Matthew DeGioia

06NT516 - Acts and Romans

THE APOSTOLIC DECREE IN ACTS 15
The Apostolic Decree described in Acts 15:19-21, and the ambiguities therein, have
perpetuated the never-ending question of the role of the Mosaic Law (Law) in the life of the
NT believer. Part of the difficulty in interpreting the Apostolic Decree is due to its position in the
account, as well as the question of whether the nature of its contents is referring to either Jewish
or pagan practice. The Decree is situated after (1) Peter, Barnabas and Paul demonstrating that
recent events, prompted by the working of the Holy Spirit among the Gentiles, had confirmed the
acceptance of Gentiles into Gods covenant community; and (2) James finding that the inclusion
of the Gentiles into Gods covenant community was prophesied of in the OT.1 When these two
holdings are established, the anticipated conclusion is that Gentile Christians are not to be
circumcised and required to keep the Law because they have been included into the covenant
community through the same means that the Jewish Christians have been included by the
grace of the Lord Jesus.
However, instead of pronouncing such a verdict, James enters into a short discussion
about requirements for Gentile believers (Gentiles), requiring them to abstain from food
polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.
The ambiguity in James requirements is whether he is alluding to portions of the Law that are to
be kept by Gentiles, or if he is requiring Gentiles to abstain from common pagan practices.2 This
paper seeks to establish that the requirements described in Acts 15:19-21 do not have the intent

1 James determines that the testimonies of Peter, Barnabas and Paul all comport with what was prophesied in Amos
9:11-12 and Isaiah 45:21, because he recognized in what the church was witnessing of the Gentile harvest in that
day what the OT anticipated of Davids promised seed. J. Paul Tanner, Jamess Quotation of Amos 9 to Settle the
Jerusalem Council Debate in Acts 15. JETS 55, no. 1 (2012): 84.

2 These requirements seem, on the face of it, to indicate the ongoing validity of the Mosaic law for the Gentiles
after all. Alan J. Thompson, The Acts of the Risen Lord Jesus: Luke's Account of God's Unfolding Plan, NSBT 2
(Nottingham, England: Apollos, 2011) 184. Cf. Thompson, Acts of the Risen Lord Jesus, 186187.

of binding the Gentiles to the Law, but rather have the dual purpose of prohibiting immoral
pagan activity amongst Gentiles, and promoting sensitivity amongst Jews.
Some scholars, like Jervell, argue that the Apostolic Decree alludes to the regulations
described in Leviticus 1718 for sojourners among Israelites, thereby requiring Gentiles to keep
the Law, particularly the portions of the Law required for them to live together with Jews.3 It is
noteworthy that Jervell argues from the viewpoint that the reconstructed house of Israel in the
NT remains committed to the Law, as interpreted under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and that
the Gentile mission described in Acts is primarily targeting God-fearing outsiders who would
identify with Israels interests.4 Johnson, who does not appear to take a position regarding the
purpose of the Decree,5 nonetheless highlights the same allusions to Leviticus 1718 as Jervell,6
adding that Acts 15:217 appears to substantiate the view that Luke regards these conditions as
rooted in Torah, and that Torahs own norms for proselytes and sojourners [...] would be known
already to Gentiles close to the synagogue such as had converted.8 Taylor, while defending the
3 Thompson, Acts of the Risen Lord Jesus, 184185. Cf. James L. Jaquette, review of Jacob Jervell, Die
Apostelgeschichie, KEK 3; 17 (1998): 55255.

4 Jaquette, Die Apostelgeschichie, 55254.

5 Even if the text is stabilized, the meaning of the specific terms and of their overall intent (whether moral or
ritual) is not entirely clear. Luke Timothy Johnson, The Acts of the Apostles (ed. Daniel J. Harrington; Collegeville,
Minn: Liturgical Press, 1992) 266.

6 Johnson, Acts of the Apostles, 266267.

7 For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath
in the synagogues (Acts 15:21 ESV).

8 Johnson, Acts of the Apostles, 267.

view that the Decree may be alluding to Leviticus 1718,9 proposes an alternate view that casts
the Apostolic Decree within the form of proto-Noachide commandments. He describes James
as objecting to the inclusion of the Gentiles within the Abrahamic covenant, the sign of which
(circumcision) was being objected to in the chapter, and instead describing the Gentiles as the
beneficiaries of the Noachide covenant described in Genesis 9:4-6.10 To Taylor, James also
keeps [Gentiles] at a distance from the Mosaic Covenant, whose charter is precisely the
Decalogue, which explains why James does not command the Gentiles to abstain from moral
laws such as theft or perjury. While the views of Jervell and Taylor differ in terms of James OT
source, both interpret the Apostolic Decree as ascribing somewhat of a second-class status to
Gentiles, while counting them within Gods covenant people. Therefore, Jervell and Taylor both
bind the Gentiles to the Law to some extent.
By contrast, those who assert that the Apostolic Decree does not intend to bind the
Gentiles to the Law find that the purpose of the Decree was to promote unity within the church
body. It is evident that the church in Acts 15 was composed of a large contingent of Jewish
believers that desired for Gentiles to adopt Jewish customs,11 which would have led to
9 Taylor links pollutions of idols to Leviticus 17:89, consumption of blood to Leviticus 17:1014, and
forbidden sexual unions to Leviticus 18:625. He does not comment on the prohibition concerning the meat of
strangled animals. Taylor argues that these restrictions are binding to both the Israelite and the resident alien, and
that the Gentiles here are being included, not as part of the House of Israel, but as foreign residents. Justin Taylor,
The Jerusalem Decrees (Acts 15.20, 29 and 21.25) and the Incident at Antioch (Gal 2.11-14). NTS 47, no. 3
(2001): 37778.

10 In this framework, Taylor links the abstention from blood directly to Genesis 9:4 -6; sexual immorality (or
unchastity) to the nakedness of Noah in the Genesis account; and the prohibition of the pollutions of idols to a
simple practical expression of monotheism. Taylor here provides no comment regarding the meat of strangled
animals. Taylor, Jerusalem Decrees, 374377.

11 [I]t is probable that these Jewish Christians represented a wing of Judaism that was even more fanatical than
the religion as a whole or than the opposition Christ had encountered during most of his life. Craig L. Blomberg,
"The New Testament Definition of Heresy (or When Do Jesus and the Apostles Really Get Mad?)". JETS 45 (2002):
65. Cf. Darrell L. Bock, Acts. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2007), 505.

considerable tension regarding the role of the Law in daily life, as well as the pagan backgrounds
that the Gentiles were coming from. Bock emphasizes the charity that James is embodying
during the debate, particularly noting the deference and sensibility in the debate through
James appeal to the Greek version of the OT text, which would have been more familiar to the
Gentile believer.12 To counter the view that there are allusions to the ritual aspect of the Law in
the Decree, Bock emphasizes the recurring theme of Gentiles being burdened with issues of the
law, which would deter James from issuing a Decree that would have bound them to it.13 In
terms of the moral tenor of the Decree, Bock finds that the four matters from which the Gentiles
are called to abstain from are typically described in pagan contexts with cultic leanings.14
While Bock acknowledges potential allusions to Leviticus 1718, he also finds a lack of the
prohibitions verbatim in the LXX.15 Witherington and Thompson agree, finding that the Decree
forms part of a wider polemic against idolatry that is paralleled in the Pauline epistles.16
Despite the great differences in position concerning the substance of the Apostolic
Decree, I believe that the biblical text itself can test the merits of each position, as follows. First,
it is likely that Luke intends for the Decree to comport with the contents of Apostle Peters

12 Bock, Acts, 504.

13 Ibid. Cf. Johnson, Acts of the Apostles, 266. James characterizes the Pharisees demands as a form of
harassment of the Gentiles that he wants stopped.

14 Ibid, 505.

15 Ibid, 506.

16 Thompson, Acts of the Risen Lord Jesus, 186.

argument in verses 7 through 11, especially because James himself finds that Peters description
of recent events had been prophesied in Amos 9:11-12 and Isaiah 45:21. Second, in approving of
Peters argument, it is likely that James intends to adopt Peters negative disposition towards the
Law, which Peter describes as a yoke [...] that neither our fathers nor we have been able to
bear. Taking these two points into consideration, it is evident that James does not intend to
ascribe a second-class sojourner status to the Gentiles, as advocated by both Jervell and Taylor,
nor does he intend to place Gentiles under a different covenant than that of Jewish believers, as
espoused by Taylor. Here, deference in interpretation goes to James paraphrase of Amos 9:1112, which casts the Gentiles as the remnant of mankind that, when included into Gods
covenant people, will lead to the restoration of Israel. James does not appear to make a technical
distinction in covenants between Jew and Gentile believers, but rather paints with a broad stroke
to say that both are part of the same redeemed community.
At the same time, it is important to note Johnsons point that Acts 15:21 may be alluding
to the fact that the norms described in Leviticus 1718 would have already been known by
Gentiles, which may have meant that Gentiles already had the self-understanding that they were
going to be treated as the OT sojourner. The rationale of the Decree was to not trouble those of
the Gentiles who turn to God (Acts 15:19 ESV), which could be interpreted as James
encouraging the Gentiles to adopt a sojourner-like posture in their interactions with the Jews to
encourage sensitivity among them. In this light, the Decree serves as a convenient precedent for
Acts 16, which features Paul circumcising Timothy because of the Jews who were in those
places (Acts 16:3). Recognizing that such sensitivity is embodied by Paul afterwards, it would
not be out of place for the Jerusalem Council to be the source of encouraging such sensitivity.
In sum, while the Decree does not intend to bind the Gentiles to the Law, it represents a

call for the Gentiles to be winsome and sensitive to their respective audiences, particularly to
Jews. In addition, the Decree, in requiring its recipients to completely abandon immoral pagan
practices, including idolatry and improper sacrifice, embodies a call for Gentiles to turn from
idols to serve the living and true God (1 Thess. 1:9) in every sense. Both purposes of the Decree
is all for the sake of enabling the message of the Gospel to spread forth with clarity and in power
through its plain preaching.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Blomberg, Craig L. The New Testament Definition of Heresy (or When Do Jesus and the
Apostles Really Get Mad?). Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 45, no. 1,
2002.
Bock, Darrell L. Acts. Grand Rapids, Mich: Baker Academic, 2007.
Jaquette, James L. Review of Jacob Jervell, Die Apostelgeschichie. Kritisch-exegetischer
Kommentar ber das Neue Testament (Meyer-Kommentar) 3; no. 17 (1998): 55255.
Johnson, Luke T. The Acts of the Apostles. Edited by Daniel J. Harrington. Collegeville, Minn.:
Liturgical Press, 1992.
Tanner, J. Paul. Jamess Quotation of Amos 9 to Settle the Jerusalem Council Debate in Acts 15.
Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 55, no. 1, 2012.
Taylor, Justin. The Jerusalem Decrees (Acts 15.20, 29 and 21.25) and the Incident at Antioch
(Gal 2.11-14). New Testament Studies 47, no. 3, 2001.
Thompson, Alan J. The Acts of the Risen Lord Jesus: Luke's Account of God's Unfolding Plan.
NSBT 27. Nottingham, England: Apollos, 2011.