1 / 10

Jerusalem Conference

Jerusalem Conference. (“Apostolic Council”). Background on the Jewish Ritual of Circumcision.

sarai
Télécharger la présentation

Jerusalem Conference

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Jerusalem Conference (“Apostolic Council”)

  2. Background on the Jewish Ritual of Circumcision • The Jewish practice of circumcision as a religious ritual goes back to Genesis 17, where God tells Abraham to circumcise himself and his descendants as a sign of belonging to the covenant people of God. • By the Second Temple period, circumcision had become a key distinction of the Jewish people, marking them off from the pagan Gentiles (who often ridiculed the Jewish practice as rather barbaric). • Male Jews who were born into the faith were circumcised as infants when they were eight days old. (According to Luke 2, baby Jesus was circumcised in keeping with Jewish custom.) • Gentiles who wished to convert to Judaism (proselytes) were circumcised as part of the conversion process (which also involved a kind of baptism and a temple sacrifice). Circumcision symbolized their becoming part of the covenant people and obligated them to observe the Jewish law and rituals just as if they had been born Jewish. • The issue for the early Christians was whether or not to continue this ancient Jewish practice. Can we claim to be the true Israel, God’s covenant people, without adopting the sign? How “Jewish” does the church need to be in observing the Jewish law and customs?

  3. Arguments for Christian Practice of Circumcision Some conservative Jewish Christians (sometimes called “Judaizers”) insisted that all Christians should be circumcised. Jewish Christians would have already been circumcised as infants, but Gentiles joining the church would have to be circumcised as part of their conversion (so the Judaizers demanded). We do not know exactly what arguments the Judaizers made to support their position, since none of their writings have survived. But the following arguments may reasonably be inferred from the NT discussions of the issue (mainly in Acts, Galatians, Romans, and Philippians): • The practice of circumcision is biblical. God commanded it in Genesis 17. (Keep in mind that for the early church what we call the OT was their whole Bible; there was no NT yet.) • Circumcision is the God-given sign of belonging to God’s covenant people. How can we claim to be Abraham’s heirs and recipients of the covenant promises of salvation without adopting the sign? • Jesus, the apostles, and all of the earliest Christians were circumcised. Those wishing to admit Gentiles without circumcision are turning the church into something it has never been, making it un-Jewish, removing it from its origin in God’s ancient covenant with Israel. • Circumcision is a sign of submission to God’s law as revealed in scripture. If we don’t circumcise Gentile converts and put them under the discipline of the commandments, how can they have proper moral guidance?

  4. Arguments against Christian Practice of Circumcision Jewish Christians connected with Antioch (such as Paul and Barnabas) pioneered a mission to Gentiles without requiring circumcision. This precipitated the Apostolic Council, where the Jerusalem apostles (Peter, John, and James) recognized the basic legitimacy of their mission. But some Jewish Christians did not buy into the agreement, so Paul had to keep defending his position. In several letters (notably Galatians, Romans, and Philippians), he makes detailed arguments against requiring that Gentile Christians be circumcised. • In Genesis 15:6, God recognized Abraham’s righteousness based on his faith, even before his circumcision and before the giving of the law. Therefore, it is faith, not circumcision and the law, that makes us heirs of Abraham and the covenant promises. • To require circumcision would imply that righteousness before God is based on works of law instead of faith, but works of law is a dead-end path since no one can keep the law perfectly (and even if they did, it would just make them arrogant). • It is evident in the Gentile mission that God is saving Gentiles and filling them with the Holy Spirit on the basis of their faith in Christ even though they have not been circumcised. To impose a circumcision requirement would surely hinder this mission. • Even without circumcising the Gentile Christians and putting them under the Jewish law, they still have the moral guidance of the law of love. Jesus himself said that whenever we love our neighbor as ourselves we have fulfilled the whole law. And the indwelling Holy Spirit provides guidance and power for loving the neighbor.

  5. Controversy in Antioch • After First Journey, controversy erupts over inclusion of Gentiles (Acts 15:1-3). • Some from Jerusalem were demanding that Gentile converts be “circumcised.” • Paul, Barnabas, and Antioch church had not been requiring it. • “Circumcision” was the key Jewish “sign of the covenant,” going back to Abraham (Gen. 17). • Male Jews were circumcised as infants. • Gentile converts to Judaism were circumcised as adults, marking them as Jews and putting them under obligation to follow Jewish law, rituals, and customs ( such as observing Sabbath, holy days, eating kosher food, etc.) • Issue is whether Gentiles (as such) can join church and be Christian or whether they have to become Jews first and follow Jewish rituals and customs. • When no resolution was found in Antioch, the debate was moved to Jerusalem for a high-level “Conference.”

  6. Jerusalem Conference(Acts 15:4-29) • Key participants: • Paul, Barnabas, and Titus represent Antioch. • Peter, John, and James the brother of Jesus represent Jerusalem. • Key issue: Must Gentile converts be circumcised and follow Jewish law and customs in order to be saved and belong to the church. • The debate: • Pharisaic Christians demand circumcision and following Jewish law as necessary for salvation. • Peter recalls experience of Gentiles receiving Spirit and having their hearts cleansed by faith/grace apart from yoke of law. • Paul and Barnabas recall their experiences among Gentiles. • James the brother of Jesus proposes the resolution: • Circumcision and keeping whole law will not be required. • Compromise requirements known as “Apostolic Decree”: • Gentiles must abstain from food offered to idols; • from sexual immorality; • and from meat not ritually slaughtered (v. 20).

  7. Jerusalem Conference(Galatians 2:1-10) • Most scholars think Gal. 2 is Paul’s account of the Jerusalem Conference. • Two main differences from Acts 15: • Timing: in Acts, it is Paul’s 3rd visit to Jerusalem after his conversion; in Galatians, it is his 2nd visit to Jerusalem. • Substance: Galatians does not report the compromise requirements known as “Apostolic Decree” and seems to rule them out (“they added nothing to me”). • Possible explanations of timing discrepancy: • Acts and Galatians report 2 different meetings on circumcision issue (not likely). • Galatians omits a visit to Jerusalem (not likely). • There is some confusion in Acts’ chronology (more likely).

  8. Jerusalem Conference(Galatians 2:1-10) • 4. Problem of compromise requirements known as “Apostolic Decree”: • Paul never mentions it (in Gal. or elsewhere) and does not follow it (1 Cor. 8-10 allows eating idol-meat under certain conditions). • Even Acts 21:25 assumes Paul does not know these requirements. • These rules may have been formulated by Jerusalem church after Conference as way of allowing Jewish Christians keeping kosher to fellowship with Gentile Christians who were not. • May be Christian adaptation of Rabbinic “Noachian laws,” a list of minimal restrictions that allowed Gentiles to have close contact with observant Jews. • Attempts to impose these restrictions on Antioch church may have precipitated the “incident in Antioch” (Gal. 2:11-16).

  9. Significance of Jerusalem Conference • Most important event in early history of church. • Preserved unity between Paul and Jerusalem leadership. • Opened the door for a wider mission to Gentiles. • Paved the way for the eventual separation of Christianity from Judaism. (If the circumcision requirement had prevailed, Christianity would have remained a sect of Judaism.) • There remained a faction not buying the agreement; they will keep pressing the issue; Paul will have to fight this battle again and again.

  10. “Incident in Antioch” (Galatians 2:11-16) • Recorded only in Gal. 2 (not in Acts). • Involves a visit of Peter (Cephas) to Antioch. • First he ate with uncircumcised Gentile Christians. • Then, under pressure from representatives of James, he refused to eat with Gentiles. (Perhaps James was trying to impose “Apostolic Decree” restrictions on Antioch church.) • Peter’s refusal to eat with Gentiles caused other Jewish Christians (including Barnabas) to break fellowship as well – splitting the church. • Paul publicly denounced Peter’s action. • No resolution is reported. Possibly, the church sided with Peter/James against Paul, who then went independent. • This episode likely had much to do with the split between Paul and Barnabas at the beginning of the Second Journey.

More Related