Ac 15:1-21
9 May 2010
6th Sunday of Easter
“Table Manners (part 2)”
When I was in junior high school, I took a class called Speech. As the name suggests, the purpose of the class was to give speeches—to practice public speaking before our fellow classmates. For me, the toughest assignment was when we had to deliver a speech that was humorous in nature. Our teacher told us we have to be funny.
I don’t remember the topic that I addressed, but I was convinced it would be quite amusing. I sure thought it was funny, but I guess I was the only one. There was not a single laugh to be heard. Of course, being nervous does hinder one’s ability to be funny. (I still remember the guy who got the most laughs. He didn’t even bother to prepare a speech. He simply ripped off a skit from Saturday Night Live!)
My main reason for starting with that Speech class was another assignment our teacher gave us that semester: speaking on a controversial issue. He asked us about various topics and the way we felt about them. Our job was to make a convincing case for the position we believed in. Then we had to make a convincing argument for the other point of view. Our teacher let us know that if we weren’t equally convincing for the other side, our grade would be affected!
That’s one of the few assignments I even remember from that school. I think everyone needs to have that kind of experience. It helps greatly in trying to understand what makes the other person tick, which, by the way, is not the same thing as simply surrendering your own ideas.
In Acts 15, we’ve arrived at the first major controversy in the early church. This is the story of the Jerusalem council. It serves as the heart of the book of Acts, both in terms of where it appears in the text and as the identity of the young church. As I said last week, how the church defines itself is still very much in question. According to verse 2, there is “no small dissension and debate” on the matter. The Good News Bible calls it “a fierce argument.”
The underlying question remains as to how the followers of Jesus, the Jewish Messiah, relate to the rest of the world. This body known as the church, which has begun as a sect within Judaism, more and more is including elements that are Gentile. And unlike Cornelius—who I noted last week to be a “God-fearer,” one who admires the Jewish faith and tries to live according to its precepts—these Gentiles show little understanding of, and for some, little interest in, the Jewish religion. The dust-up with Peter in chapter 11 has done almost nothing to resolve these concerns.
Fast forward several years. By this time, the church is spreading throughout the Roman Empire. And Paul, who once had a reputation for bringing the pain to Christians, has had a literal change of heart. As much as anyone, he’s now standing with those he sought to hurt—Paul is now making the case that he once opposed. He must be convincing; Gentiles are coming to the faith. (I think he would have gotten a good grade in my Speech class!)
Paul,
Barnabas, and their companions have been traveling through Cyprus and the
southern part of Asia Minor. They have returned to Antioch, where the Bible
says “the disciples were first called ‘Christians’”
(11:26). This is where the group from
Judea has arrived, and this is their message:
“Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot
be saved” (v. 1).
Last week,
I spoke about the “table manners,” by way of ritual purity laws, that cause
Jews to believe Gentiles are automatically
unclean. There’s a laundry list of these
laws, but eating improper food and circumcision for males are a couple that get
plenty of notice. Jews coming into
contact with Gentiles must themselves undergo ritual purification ceremonies.
You know, it would make
getting together a little difficult.
It’s almost like having a life-long restraining order!
Here’s how
Luke lays it out. When Paul and his
friends “came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles
and the elders, and they reported all that God had done with them. But some believers who belonged to the sect
of the Pharisees stood up and said, ‘It is necessary for them to be circumcised
and ordered to keep the law of Moses’” (vv.4-5).
So, do these boys have a
case? By insisting that the Gentiles
follow the law of Moses, are they just being obstinate? Are they simply being the party of “no”?
Before we answer that, it
should be said that the Pharisees get plenty of bad press in the New Testament. I would add, unfairly so. Today, when we hear the word “Pharisee,” it
almost always is used as an insult. But
if we look at the history, we see that wasn’t always so.
In a sermon last month, I said
that the Pharisees arise in the time between the Old and New Testaments,
especially when the Greeks rule the Middle East. Something to bear in mind is that the
Pharisees and the Sadducees are rivals—they are competing parties. While the Sadducees reflect the interests of
the aristocratic and priestly classes, the Pharisees reflect the interests of
the lower classes. They try to be a
party for the people. The threat of
Greek customs eroding a distinctively Jewish identity has them concerned.
Now they’re being ruled by yet
another empire, the Romans. That same
concern is still there. They don’t want
to be assimilated; they don’t want to lose their identity. With its state-of-the-art road system and
seaports, the Roman Empire probably enjoys the easiest flow of people and ideas
yet seen in human history. It’s becoming
a brand new world, which is a cause for both celebration and concern.
Having said all that, can we
see how the Pharisees arguing with Paul and Barnabas might have a legitimate
case? Can we acknowledge that they
aren’t simply being stubborn? We don’t
have to totally agree with them to see that they do have some justifiable
concerns. And as it turns out, the
Jerusalem council seems to reach the same conclusion.
At the end of our passage, we
can see that the council does throw them a bone. Verse 20 states that “we should write to [the
Gentiles] to abstain only from things polluted by idols and from fornication
and from whatever has been strangled and from blood.”
The Gentiles are asked to
avoid food that has been offered to idols or that still contains blood. (No rare steak!) They also need to observe the stricter Jewish
standards when it comes to sex. As the
late F. F. Bruce put it, “This would smooth the path of social and table
fellowship between Christians of Jewish and Gentile birth.”[1]
Verse 21 assures everyone that
the law of Moses isn’t being neglected, saying that “in every city, for
generations past, Moses has had those who proclaim him, for he has been read
aloud every sabbath in the synagogues.”
There’s no attempt to, so to speak, throw the baby out with the bath
water.
Nonetheless, let me remind us
of something I spoke about last week. It’s
inevitable that we do have differences and distinctions, but encouraging the
ones that crush human life are not to be tolerated. Diversity is a fact of life. How we handle it is a different question.
The story is told about the
student who goes to the rabbi and says, “Teacher, you have taught that all of
us are created in the image of God.” The
rabbi responds, “Yes, that is true.”
“Well then,” the student replies, “how is it that we come in so many
different colors and shapes and sizes?”
The rabbi answers, “Because we have been created in the image of God.”
In Acts 15, the Jerusalem
council goes along with the distinctions about food and sex. But remember Peter’s argument in verses 10
and 11: “why are you putting God to the
test by placing on the neck of the [Gentile] disciples a yoke that neither our
ancestors nor we have been able to bear?
On the contrary, we believe that we will be saved through the grace of
the Lord Jesus, just as they will.” He’s
talking about the vast array of laws they’ve been debating.
And in the decision, James,
the respected elder of the Jerusalem church, agrees with that. “I have reached the decision,” he says, “that
we should not trouble those Gentiles who are turning to God” (v. 19). Later in the chapter, the letter they draft
reads “it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to impose on you no
further burden than these essentials,” which are the, relatively speaking,
minor provisions we just looked at (v. 28).
They are careful to not
endorse differences and distinctions that crush human life. They strongly assert the good news. Salvation—life itself—comes through Jesus
Christ, not through shouldering a heavy yoke of rules and regulations. Over and over, we need to remind ourselves of
that.
It is very easy for us to
encourage, not human life, but subhuman life.
Last week, I asked us to think about a couple of things. What is it within us that seeks to
exclude? What is it that we fear? In reality, we use fear to stifle the full
expression of human life. We force each
other to behave in subhuman—call it reptilian—ways. Reptiles aren’t very good at expressing love
and hope! The reptilian part of our
brain isn’t very good with complex ideas and emotions.
We tend to fear what we don’t
understand. That assignment in my Speech
class I mentioned at the beginning—where we had to argue for both sides of the question—that’s
nothing more than educating
ourselves. That means not limiting
ourselves to those who already agree with us.
I’m absolutely convinced that
learning about, and being friends with, people who disagree with me religiously
and politically has greatly helped me.
It has made me a better Christian.
For example, learning about Buddhism or Islam—and even more, getting to
know Buddhists and Muslims as people—helps to dispel the paranoia and bigotry
that I know is in me.
Yet at the same time, to the
extent I’ve allowed myself to do that, I’ve gotten to know Jesus better. How can I share Jesus with others if I don’t
know and love him myself?
Acts 15 presents the first
major controversy in the early church. Our
spiritual ancestors trust the Holy Spirit to guide them through the
debate. They reach a decision. Does that mean that the issue never again arises?
Of course not. As I’ve suggested, each generation has its own
spin on table manners. Maybe more important
than their pronouncement is the process.
We can learn from them. We can learn to trust the Holy Spirit, even when
it looks like the only options are either fighting or surrendering our Christian
identity. In fact, the more hopeless the
options look, the greater the need to trust the Spirit who leads us into all the
truth and who raised Jesus from the dead.