But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brethren, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved." And when Paul and Barnabas got into debate with them it was no small dissension, and so the two of them and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and the elders to confer on this question. Being sent on their way by the church, they passed through both Phoeni'cia and Sama'ria, reporting the conversion of the Gentiles, and they gave great joy to all the brethren. When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they declared all that God had done with them. But some believers belonging to the party of the Pharisees were there to rise up, and say, "They must be circumcised, and be charged to keep the law of Moses."
In a Nutshell
Now Paul and Barnabas had to confront the ideology that following Christ means becoming a Jew just like Jesus was. This threatened to split the church down the middle.
Questions
Why not have a Jewish Christian denomination which required members to follow the Jewish way and a Gentile Christian denomination that did not make Jewish demands? Why wouldn't that work?
Throughout Acts we come to point where we would like to know things Luke hasn't told us. In Lystra, for example, we hear of the stoning of Paul; but what happened to Barnabas? Luke doesn't tell us. Also, we don't know what most of the apostles did. We read about Peter, James and John. Of the seven overseers of the food distribution, we only read about Stephen and Philip. They proclaimed the Good News, like other Hellenistic believers. who fled Jerusalem with the persecution. We hear about the work of Paul and Barnabas. But there is much we have not been told. Maybe Luke's first readers knew some of these things already. Maybe Luke decided some things were not germane to his story. Luke may not have known everything that was going on in those times, but he does tell his story in a certain order, with certain emphases. As we get into his story we realise he is linking things together. Saul and Barnabas, sent out from Antioch, returned with all the news. The church was overjoyed. The Holy Spirit had blessed their work. A network of churches had emerged in the region. Jews and Gentiles were joining together praising God for the salvation brought by Jesus, the Rabbi of Nazareth. Jewish believers embraced the fulfilment of the Law and the Prophets, just as Peter had done at Cornelius' house in Caesarea.
Still, the ethnic issue did not go away. The apostles had first-hand experience of Jesus, they had been taught by Him and were the ones to offer leadership to the churches. They experienced the Spirit's out-pouring at Pentecost. Peter was deeply impressed that the Saviour Himself had eaten with His disciples while they still disbelieved; there was no ground for refusing to eat with Gentiles who did believe. To do so would suggest that Jesus' work was incomplete, that somehow, despite His resurrection, it needed "topping up" to come into effect. Luke tells us how Paul and Barnabas returned to Antioch with the wonderful news that many had believed …. But waiting for them was a commission of inquiry claiming to come from Jerusalem and telling them, and the young churches, that the work they had done was flawed. This commission claimed to defend the law of Moses.