision for righteousness.

Gentiles should be clear on this point: salvation was a gift of God; one could not procure or obtain it by mere conformity to any ceremonial ritual. [emphasis added]

Separation or Continuity?

What was the background to this meeting of the leaders in Jerusalem? Was this a new thing breaking out to launch the principles by which a fledgling Christian Church was to live? Were the implications that Jewish law was now replaced? It is possible to read this chapter of Acts and filter it through a mind-set that the Christian Church was a completely new thing separate from Judaism. It is therefore possible to fuel the view that grace now replaced law and that the Church replaced Israel.

However, with careful consideration, we see that there is continuity and not separation. Indeed, what was happening goes back to the time of Moses. When we look at it this way we might even challenge the traditional terminology that Acts 15 was a Church Council. This is particularly so when the idea of a 'Church Council' has generally been applied to later meetings of Church leaders which led to much greater and unnecessary separation from Jewish roots. One such council was the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, at the time when Christianity was being merged into the Roman Empire!

It is easy to filter Acts 15 through a mind-set that the Church was a completely new thing, separate from Judaism and replacing Israel. However, more careful consideration shows continuity in Acts 15, not separation."

The Tradition of Elders

It can be argued that the tradition that led to the coming together of apostles and elders in Acts 15 had its origin with Moses. This goes back to the time when Jethro, his father-in-law, gave him some sound advice:

Listen now to my voice; I will give you counsel, and God will be with you: stand before God for the people, so that you may bring the difficulties to God, and you shall teach them the statutes and the laws, and show them the way in which they must walk and the work they must do.

Moreover you shall select from all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them to be rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens. And let them judge the people at all times. Then it will be that every great matter they shall bring to you, but every small matter they themselves shall judge. So it will be easier for you, for they will bear the burden with you. (Ex 18:19-22)

This appointment of elders is comparable to the instruction that Paul gave to Titus:

For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you - if a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination. For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but hospitable, a lover of what is good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled, holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict. (Titus 1:5-9)

From the time of Moses, authority for giving rulings on how to apply Torah was delegated to reliable leaders of the community – the older and wiser men. Up to the time of Jesus this authority was with the Sanhedrin for the major decisions, and the local synagogue would have its own elders who 'sat in Moses' seat'. Thus when Paul instructed Titus to appoint elders it was from this tradition that he was drawing.

The tradition of appointing elders to judge how God's law should be applied in different circumstances goes back to the time of Moses."

In this regard, one of the functions of the elders in the Synagogue was to hold a 'Bet Din' ('House of Ruling') on new issues that came up for decision. This was a place of authority comparable with law courts today. The Bet Din took Torah as the foundation of all ruling and interpreted the principles into 'halakhah' for the people (rulings on the way they should walk/live their lives).

Acts 15: a 'Bet Din'

Thus, when we come to Acts 15, it may be seen as a Bet Din, where those in a position of authority met to discuss a new issue that had arisen among believers. The new issue was that many were becoming believers from among the Gentiles by the power of the Holy Spirit, but without any particular knowledge of the Torah and the way it was being taught by the Rabbis of the day. So a Bet Din was formed in Jerusalem.

The Council of Jerusalem was a 'Bet Din', a traditional meeting of those in authority to discuss a new issue that had arisen among believers. It was not a new thing- simply the first major one since the beginning of the Gentile harvest."

This must be seen as the natural thing for the apostles to do, going back to the time of Moses, rather than as a new thing in the Christian Church. It would not have been the first time these leaders met to discuss matters of Torah and halakhah, but it was the first major meeting regarding the role of Torah among those converted from a Gentile background. Unlike most Church Councils in later centuries, when Christianity had largely separated from its Jewish roots, this Bet Din was embedded in, and flowed out of, its Jewish heritage.

New Authority Structure

Whilst the Bet Din recorded in Acts 15 was not a unique concept, it was unique in its being led by the new Church leaders- the apostles and elders –rather than by the traditional Rabbinical hierarchy of Judaism. As the only 'Church Council' recorded in Scripture, in it we see a new authority structure coming into being for the New Covenant community, instituted by Jesus.

Jesus entered a world in which, through Moses, God had already delegated authority to community leaders. Jesus did not challenge the delegated authority, though he did challenge the leaders' interpretation of the Torah, especially in their own lifestyles:

Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, saying: "The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do. (Matt 23:1-3)

After recognising the delegated authority of the existing leaders, Jesus later confirmed that as the Son of God, all authority in heaven and on earth had been given to him (Matt 28:18). Before his ascension into heaven, he then gave authority to his apostles to minister in his name on earth. He also told them:

Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Again I say to you that if two of you agree on earth concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by My Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them. (Matt 18:18-20)

"In my name", in this sense, can be understood as being according to Jesus' authority. Jesus confirmed that he would uphold the decisions of those in authority and also be among them, by the presence of his Spirit, as they sought agreement in his name.

The Bet Din in Acts 15 displays the new authority structure of the New Covenant Church, being led by elders and apostles, not the traditional Rabbinic hierarchy.

The Fig Tree: a Symbol of Authority to Interpret Scripture

Another relevant symbol here is the cursing of the fig tree, when Jesus spoke to a fruitless fig tree and caused it to wither (Matt 23:21-23):

And seeing a fig tree by the road, He came to it and found nothing on it but leaves, and said to it, "Let no fruit grow on you ever again." Immediately the fig tree withered away. And when the disciples saw it, they marveled, saying, "How did the fig tree wither away so soon?" So Jesus answered and said to them, "Assuredly, I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what was done to the fig tree, but also if you say to this mountain, 'Be removed and be cast into the sea,' it will be done. "And whatever things you ask in prayer, believing, you will receive."

Now when He came into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people confronted Him as He was teaching, and said, "By what authority are You doing these things? And who gave You this authority?"

Why did Jesus respond in this way towards a fig tree? Under the shade of a fig tree was a common location for Torah students to study and pray. Hence, the fig tree had become symbolic of sitting under the authoritative teaching of the Rabbis, and therefore the authority of the Rabbis to interpret Torah. By cursing the fig tree, Jesus was hinting about the removal of authority to teach from those who were not interpreting God's word correctly. This can be tied in with Matthew 21:43:

Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it.

Here the word 'nation' is the Greek 'ethnos'. This has a range of meanings but from the context, we can say that it means another group of people, implying that authority would be taken from those presently interpreting Torah to another group whom Jesus would designate.

New Authority Structure

This does not mean that Israel would now be cast out as a whole and the Church in the Gentile world take over with a new plan, but that a new authority structure would be defined among God's people. This authority was given to Jesus' disciples, as already promised in Matthew 16:19:

And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

Thus, when the apostles and elders met in Jerusalem, as recorded in Acts 15, we see the new authority structure coming into being for the Covenant Community. The Holy Spirit was among them to confirm what Jesus had promised and the phrase, 'it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us' (Acts 15:28), is significant in this respect. It is a confirmation that authority to interpret the teaching of God (Torah) had been passed on to the leaders of the New Covenant community.

At the Jerusalem council, the elders and apostles of the New Covenant community led under the guidance and confirmation of the Holy Spirit."

That new authority structure was operating at the Jewish elders meeting in Jerusalem. It was a continuity of the authority structure first given through Moses by God, now confirmed through Jesus for the new move of his Spirit into the Gentile world.

For Study and Prayer

If the meeting of the apostles and elders in Acts 15 is a continuation of the traditions handed down from the time of Moses, does this have implications for meetings of church elders today, and for the relationship between Jews and Christians in the New Covenant community?

Next time: We will continue to consider the meeting of Acts 15.

These studies are developed from the course 'Christianity's Relationship with Israel and the Jews', first prepared for Tishrei Bible School.