Freedom from the Law

There's something I've wanted to say for a while.

It's about the Council at Jerusalem.

I feel it's important to understand that the decision of the Council at Jerusalem meant Gentile believers were not required to keep Moses' Law.

I realise some people think the reason the Council decided to impose only a few requirement on the Gentiles, was because Moses' Law was already being read every sabbath and they expected the Gentiles to go along and hear it and do it.

But if the Apostles expected the Gentiles to keep Moses' Law, what was the conflict about?

If that's what the Apostles in Jerusalem meant, no dispute could have arisen in the first place.

If that's what Paul had always expected of his converts, then what need would he have felt to travel all the way to Jerusalem to confront the issue!

Paul was not at all happy with the people who infiltrated his churches, teaching that his converts must keep the Law.

When James decided that no such burden should be placed on the Gentiles, he was referring to the obligation to keep Moses' Law. Nothing else.

The reason James mentioned Moses being read every sabbath would have been something along these lines:

"Lets not expect the Gentile congregations to keep Moses' Law. Instead lets write to them merely to avoid food offered to idols, blood, things strangled, and fornication. This won't deny anybody in the congregation anything, seeing those who really want to can always go to their local synagogue to hear whatever else they wish to hear."

It certainly wasn't that James expected the Gentiles to keep Moses' Law. Otherwise he would have been contradicting himself and the whole episode makes no rhyme nor reason.

The congregations Paul founded were predominantly Gentile. But there would have been a number of Jews in the congregations also who, being Jewish, may still have desired to keep their national traditions.

By deciding not to demand adherence to Moses' Law in the churches, none of these members of the congregations would be denied from hearing about their national traditions, or from following their conscience, seeing they could always access such things at any local synagogue.

Thus peace was attained between the consciences of both Jewish and Gentile members of the congregations.

Isn't that wonderful! When the Gentile believers heard about it, they were glad. And Jewish members weren't offended either.

(And we know Jews also stopped keeping the Law a short time later, whether they wanted to or not - when the altar and Temple were destroyed.)

I just felt it is an important foundation to properly understand the sense of what James said.

It was a clarifying moment for the churches.

Incidentally the people who first started insisting that Gentiles keep the Law, were Pharisees who'd joined the church. It wasn't the general opinion in the Jerusalem church.

Also James said that the Jerusalem church had not authorised them to teach such a thing in the first place.