differences in detail, but there is one mistaken view to which we must refer, or suffer from a bad conscience by

keeping silent. In the scheme of interpretation to which we refer, not only are the attempts to impose circumcision

and law-keeping upon the Gentiles rejected as evil, but also the subsequent methods adopted out of respect for the

weaker consciences of Jewish believers, which is a totally different thing. The seriousness of this point of view will

be evident to any one who ponders the following explanation given on this scheme. With reference to James - who

is described as the `fleshly James' - it is stated that `when he makes his decision, saying, "Wherefore I decide" he

does not consult Peter or the rest of the apostles'. The reader will probably realize at once the inaccuracy of this

view, for in Acts 15:22 we read that it pleased `the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men

of their own company'. If this interpretation were true what could we make of the express statement: `It seemed

good to the Holy Ghost'?

Continuing our quotation, we read:

`It is to be noted that this epistle claims that this "burden" was placed upon the nations because "it seems good to

the Holy Spirit and to us". It would have been more honourable for this flesh-controlled council to assume

responsibility for their fleshly decision, instead of trying to place the responsibility upon the Holy Spirit Whom

they wholly ignored'.

How many other false views of the Acts have been linked up with so-called `apostolic mistakes'. Some, with

wrong ideas as to the constitution of the Church, teach that the apostles made a mistake in Acts 1:6. Others find

apostolic mistakes in other passages. And here, in Acts 15, not only are the apostles and elders found guilty, but

Barnabas and Paul, Silas and Judas, men who were `prophets' and had hazarded their lives for the Lord, are all

accused of moral cowardice and spiritual dishonesty. If these decrees were `fleshly' and not of God, how is it that

we read in Acts 16:5, `And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily'?

We have purposely refrained from naming the literature concerned, but those who have any knowledge of it will

understand. We cannot help feeling saddened at such reading, but we remember that prayer is what is called for, and

not censure.

Let us now come to the positive study of the Word. Before we can hope to understand the details of such a

passage we must have a view of the whole, and we therefore give the structure as the next step in our exposition.

A reference to page 141 will show that the section before us is Acts 15:1-35. At verse 36, Paul proposes to

re-visit every city where he had preached, and the section relating to his `second missionary journey' begins. We

have, therefore, a well-marked boundary at verse 35.

Upon examination we find that the passage falls into three pairs of corresponding sections as follows:

A 15:1,2.

Antioch. The Question. Paul. Barnabas.

B 15:3-5.

Phenice, Samaria, Jerusalem.

The Pharisees' demand.

C 15:6-12. Apostles and Elders. Peter. Why put a yoke?

C 15:13-21. Men and Brethren. James.

Trouble not the Gentiles.

B 15:22-29. Antioch, Syria, Cilicia. No such commandment.

A 15:30-35. Antioch. The Answer. Paul. Barnabas.

Judas and Silas.