The first - and most controversial - ministry gift of Ephesians 4.

This article is part of a series – click here for previous instalments.

“It was Christ who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.” (Eph 4:11-13, emphasis added)

While there is much that we can read in the New Testament about the original apostles appointed by Jesus, their calling and the role they fulfilled in the burgeoning Church, there is a divergence of opinion today on whether or not there are, or ever can be, modern-day apostles.

It can be a very divisive subject – but the one thing that all should be agreed on regardless is that the role of an apostle, as it was understood in the Early Church, can and should be carried on in the Church today – a role which, incidentally, has no equivalent in the secular world!

Who WERE the Apostles?

Christ appointed 12 of his disciples to be apostles and named them in Matthew 10 and Luke 6. Following the defection of Judas Iscariot and the ascension of Jesus into Heaven, the remaining 11 (Peter, John, James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James son of Alphaeus, Simon the Zealot and Judas son of James) were praying.

They felt the importance of replacing Judas, who had betrayed Jesus, with “one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection” (Acts 1:21-22). There were two nominations - Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. After prayer they cast lots; “the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles” (Acts 1:26).

There is a divergence of opinion today on whether or not there can be modern-day apostles.

The Apostles mentioned in the New Testament all had three things in common – they had to have been personally called by Christ, been taught by him directly for several years, and seen him alive after his resurrection (Acts 1:17, 22, 25).

Paul was the one exception, and he had to make a strong case for his inclusion as he had not been one of the disciples at the time of Jesus’ death. In fact, he had been the opposite – distinctively anti-Jesus - yet he too was offered and accepted a specific God-given task.

Ananias had been told by the Lord to seek out Paul after his Damascus experience, “for this man [Paul] is a chosen vessel to me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel” (Acts 9:15-16). Paul’s qualifications were that he had seen the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ and witnessed him perform miracles, and that he had also seen the imparting of the Holy Spirit to baptised believers. He describes himself in Galatians 1:1: “Paul, an apostle - sent not from men nor by a man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead”.

Commissioning

There are others described as ‘apostles’ in the New Testament: Barnabas became an apostle (Acts 14:14) of the congregation of Antioch, Syria. Other men also are referred to as ‘apostles of congregations’ in the sense that they were sent forth by such congregations to represent them. James the brother of Jesus was commissioned to become a leader among the apostles in Jerusalem, but he still met the same requirements placed upon Paul.

Today, commissioning and the laying on of hands carries on the apostolic succession of the Pope in Roman Catholic churches, although most denominations also commission members they consider to have the right qualifications to other, different tasks and many also lay on hands to confirm this.

The first Apostles were all personally called by Christ, taught by him directly and saw him alive after his resurrection.

The Meaning of ‘Apostle’

The word ‘apostle’ is taken from the Greek word apostolos meaning simply ‘sent forth (or of)’ or ‘one who is sent on a mission’. But this does not mean that all who receive a calling from God and are sent forth to share the Good News with those who have not heard it, or who have had hands laid on them, or who are commissioned to plant churches, or for any other reason, are to be called apostles today.

Those who are sent out can often also be called evangelists or teachers, but ‘apostle’ gives the impression of having been given the authority to break new ground – and all are called to some kind of leadership. Apostles are often linked with prophets in partnership; they are seen to need each other.

This particular passage in Ephesians 4 ensures that the five roles designated are part of a team – all of whom are needed in our churches today – and usually in the leadership. This is essentially a team of people called by Christ himself “to equip his people for works of service”. They are not a hierarchy leading from the top – but a group who, having had special privileges, are then also given a special commission to equip and enable others so that they can be on the front line.

The end result is “so that the body of Christ may be built up” – there can be no role for individuals here who do not also have right relationships with others in the areas within which they operate.

Passing on the Baton

Jesus’ final commission to the original apostles just before his ascension to his Father was to “Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them everything I have commanded you” (Matt 28:19-20).

This carried with it the assumption that the continuance of the true faith was in their hands. They were responsible for ensuring that the faith remained true to all who heard it so that the baton could be passed on to succeeding generations. They needed the Holy Spirit to do this and their fruit would be that others followed Jesus.

‘Apostle’ gives the impression of someone given the authority to break new ground.

In practice, the first apostles continued to meet together in Jerusalem, ministering to the large number of disciples there, which included many Jews. They acted as a focal co-ordinating and consulting point for the spreading Church, remaining linked throughout Paul’s ministry and beyond.

There are glimpses in Paul’s letters of their continuing role and their relationships with the expanding Church, although it was Philip who first took the Gospel to the Samaritans and Paul who then took it farther afield, with Thomas reputed to have taken the Good News to India. By the time of the first Ecumenical Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, there was no longer a Christian representation of the Jewish section of the Church and “building up in unity” had become a major issue.

In order for the baton to be passed on from one generation to another successfully, the wider apostolic role is also definitely still needed – but it is one that is sorely missed in the Church today.

If you have any other comments to add about apostles and their role – past and present - please add them below.

Charles Gardner reviews a spell-binding new book from Julia Fisher, which looks at the costly path of discipleship being followed by Jews and Arabs in Israel.

Stories of healing, restoration and forgiveness, along with a remarkable outflowing of love and reconciliation...sounds rather like the gospel accounts of when Jesus walked the land of Israel! Actually, it's also the story of what is happening there today, according to a spell-binding new book by British author-journalist Julia Fisher.

What is God doing in Israel? (Monarch Books) is a gripping account of the lives of individual Jews and Arabs who have had a supernatural encounter with Yeshua (Jesus).

In each case it has led to a dramatic transformation in their lives. And the cost of their discipleship – whether coming from a Jewish or Muslim background – has been no less demanding than that experienced by Paul and the original apostles. For there is nothing half-hearted about their faith, with passion undimmed despite painful suffering, especially through rejection by family or community.

Modern Apostles

Appropriately, therefore, the book is divided into twelve chapters, each dedicated to what I would call a true modern 'apostle'. Most of the Jewish believers included have been disowned by their families at some point – in the case of Sandy Shoshani it was 14 years before she was reconciled with her father, who subsequently gave his life to Jesus on his deathbed!

As Jesus said: "No-one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age (homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields – and with them, persecutions) and in the age to come, eternal life." (Mark 10:29)

Also featured is the more widely-known story of David and Leah Ortiz, whose teenage son Ami was virtually blown apart by a bomb (though he has since miraculously recovered). Perversely disguised as a Purim parcel, the device was sent to the family home during the Feast of Purim, when Jews exchange gifts to celebrate their rescue, by Queen Esther, from a plot to exterminate them in ancient times. The perpetrator of the atrocity, a Jewish extremist, believed the Ortiz family were betraying his people by encouraging them to follow Jesus.

As far as some of the Muslim-background believers are concerned, they have become like hunted animals after deciding to follow Christ, with Julia having to carry out interviews with a great degree of stealth and care so as not to attract attention to these brave men and women risking their lives for the sake of their Lord. Many have been tortured, imprisoned or forced to flee the land.

This gripping account tells the stories of Jewish believers who have been disowned by their families - and Muslim-background believers who have become like hunted animals after deciding to follow Christ.

The Power of True Reconciliation

The shocking irony of it all is that these persecuted believers actually hold the key to peace in this troubled region. Palestinian and Jewish believers are clearly united by their love for Yeshua, the Jewish Messiah; they pray and fellowship with one another and are a powerful demonstration of the reconciling effect of what Jesus did for them on the cross, breaking down the dividing wall of hostility and creating "one new man" out of the two (Eph 2:14).

"This is something the politicians cannot do" said Mazen Naswari, a Palestinian pastor in Jerusalem's Old City. "This love that we as believers in Jesus share, no matter what background we come from, shows that we can love one another."

Patrick Radecker was a seemingly hopeless drug addict who lived on the streets for seven years but, with the help of a rehabilitation centre in Haifa called House of Victory, he has been totally cleaned up and renewed, almost unrecognisable to those with whom he used to hang out in downtown Tel Aviv. A Jew whose family immigrated to Israel from Holland, Patrick too has developed a special love for Arabs since he started following Yeshua.

Here is the answer to conflict in the Middle East: all these people, Jews and Arabs, have found peace through the Messiah whom the prophet Isaiah foretold would be the "Prince of Peace" (Isa 9:6).

What is God Doing in Israel is out today (19 February 2016), available for purchase from Amazon or from Lion Hudson, both £8.99 + P&P (Kindle edition £8.54).

Clifford Denton continues to examine the early separation between Christianity and Judaism, looking at their theological conflicts.

One of the main factors contributing to the early rift between the Christian Church and the Jewish community was a theological conflict that emerged as biblical prophecies were interpreted through the revelation of Jesus as the expected Messiah. We will consider here the beginnings of this theological separation.

Parting of the Ways

In Chapter 4 of Our Father Abraham, Marvin Wilson considers the parting of the Church from the Synagogue. This parting of the ways was a gradual process over many centuries, but the beginnings are found in the biblical account. In Acts 5:40 we read, "They called the apostles in and had them flogged. Then they ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go." Wilson writes:

The Jerusalem Council (Acts 15)...was an alpine event. Its decision would have profound implications for both Church and Synagogue in the years to come. By calling this council, the Church took a clear stand on the issue of gentile circumcision (Acts 15:5, 28-29). This most ancient of all covenant rites would not be a prerequisite to join the still fledgling messianic community which had rapidly expanded into the gentile world. (p52)

In later years, Christian theology would be the subject of many councils, and the creeds of the Christian Church would be crafted. New divisions would begin to occur in the Christian Church itself as various denominations and sects emerged. It was inevitable, however, that the separation of Christians from the sects of Judaism would occur in the early days of the Apostles.

Dr Wilson continues:

The picture of the Church which we are able to draw at this mid-century juncture is composite. It comprised essentially three main groups. One segment was made up of traditionalists from the circumcision party. They were conservative Jewish believers, most likely from the sect of the Pharisees, and were closely tied to Temple worship and Jewish Law...the Ebionite sect probably represented the remnants of this movement, a group which did not die out until the fourth century. A second distinguishable group was the free-thinking Hellenistic party. The Hellenists had one foot planted in the turf of Judaism.

But the other, more firmly set in Greek soil, caused this group to lean to the West. A third segment held to a middle or mainstream position. It reflected the thinking of the council and presumably also the majority of the Jerusalem church (see Acts 15:22). Some of its leading voices were James, Peter ("an apostle to the Jews"), and Paul ("an apostle to the Gentiles" cf. Gal. 2:8). Through the guidance of the Holy Spirit (Acts 15:28), this influential group sought to be open to Gentiles and yet sensitive to the Jews. (emphasis added)

The Christian movement began so powerfully, and the zeal of the early believers was so great, that it could not avoid drawing attention to itself. It was recognised as a heretical sect of Judaism and so caused response from the leaders of the Jewish community who foresaw coming division. The followers of Jesus were seen as emerging from the background of Jewish life, interpreting their message from the Hebrew Scriptures, continuing to visit the Temple, preaching their message among the Jews and interpreting their faith out of Jewish symbols and traditions.

Thus the first points of division can be seen in the Bible itself, before ever a Church Council emerged in later generations.

Theological Issues

Church creeds and doctrines crystallised over the centuries as a response to many issues of contending for the faith, but this began with the Apostles. We have already mentioned the meeting in Jerusalem (Acts 15) that has come to be known as the Council of Jerusalem. As further issues came up, so discussions took place and positions were taken. The New Testament writings introduced many statements of faith, even before systematic creeds were drawn up. Paul highlighted issues of doctrine that had to be made clear as congregations in the Gentile world faced various questions. Paul's writings, in themselves, marked a separation point from other forms of Judaism.

The New Testament writings introduced many statements of faith before systematic Christian creeds were ever drawn up.

In the Introduction to the Mishnah (translated by Danby, OUP, 1933) is an interesting confirmation of this separation based on the writings of the New Testament. The sects of Judaism codified the oral traditions while the Christian Church received the New Testament, signifying the theological parting of the ways. The Mishnah became the foundation of the Talmud and the New Testament became the basis of future creeds of the Christian Church:

The Mishnah may be defined as a deposit of four centuries of Jewish religious and cultural activity in Palestine, beginning at some uncertain date (possibly during the earlier half of the second century B.C.) and ending with the close of the second century A.D. The object of this activity was the preservation, cultivation, and application to life of 'the Law' (Torah), in the form in which many generations of like-minded Jewish religious leaders had learned to understand this Law. These leaders were known in turn by the names Soferim ('Scribes') and Tannaim (lit. 'repeaters', teachers of the Oral Law).

The latter taught the religious system of the Pharisees as opposed to that of the Sadducees. Until the destruction of the Second Temple in A.D. 70 they had counted as one only among the schools of thought which played a part in Jewish national and religious life; after the Destruction they took the position, naturally and almost immediately, of sole and undisputed leaders of such Jewish life as survived. Judaism as it has continued since is, if not their creation, at least a faith and a religious institution largely of their fashioning; and the Mishnah is the authoritative record of their labour. Thus it comes about that while Judaism and Christianity alike venerate the Old Testament as canonical Scripture, the Mishnah marks the passage to Judaism as definitely as the New Testament marks the passage to Christianity. (emphasis added)

First Century: the Separation Begins

The Apostolic Council of Jerusalem was around 49 AD. 1 and 2 Corinthians was written around 54-55 AD, Romans around 55 AD and Hebrews in the 60s. Peter and Paul's martyrdoms were around 64 AD. Matthew was written in the 60s, Revelation in the late 80s or early 90s. Thus the date of the destruction of the Temple (70 AD) is embedded in the dates surrounding the significant writings and formation of the doctrines of the Christian Church.

Already the ministry of Jesus had been pivotal in the Jewish world, his crucifixion being around 30 AD. His followers then became living witnesses to their faith and so the Christian community was noticeable in the world of Judaism, it being inevitable that their beliefs would be scrutinised by the leaders of the Jewish community.

The destruction of the Temple in 70 AD is embedded in the dates surrounding the New Testament writings, and followed the pivotal ministry of Jesus, so the Christian community was already well-known in the world of Judaism.

Other early Christian writings give indications of the way theological ideas began to form among believers. For example, around 95 AD Clement, secretary of the Roman Church, wrote to the Corinthian congregation. He viewed this congregation as what we might consider to be on a par with the Essene community of Qumran, fulfilling what was prefigured in the Old Testament. Later, in his second letter, we see him treat Paul's writings on an equal footing to the Scriptures of the Old Testament. Others such as Ignatius of Antioch have left letters which build up clues to the early theology of the Christian Church.

Statement of Faith

What emerged is called the kerygma. It is a Greek word meaning, 'proclamation, announcement, preaching'. CH Dodd (The Apostolic Preaching, 1936), and others, examined early Christian writings to discover the core of Christian preaching in the early days of the Apostles. The ancient kerygma as summarised by Dodd from Peter's speeches in Acts was:

1. The Age of Fulfillment has dawned, the 'latter days' foretold by the prophets.
2. This has taken place through the birth, life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
3. By virtue of his resurrection Jesus has been exalted at the right hand of God as Messianic head of the new Israel.
4. The Holy Spirit in the church is the sign of Christ's present power and glory.
5. The Messianic Age will reach its consummation in the return of Christ.
6. An appeal is made for repentance with the offer of forgiveness, the Holy Spirit, and salvation.

Jesus Christ, of course, was the center of this ancient kerygma. The cross and resurrection are crucial to the kerygmatic preaching of Jesus. Another useful summary is found in Chronological Charts of the New Testament (Zondervan, 1981, p120) by H Wayne House:

1. The promises by God made in the Old Testament have now been fulfilled with the coming of Jesus the Messiah (Acts 2:30; 3:19,24; 10:43; 26:6-7, 22; Rom 1:2-4; 1 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-2; 1 Pet 1:10-12, 2 Pet 1:18-19).
2. Jesus was anointed by God at his baptism as Messiah (Acts 10:38).
3. Jesus began his ministry in Galilee after his baptism (Acts 10:37).
4. He conducted a beneficent ministry, doing good and performing mighty works by the power of God (Mark 10:45; Acts 2:22; 10:38).
5. The Messiah was crucified according to the purpose of God (Mark 10:45; John 3:16; Acts 2:23; 3:13-15, 18; 4:11; 10:39; 26:23; Rom 8:34; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:3; Gal 1:4; Heb 1:3; 1 Pet 1:2, 19; 3:18; 1 John 4:10).
6. He was raised from the dead and appeared to his disciples (Acts 2:24, 31-32; 3:15,26; 10:40-41; 17:31; 26:23; Rom 8:34; 10:9; 1 Cor 15:4-7, 12ff.; 1 Thess 1:10; 1 Tim 3:16; 1 Pet 1:2, 21; 3:18, 21).
7. Jesus was exalted by God and given the name 'Lord' (Acts 2:25-29, 33-36; 3:13; 10:36; Rom 8:34; 10:9; 1 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:3; 1 Pet 3:22).
8. He gave the Holy Spirit to form the new community of God (Acts 1:8; 2:14-18, 33, 38-39; 10:44-47; 1 Pet 1:12).
9. He will come again for judgment and the restoration of all things (Acts 3:20-21; 10:42; 17:31; 1 Cor 15:20-28; 1 Thess 1:10).
10. All who hear the message should repent and be baptised (Acts 2:21, 38; 3:19; 10:43, 47-48; 17:30; 26:20; Rom 1:17; 10:9; 1 Pet 3:21).

It was impossible for the differences in theology to go unnoticed as being a divergence from orthodox Judaism. Christianity, nevertheless, grew out of the Jewish background with common roots in the Tanakh, not as a new religion in the Gentile world, where it might have gone unnoticed. The centrality of Jesus the Messiah made it impossible for the Apostles to be silent and the fact that the oral traditions of Judaism (later codified as the Mishnah) made different emphasis, made it impossible for theological conflicts to be avoided.

It was impossible for Christianity to be ignored as a simple divergence from orthodox Judaism. The centrality of Jesus the Messiah made it impossible for the Apostles to be silent, and the difference between Christian doctrine and the Jewish oral traditions made theological conflict unavoidable.

Jewish Symbols

It was for the very reason that Christianity emerged from the background of Judaism that conflict occurred. On the one hand these are two branches of the same tree and, on the other hand, they are conflicting interpretations of the same Scriptures. On page 55 of Our Father Abraham, Dr Wilson presents Christianity as a radical reinterpretation of Jewish symbols and therefore ready to spark off reaction and potential parting of the ways:

The two Testaments exhibit strong continuity, but also a discontinuity. Many Old Testament institutions and themes are radically reinterpreted in the New Testament, often in ways – despite their foreshadowing – that the majority in New Testament times was unable to discern. In addition, the embodiment of the Torah in Jesus created a major tension. Jesus subordinated many of the central symbols of Judaism to himself, and the New Testament writers continued that subordination.

Thus, Jesus became the Temple (John 2:19-21) and the atoning sacrifice ("the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world" – John 1:29). At Passover the matzah, "unleavened bread," represented his body (Mark 14:22); likewise, the lamb sacrificed at Passover symbolized Jesus' sacrificial death (1 Corinthians 5:7). In addition, Jesus declared himself Lord of the Sabbath (Mark 2:27-28). He also distinguished the ritually clean from unclean (Mark 7:1-23). In sum, in early Jewish Christianity the "Sabbath, Temple, Law, sacrifices are christologically reinterpreted by the One who is greater than them all." (quoted from P. Richardson, Israel in the Apostolic Church, CUP, 1969). The overall effect was that the first-century Jewish community largely considered these teachings strange and antiritualistic, a threat to established religious beliefs of the day.

On the one hand, Christianity and Judaism are two branches of the same tree. On the other, they are radically conflicting interpretations of the same Scriptures.

For Reflection and Comment

How might the Christian Church, without compromising the Gospel, restore theological balance and heal the rift with Israel and the Jews?

Next time: Exclusion from the Synagogue.

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.