Acts 15:13–18

Peter had made an admirable introduction, and his argument reflected the grace of the Lord Jesus. It was right and fitting for Peter, the apostle to the Jews, to speak this way. He spoke not only from his own experience but from the sovereign choice of God. We can understand the effect: the whole crowd fell silent. No one could doubt Peter's strong Jewish prejudice. And no one could now question his claim that the Gentiles were free from the law. But there was another reason for the silence. They also listened as Barnabas and Paul told what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles.

It is not certain that he was an apostle. Probably he was not. He was at the head of the Jewish church at Jerusalem. That is why the angel of the Lord, after bringing Peter out of prison, tells him to go and show these things to James and to the brothers (Acts 12:17).

The disputing is now silenced, and God gives James grace to speak for Him with authority. His letter makes it clear that he was no lax or careless man. The Jews of Jerusalem clearly held him in high regard.

Either he was the apostle James, son of Alphaeus, or he was not. If he was, he gave his voice as an apostle, and he spoke after the others. He was also the most Jewish of them all — the very leader of Jewish thought and feeling, as Galatians 2:12 shows, and other passages confirm — not to speak of his being the Lord's brother, which it appears he was. Here the Jews were forcing circumcision on the Gentiles. In a case like that his voice counted most, and it would close the question the assembly had been discussing. Peter and Paul had declared God's ways in their active ministry. Now James, the vessel of Jewish thought, brings in the conclusion of the matter.

James then summed up. Peter was evidently not regarded as president of the gathering. Nor did James pronounce sentence because he was "the first bishop of Jerusalem," as some claim. A single bishop in a city was unknown in those days. Where bishops existed at all, there were several of them in every place (Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:5). The truth is that God the Holy Spirit was present in that gathering. He saw a divine fitness in using James, the most intensely Jewish man in the company, to speak the decree that set the Gentiles free.

James answers, saying that Simeon (Simon Peter) has told how God first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name (vv. 13, 14). This is a most important statement in its way. It gives a distinct character to God's present work... It asserts a special gathering out at this present time. It leaves no room for the empty idea that the gospel will bring even one whole nation to confess the Lord, and still less that all nations will be so changed. The truth is that, while Jesus is at God's right hand, God proposes only to take out of them all a people for His name. This is the church of God. It is as distinct from God's ways before the cross as from the ways that will follow the Lord's appearing and reign.

Jerusalem is the place where the matter is settled, and for a reason. The Jewish yoke is to come off the necks of the Gentiles, finally and forever, and no other hands could do it so well. It is an act of giving up supposed rights, and those who are thought to hold the rights must be the ones to do it. After all, in truth the decision is that God has settled the matter, and they have nothing to do but bow to what He has done.

Then James, who held the first place at Jerusalem (see Acts 12:17; 21:18; Gal. 2:12), sums up the judgment of the assembly, and no one opposes it. By the help of the Holy Spirit he gives definite form to the thought of God, expressing His will about the Gentiles.

This is the name James uses for Simon Peter in Acts 15:14. In 2 Peter 1:1 the Greek also has the name Simeon.

This is a most important statement in its way. It gives a distinct character to the present work of God. It in no way denies that God had a line of saints in Israel, and before Israel, and, what is more, outside Israel. But it says that God is making a special gathering "out" at this present time. It leaves no room for the empty notion that the gospel will bring even one whole nation to confess the Lord, still less that all nations will be so changed. The truth is that while Jesus is at God's right hand, God's plan is only to take out of all a people for His name. This is the church of God, as distinct from God's ways before the cross as from those that follow the Lord's appearing and reign.

God does not send the gospel among the nations to convert them as nations, and so make the earth a fit place for Christ to return to. He sends it to convert people one by one, and they are then taken out from the nations to be His special possession. If we are wrong on this point we shall be wrong about the whole character of the period in which we live. The gospel goes out so that a chosen people from both Jews and Gentiles may be called out, and that chosen people is the church of God.

At the memorable council in Jerusalem, the gathering debated whether to force Jewish practice on Gentile Christians. There James points back to the Apostle Peter, and says that God first visited the Gentiles [Greek, ethnos] to take out of them a people [Greek, laos] for His Name. There is no such thing as a Christian nation [Greek, ethnos] in God's ways. Out of the nations God selects a people [Greek, laos] for Himself.

And all whom the grace of God takes out in this way have the Holy Spirit living in them. They are part of the church which Christ loved and for which He gave Himself.

Note in verses 14-18 the four important steps: 1. God visits the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for His Name. This is the purpose of the present age. The called people constitute the church, the body of Christ. 2. After this I will return. This means the second Coming of Christ. When the church is complete and all its members are in that body, Christ comes again. 3. The Restoration of Israel follows after His Return. God will build the tabernacle of David again and set it up. 4. Then all the Gentiles will seek after the Lord.

He says, "Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles." For what? To convert them all? The very reverse: "to take from them a people for His name." Nothing can be clearer than this. It sets before us what ought to be the great object of all missionary work. Every missionary whom God sends and teaches will keep this in mind in all his blessed work.

James now clinches the matter by quoting their Old Testament Scriptures. ... He was quoting the prophet Amos, supporting with Scripture authority what had gone before.

Scripture shows us one of its own statements accepted as final in the great council of the apostles at Jerusalem (Acts 15:15-19). That statement governed not merely one believer (even allowing that he is a "spiritual man"!), but the whole Church of God.

Amos 9:11-12 is quoted in Acts 15, but not to show that the prophecy had then come true. It is quoted to prove that God had always meant to have a people from among the Gentiles. So the language of the prophets agreed with what Simon Peter had been telling them about what God had done in his days. This is not the fulfilment of a prophecy. It is the establishing of a principle by the mouth of the prophets, and also by the word of the Spirit through Simon Peter.

James quotes the broad fact from the Greek version, and it agrees with the principle the prophets laid down in general: that all the nations should be called by the Lord's name. The Lord has not yet raised up the tent of David, and James's quotation does not hint that He has. Neither he nor any other apostle ever says that the church of God is the same thing as the tent of David. The whole system that identifies them is foreign to Scripture and opposed to it... this error lowers our own dignity, and robs the ancient people of that hope for which God's providence keeps them despite their present unbelief.

The word given through Amos answered directly for James in Acts 15. There the apostle was insisting on the independence of Gentile believers: no one was to require them to be circumcised or to take up the customs of Israel. Amos hints at this, and James quotes him, to show that God would adopt the Gentiles (or have His name called on them acceptably) in a way quite independent of the Jews.

It is an error to think that these last words refer to the mystery of joining believing Gentiles with faithful Jews in one body, the church. Romans 16:25-26 and Ephesians 3:5-6 do refer to that mystery. Our text does not. It speaks of God's gracious recognition of those among the nations who believe as His own, though they are still Gentiles — whether under the gospel now or in the future kingdom.

James quotes from the Greek version of Amos, and not even from that with exactness. But on the point in hand — Gentiles to be called by God's name — he quotes the Greek word for word.

So the Spirit used Amos to serve two great occasions in the New Testament history of the Church: Stephen's words in Acts 7 and James' words in Acts 15. We might think of Amos as a distant and unnoticed part of the word of God. But it is beautiful to see in this way that we are to live "by every word of God." We do not know in what obscure corner of the book that Scripture may lie which the Holy Spirit has fitted and destined to stand by the soul in the trying hour.

This is the well-known principle James applied at the council in Jerusalem: under the gospel God has the right to accept Gentiles without circumcising them. His argument is that they do not need to become Jews in all but name to get the blessing of God and to bear His name. To be circumcised is, in practice, to stop being a Gentile and to become a Jew. But now God is really making not Jews but Christians. So forcing circumcision on Gentiles who believed was a complete mistake.

In the words James quotes (and he quotes them from the Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament), the point is this: "all the Gentiles upon whom My name is called." So they were not to trouble the Gentiles. As for "the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down," that has nothing to do with why he quotes the passage.

The word 'tabernacle' sometimes means a temporary dwelling place, which can be new — see Matthew 17:4. At other times it means a dwelling place in ruins. That is the sense here. The 'house of David' has 'fallen', that is, it has fallen into ruin. David's descendants lived under Roman occupation, they had no king, and so on. But God would rebuild 'its ruins'.

God would not allow Judah and Israel merely to flourish as separate powers. He will reunite them and establish the rights of the united kingdom. He will wall up their breaches, for the breaches were many, some from weakness inside and some from violence outside.

Note in verses 14-18 the four important steps: 1. God visits the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for His Name. This is the purpose of the present age. The called people constitute the church, the body of Christ. 2. After this I will return. This means the second Coming of Christ. When the Church is complete and all its members have been added to that body, Christ comes again — first, as later revealed, for His saints, and then with them. 3. The Restoration of Israel follows after His Return. The Tabernacle of David will be built again and will be set up. 4. Then all the Gentiles will seek after the Lord.

The book of Acts is not a history of the Church as such, but of the change from Judaism into Christianity. James does not quote this scripture to prove that the tabernacle of David had been rebuilt. It certainly is not rebuilt yet. He quotes it to show that Gentiles come within the blessed purposes of God's grace. In other words, this passage says nothing about the Church.

The 'tabernacle of David' will be built up to a state far better and higher than 'in the days of old'. This will be under the thousand-year reign of Christ, when He has put down every enemy and reigns in righteousness and peace.

He quotes Amos 9:11-12, which shows that Gentiles would be blessed by having God's name called on them, and that this goes with the rebuilding of the tabernacle of David. Of course, Christ is the true Prince of the house of David, and in Christ alone Gentiles as well as Jews find blessing.

In James' citation (and he is quoting from the Septuagint), the point is, "all the Gentiles upon whom my name is called"; so they were not to trouble the Gentiles. As for "the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down," this has nothing to do with his object in quoting the passage.

Here is the well-known principle James applied at the council of Jerusalem. He applied it to God's right to recognise Gentiles under the gospel without circumcising them. His argument is that they do not need to become Jews in effect to receive God's blessing and to bear His name. For to be circumcised is in practice to be no longer a Gentile, but to become a Jew. Whereas God is now really making not Jews but Christians. So forcing circumcision on Gentiles who believed was a complete mistake.

Before this they had no connection with the name of God — that is, the Jehovah of Israel (Isaiah 63:19). Yet Amos (Amos 9:12) prophesied of Gentiles who would be called by His name. Acts 15:14, 17 shows how that part of the prophecy found a measure of fulfilment when Peter baptised Cornelius and his household.

It is an error to suppose that these last words allude to the mystery of forming believing Gentiles with faithful Jews into one body, the church. Romans 16:25-26 and Ephesians 3:5-6 do refer to that mystery, but our text does not. It simply speaks of God's gracious recognition of those of the nations who believe as His own, though they are still Gentiles. This is true under the gospel now and in the future kingdom. Union with Christ the Head as His body goes much further, and it is said of Gentiles now as of believing Jews. But no Old Testament prophet reveals it.

James draws from the testimony of the prophets the principle that Gentiles, as Gentiles, have the Lord's name called on them; the one prophet he cites proves it. The nations were so far from having to accept circumcision that the prophet speaks of all the Gentiles. This will be in the days of the kingdom, as no Jew could deny. They will not become Jews any more than the Jews will become Gentiles; both will be blessed of the Lord in their respective positions when the Messiah reigns. It was absurd, therefore, to object to God's grace toward the Gentiles now.

Note in verses 14-18 the four important steps: 1. God visits the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for His Name. This is the purpose of the present age. The called people constitute the church, the body of Christ. 2. After this I will return. This means the second Coming of Christ. 3. The Restoration of Israel follows after His Return. The Tabernacle of David will be built again and will be set up. 4. Then all the Gentiles will seek after the Lord.

James quotes a passage whose scope has nothing to say to the matter. The Septuagint reads, "that the residue of men might seek after the Lord." The Hebrew reads, "that they may possess the remnant of Edom."

So we see what was in James's mind. What Peter and Paul and Barnabas had pressed was in line with what the prophets declared. It was not in conflict with them, but in agreement. He does not say more than this. He does not mean that this was their fulfilment... The prophets teach that the Lord's name should be called on the Gentiles, not when they become Jews. So their blessing and recognition agreed with prophecy. God owned Gentiles as Gentiles. They did not have to be circumcised and become practical Jews. Yet the name of the Lord was called on them.

They of the nations did not have to accept circumcision at all: the prophet speaks of all the Gentiles. This will happen in the days of the kingdom, as no Jew could deny. They will not become Jews, any more than the Jews will become Gentiles. When the Messiah reigns, the Lord will bless both in their own places.

"Known unto God are all His works from aion" (Acts 15:18), where we cannot say "from the age."... "From the beginning of the world" might suit the context, but it would be no translation. And what lies outside that beginning of the world? Surely, eternity. In this sense then "from eternity" would suit, and all the occurrences would be in harmony.

God has never adopted any remedies. He has arranged all His works according to the counsel of His own wisdom. True, to our short sight His works may look like remedies. That is because He will let the creature fail under the highest possible advantages, and so show that His purpose alone can stand. But there is a fulness of time when what is in His mind unfolds, and His own eternal counsel is what appears last. God planned and secured all the blessing and glory in Christ Jesus before the world began.

What is worthy of God to do is worthy of God — and worthy of Him alone — to determine beforehand, or from eternity. Deciding beforehand, or predestination, does not change what He does at its appointed time. It only clears it of the mark of an afterthought, which would imply weakness and change in Him.

It is a mistake to suppose that these last words refer to the mystery of forming believing Gentiles with faithful Jews into one body, the church. Romans 16:25-26 and Ephesians 3:5-6 do refer to that mystery, but not our text, which simply speaks of God's gracious recognition of those of the nations who believe as His own, though still Gentiles — whether under the gospel now or in the future kingdom. Union with Christ as Head, as His body, goes much further, and no Old Testament prophet reveals it.

Verse 18 is used in a pointed way to back up the significance of all this... God was not taken by surprise, but had ordered these matters in this way in eternity past. Of course, mankind knew nothing of this until God revealed it. But when He sees fit to change the way He deals with people, they should be gladly willing to submit.