Is It Grace Plus Works?

“Is It Grace Plus Works?”

Acts 15:1-23

Paul and Barnabas had just returned from their first missionary journey (Acts 13:4-14:28). While they were sharing about their experiences in Antioch we are told, “And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” (v. 1) The church’s mission to the Gentiles was gathering momen-tum. The trickle of Gentile conversions had become a flood. The problem now became how these Gentile converts were to become a part of what had been a predominantly Jewish body. The message Paul and Barnabas had been preached was simple: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved.” They believed salvation was by grace alone through faith alone. Gentile converts were being welcomed into the fellowship by baptism without circumcision. They were becoming Christians without first having to become Jews.

The specific issue of circumcision has long since passed away as a concern to us; but the principle behind it is very, very present with us today. The enemy has simply changed the issues. Substitute baptism, or separation issues, or speaking in tongues, or the necessity of good works for circumcision and you bring the problem right up to date. They said, “unless you are circumcised…. you cannot be saved.” But what is the problem and why was it so dangerous? They were attempting to mix law and grace. To add anything whether it is baptism or good works or whatever it may be as a requirement for salvation is to diminish grace.

Paul puts it very clearly in his letter to the church at Galatia (3:1-3). “You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. (2) I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard? (3) Are you so foolish? After beginning by means of the Spirit, are you now trying to finish by means of the flesh? (Galatians 3:1-3 -NIV)

We can just imagine how Satan wanted to take advantage of this situation. First, he wanted the false doctrine of works righteousness to succeed. But even if it didn’t, Satan wanted a costly, bitter doctrinal war to complete split and sour the church. This may be the greatest threat to the work of the gospel seen in the Book of Acts! The problems that confronted the church at Antioch seem easier to understand if we keep several things in mind. First, all of these men who came down from Jerusalem were evidently sincere. I don’t know that they came down trying to make trouble; they were deeply committed to their conviction that unless a Gentile first became a Jew by circumcision then, he had no right to call himself a Christian.

Secondly, no doubt these men had Scriptures to back up what they believed. (The Pharisees who believed might quote in defense of their position are Exodus 12:48-49 and Isaiah 56:6. These passages might be quoted to say that the covenant the Gentiles were invited to join was a covenant of circumcision.) Their position even seemed to be supported by the church at Jerusalem.

Luke says that when this group arrived in the city they stirred up “no small dissension and dispute” (v. 2). After the Judaizers arrived apparently Peter began to act differently. Apparently before they came Peter “would eat with the Gentiles” but after they arrived they persuaded Peter to withdraw and “separated himself” from the Gentiles. (Gal. 2:12). Not only would this have hurt the feelings of the Gentiles and created a dissension within the body, it made Peter look like a hypocrite (Gal. 2:13). But even beyond Paul says that were not acting in accordance with “the truth of the Gospel.” (v.14)

First, The Dispute. (15:1-6)

Verse two says, “Therefore, when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem, to the apostles and elders, about this question. (3) So, being sent on their way by the church, they passed through Phoenicia and Samaria, describing the conversion of the Gentiles; and they caused great joy to all the breth-ren. (4) And when they had come to Jerusalem, they were received by the church and the apostles and the elders; and they reported all things that God had done with them.”

When the dispute could not be settled within this local body they decided to appeal to the church at Jeru-salem. It is a reasonable suggestion for several reasons. First it was where the apostles would be found, or at least some of them. Secondly, it was the church it would seems that the Judaizers had come from and since the Judaizers seem to have given the impression that they spoke for the apostles and the church at Jerusalem, who would have been better to confirm their teachings or to confront their error?