The Jerusalem-Conference Decree: A Closer Look (Part 1 of 4)

Background: A Setting of Controversy

About twenty years after the Lord’s church had begun, having spread from Jerusalem to the provinces of Judea, Syria, Cyprus, Cilicia, and Galatia, a major controversy threatened the unity, peace, stability, and growth of these young Christian communities. Certain Jewish converts felt compelled to bind on non-Jewish brethren, as conditions of salvation, distinctively Jewish practices—particularly circumcision, which they sincerely believed was divinely mandated. The ensuing dispute and inability to resolve the conflict called for urgent consultation with mature Christian leaders. The Syrian Antioch congregation, where the controversy was instigated, sent a delegation (including Paul, Barnabas, and Titus) to confer with the apostles and elders in Jerusalem (Acts 15:1-6; Gal. 2:1).

The question of how to interact with those having little understanding or regard for deeply entrenched Jewish traditions and values was a rather sensitive and divisive issue among many Jewish disciples at the time (cf. Acts 10:28; 11:1-3). Not surprisingly, the discussions in Jerusalem began with intense debate (Acts 15:7a).¹ Simon Peter reminded the group of God’s acceptance of uncircumcised believers without added conditions beyond gospel obedience, which Barnabas and Paul reaffirmed (Acts 15:7b-12; cf. vv. 3-4).

James was next to speak (Acts 15:13-21). Reinforcing Simon Peter’s observations, James quoted scripture (viz. Amos 9:11-12) concerning the inclusion of Gentiles in God’s eternal plan. James then offered his judgment: “I therefore judge [διὸ ἐγὼ κρίνω] ...” (Acts 15:19a).²

The Influential Role of James

Jesus’s half-brother James (Matt. 13:55) at one time did not believe in Jesus as the promised messiah (John 7:5) but as an eyewitness of the resurrected Christ his doubts succumbed to unshakable faith (1 Cor. 15:7; Jas. 1:1). Although still relatively young when the church began (Acts 1:14), during the following decades he rose in prominence as a well-respected leader in Jerusalem’s Christian community (Acts 12:17; 15:13; 21:18; Gal. 1:19; 2:9).

One of the most Jewish documents in the New Testament, and probably the earliest to have been written, is the epistle of James.³ He writes authoritatively as someone already well known and highly regarded among his readers, someone not only professing his faith in the Lord but wholeheartedly living his faith. He exhorts his reading audience to do the same.

Notwithstanding the debate concerning chronological placement (before or after the Jerusalem conference?), the event recounted by Paul in Galatians 2:11-21 shows how influential James was in the early church. 

But when Cephas came to Antioch, against his face I opposed him, because he stood condemned. For before some had come from James, he ate with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing the ones of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews [also] behaved hypocritically with him, so as even Barnabas was led away with their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they did not walk straight with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of all: “If you being a Jew live as a Gentile and not as a Jew, how can you compel the Gentiles to judaize?” (Gal. 2:11-14)

That “some had come from James” does not necessarily mean they were sent by or represented the Lord’s brother, but they had at least come from Jerusalem (where James was based) and were probably in some way associated with him and perhaps even claimed his authorization (cp. Acts 15:1-5). The source of the intimidation felt by Peter, Barnabas, and other Jewish believers was probably not undue pressure from the associates of James or others from the Jerusalem church, but rather news of violent backlashes from fanatical Zealots who regarded Jewish Christians (especially those who associated with Gentiles) as heretics deserving severe punishment (cf. Gal. 6:12; Acts 4:1-3, 21; 5:17-40; 7:54-60; 8:1-3; 9:1-2, 23, 29; 12:1-4; 21:20-21, 27-32).⁴

The Fourfold Interdiction

James’s proposal at the Jerusalem meeting, with which the rest of the group agreed, was to write a letter to non-Jewish brethren, advising them to ignore the unnecessary dictates of pharisaic judaizers, while abstaining from these four things: (1) “the pollutions of idols,” particularly sacrifices offered in pagan religious ceremonies, (2) illicit sexual intercourse, (3) the meat of strangled animals (without having the blood drained), and (4) blood itself (Acts 15:20, 29; 21:25). Discussed in more detail below and in following posts.

The reason given: “for [γάρ] Moses, from generations of old, has in every city those proclaiming him in the synagogues, being read every sabbath” (Acts 15:21). James’s own explanation had to do with Christian influence and respectful consideration of the sensibilities of local Jewish communities. Were these prohibitions, then, simply the wise counsel of an esteemed church leader (with joint approval), or was this something divinely enjoined? And were these prohibitions ethical in nature, ceremonial, or a combination of both?

The Holy Spirit’s Role?

When put into writing, the Holy Spirit was acknowledged as having been involved, in some way, in the decision-making process: “for it seemed good [ἔδοξεν] to the Holy Spirit and us to lay upon you no greater burden except these necessary things” (Acts 15:28). The manner of the Spirit’s activity is not explicitly stated. Were these directives revealed through divine agency (as in Acts 1:2; 8:29; 10:19; 11:12, 28; 13:2-4; 20:23; 21:11), or simply based on an inference drawn from the Spirit having already validated Gentile converts (Acts 10:19–11:18), about which Simon Peter had just reminded these brethren (Acts 15:7-11)?

The verb ἔδοξεν, aorist form of δοκέω, is not a definitive statement of absolute certainty but conveys something that appears to one’s understanding, seems to be, or recognized as (see BDAG 254-55; cf. Acts 12:9; 17:18; 25:27; 26:9; 27:13). It “seemed good [ἔδοξε(ν)] to the apostles and to the elders, with the whole church ...” (Acts 15:22), who then wrote, “it seemed good [ἔδοξεν] to us, having come to one mind ...” (v. 25).⁵

When James said, “I therefore judge ...” (Acts 15:19a), the verb κρίνω is used in the sense of “to make a judgment based on taking various factors into account, judge, think, consider, look upon” (BDAG 568). This was a matter of practical judgment (as in Acts 3:13; 4:19; 13:46; 16:15; 20:16; 25:25; 26:8; 27:1).⁶ Later the group decision was described as “having been judged [perfect participial form of κρίνω] by the apostles and elders in Jerusalem” (Acts 16:4), i.e., “decided” (NASB1995), “determined” (NKJV); “we wrote, we judged [aorist participial form of κρίνω] ...” (Acts 21:25), i.e., “decided” (NASB, NKJV), “concluded” (KJV), “our decision” (CSB, NIV), “our judgment” (ESV).

The only specific allusion to the Holy Spirit’s involvement in these proceedings does not clearly define what his role was. No mention is made of direct revelation. No mention of a heavenly vision or angelic visitation (as in Acts 10:3-16, 22, 30-32; 11:5-10, 13-14), or verbal communication from the Spirit (as in Acts 10:19-20; 11:12), or observable manifestation of the Spirit’s miraculous power (as in Acts 10:44-47; 11:15-17). Instead, there was “much debate” (Acts 15:7a), and when Simon Peter, Barnabas, and Paul contributed to the discussion, they simply argued from the precedent already set by the past working of God and God’s Spirit (vv. 7b-14). James followed suit with a scripture quotation (vv. 13b-18)⁷ and his personal judgment (v. 19a).

Necessary Things?

Described as “these necessary things” [τούτων τῶν ἐπάναγκες] (Acts 15:28), the question is, necessary for what? Necessary for salvation, or necessary for handling the current dilemma? The four points of abstention, issued from James and accepted by his colleagues, were separated from what the judaizers were claiming to be necessary for salvation (Acts 15:1), and Peter affirmed that Jews will be saved the same way as Gentiles (v. 11), not vice versa. The condition, “If you keep yourselves from these things,” was not answered with “you will be saved,” but rather, “you will do well [εὖ πράξετε]” (v. 29). These proscriptions were “necessary” to avoid stumbling blocks impeding outreach and influence, to prevent needlessly offending Jewish neighbors and recent converts, and to maintain peace among ethnically mixed churches.

The non-binding nature of circumcision in the Christian Age was clearly a cultural rather than ethical matter, but what about these other points of contention? Rather than isolating and classifying each proscription individually, it makes better sense to consider them all together as a collective whole. Each is contextually associated with the others, and the stated purpose of avoidance is therefore mutually applicable.⁸

Comparable Situations

When Paul did not have a direct command from the Lord to address a particular issue, he offered his own personal judgment (1 Cor. 7:12, 25-26, 40a; 2 Cor. 8:10; 9:5). Even so, he was aware of his mature faith and experience, knowledge and understanding, leadership responsibilities, and the divine sanction of his teachings (1 Cor. 1:1; 2:6; 7:40b; 4:6, 16; 11:1; Phil. 3:15-17).

Mature Christians are expected to make wise judgments consistent with God’s revealed will and the application thereof (Matt. 7:5; John 7:24; 1 Cor. 2:15; 5:3, 12; 6:2-5; 10:15; 11:13, 31a). To “judge” is to make an informed assessment about whether something is right or wrong, true or false, good or bad. Spiritual maturity involves developing the capacity for proper discernment in making responsible decisions (Heb. 5:14).⁹

The whole point of the Jerusalem conference was to counter pharisaic legalism in the church. James and fellow-leaders were not implementing a new law but opposing mandated observance of the old law.

The “Pollutions” of Idols

It is not insignificant that James started with “the pollutions [τῶν ἀλισγημάτων] of idols” (Acts 15:20), which was later more specifically applied to ritual defilement associated with idol worship. These restrictions were not simply about sacrificial meat consumption, sexual immorality, strangulation, or blood per se. From a Jewish-Christian perspective, this was about how Jewish people, particularly in the north/northwestern Gentile territories of Antioch, Syria, Cilicia, and Galatia (Acts 15:23; 16:4), generally perceived what pagan idolaters did, whether any or all these things were actually part of their religious ceremonies.

Just as Gentile converts from pagan backgrounds would have had no previous associations with Jewish laws and customs, almost certainly none of the church leaders who participated in the Jerusalem conference had ever been inside a pagan temple or seen firsthand what happened there.¹⁰ The four prohibitions seem to cover all the bases and would help ensure that non-Christian Jews would be less likely to get the impression that followers of Christ were in any way associated with cultic polytheism. 

Conclusion

One might wonder why any Christian would need to be reminded to abstain from some or all these things. We could ask the same question about Paul’s correspondence to the mid-first-century church at Corinth (1 Cor. 5:1–7:9; 10:7-8, 14; 2 Cor. 12:20-21), as well as similar vice lists in other letters (Gal. 5:16-21; Eph. 5:1-17; Col. 3:1-10; 1 Thess. 4:1-7). Seeing that several forms of pagan idolatry included sexual activity, it is not without significance that nearly every reference in the NT to consuming food offered to idols also warns against illicit sex.

In the next posts we will more closely examine the Jerusalem-conference proscriptions, how each relates to the others, and the significance of the collective whole.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ The descriptive term ζήτησις (Acts 15:7), meaning “engagement in a controversial discussion, discussion, debate, argument” (BDAG 429), is the same type of exchange that Paul and Barnabas previously had with the judaizers in Antioch (v. 2); cf. also 1 Tim. 1:4; 6:4; 2 Tim. 2:23; Tit. 3:9.

     ² Unless otherwise noted, scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

     ³ See K. L. Moore, “The Story of Young Jacob,” Moore Perspective (15 June 2016), <Link>; “The Epistle of Jacob” (22 July 2012), <Link>.

     ⁴ Apparently the fallibility of Cephas (Peter), demonstrated in the Gospels, persisted in these early developmental stages of the Lord’s church, despite his prominent role. His “fearing the ones of the circumcision” is in stark contrast to Paul’s determined refusal to “seek to please men” (Gal. 1:10). Over a decade earlier, Peter had been convinced by the Lord of the legitimacy of consuming non-kosher foods and eating with the uncircumcised (Acts 10:9–11:18). He then defended this position at the Jerusalem conference, along with James’s endorsement (Acts 15:7-21), and participated in the decision of the apostles and elders to safeguard the freedom of Gentile believers from works of the Mosaic law (Acts 15:22-29). Nevertheless, what one professes among allies and what one practices among (or with awareness of) adversaries is not always consistent (cf. Matt. 26:33-35, 69-75).

     ⁵ Most standard English versions render this verb in Acts 15:22, 25, 28, “it seemed good,” albeit varied in Acts 15:22, “decided” (CSB, NIV, NET, NRSV), “it pleased” (N/KJV).

     ⁶ Other uses of the verb κρίνω in Acts are indicative of condemnatory judging (Acts 13:27; 23:6; 24:21; 26:6), official adjudication (Acts 23:3; 24:6[variant]; 25:9, 10, 20), or God’s judgment (Acts 7:7; 17:31).

     ⁷ Along with citing Moses (v. 21), this would have been another indirect working of the Holy Spirit (cf. Acts 1:16; 4:25; 21:25).

     ⁸ The verb ἀπέχω occurs in the first two listings of prohibitions (Acts 15:20, 29), meaning “to avoid contact w[ith] or use of someth[ing], keep away, abstain, refrain from” (BDAG 103). Later the verb φυλάσσω is used, with the twofold nuance: (a) “observe, follow” (Acts 16:4), rendered “keep” (NKJV), “for observance” (ESV); and (b) “to be on one’s guard against, look out for, avoid” (Acts 21:25), rendered “keep ... from” (ASV, CSB, N/KJV), “abstain” (ESV, NIV, NASB) (BDAG 1068).

     ⁹ Hebrews 5:14 employs the terms τέλειος (“full grown,” “mature”), αἰσθητήριον (lit. “organ of sense,” fig. “faculty,” “capacity for discernment”), ἕξις (“proficiency,” “skill,” “maturity”), γυμνάζω (“train,” “undergo discipline”), διάκρισις (“ability to distinguish and evaluate”); see BDAG 29, 208, 231, 350, 995-96.

     ¹⁰ Gentile God-fearers (Acts 10:2, 22; 13:16, 26; 17:17; 18:7) were affiliated with Jewish teachings and conventions. Titus was Greek, having accompanied Barnabas and Paul to Jerusalem and serving as a test case against mandated circumcision (Gal. 2:1-3). While nothing is known about his religious past, there is no indication (whether in private or public meetings) he was involved in formulating the prohibitions.

Related Posts:

Related articles:

 

Image credit: https://christianpublishinghouse.co/2025/09/25/the-jerusalem-council-and-the-gentile-question/ 

The Paradox of Freedom

This year, as the United States of America celebrates her 250th anniversary as an independent nation, citizens of this country are especially mindful of the freedoms and opportunities we enjoy that are unavailable to so many around the world. Since the 4th of July 1776, the United States Declaration of Independence has affirmed, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

From a Christian perspective, regardless of where on planet earth we live, “our citizenship exists in heaven, from which also we are awaiting a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ” (Philippians 3:20).¹ The readership to whom Paul originally wrote these words was comprised of Roman citizens living in a Roman colony where freedom was highly valued (Acts 16:12, 21). Paul himself was a Roman citizen with all the rights and privileges this afforded (Acts 22:25-28; 1 Cor. 9:1, 19a), although at the time of writing he was incarcerated, “in chains” (Phil. 1:7-17). Moreover, in the opening address he describes himself, along with his coworker Timothy, as “slaves” of Christ Jesus (Phil. 1:1), elsewhere self-identifying as the Lord’s “prisoner” (Eph. 3:1; Philem. 1, 9).

Citizens of God’s heavenly kingdom have certain unalienable rights and liberties unlike anything earthly governments might offer or attempt to take away. The concept of “freedom” has a whole new meaning when viewed through the lens of God’s inspired word.²

The New Testament World

Christianity entered a world where slavery was already a long-established societal norm and regarded as an economic necessity. It is estimated that one in five of the Roman Empire’s population and one in three of Italy’s population were slaves.³ Throughout the vast Mediterranean regions of the first century, Christian communities included slaves, ex-slaves, and slave owners (1 Cor. 7:17-24; 12:13; Eph. 6:5-9; Col. 3:22–4:1; 1 Tim. 6:1-2; Tit. 2:9-10; 1 Pet. 2:18-21). Even so, these conventional status rankings were broken down and leveled out in Christ (Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11).⁴ Irrespective of ethnic and social distinctions, a new relationship is created within God’s family (Philem. 10-16), where all are equally subservient (Rom. 6:18; 1 Cor. 7:22; Gal. 5:13) and all are equally free (Gal. 5:1, 13).

Jesus the Great Emancipator

Addressing a mixed crowd of Jewish believers and nonbelievers, Jesus promised: “If you abide in my word, truly you are my disciples. And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free .... if therefore the Son has set you free, you will be free indeed” (John 8:31-32, 36). The Lord was speaking to subjugated Jewish people whose homeland was occupied by pagan Roman oppressors, but a much greater adversary was enslaving them in the bondage of sin (vv. 23-24, 34, 41, 44). The deliverance Jesus offers is by far the most pressing need.

The irony is that Jesus, our great emancipator whose example we are called to follow, did not come to this earth to be served but to serve and to liberate sinners through his life and sacrificial death (Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45). In emptying himself to join the ranks of humanity, he took on the role of a humble “slave” [δοῦλος] (Phil. 2:5).

Paul to the Galatians

“For the freedom Christ freed us; stand firm therefore and do not be entangled again with a yoke of slavery” (Gal. 5:1). When Paul speaks of “the freedom” (article [τῇ] appended), he is specifically referencing what is discussed throughout his letter to the Galatians, namely freedom from “the present evil age” (1:4) and the shackles of sin (2:17-20; 3:22), as well as the burdens of the old-covenant system of Judaism (2:4, 16; 3:13, 21-25; 4:1-7, 21-31). And how is this freedom to be utilized? “For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not use the freedom for an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve [as slaves] one another” (Gal. 5:13).

Paul to the Corinthians

The mid-first-century church at Corinth was comprised of slave members and members who were legally free (1 Cor. 7:21-24; 12:13). Even though Paul was counted among the freemen (9:1, 19), he willingly lowered himself to a virtual “slave” to win others to Christ (9:19b). He calls upon the Corinthians to follow his example as he follows Christ’s example (4:6; 11:1), involving self-denial (13:5b) and sacrificing perceived “rights” for the benefit of others (8:9–9:18; 10:24, 32-33). A literal slave who is in the Lord is spiritually free, while all who submit to Jesus as Lord are his willing slaves (7:22).

Paul to the Romans

Paul’s letter to the saints at Rome continues the familiar analogy of slavery in the Roman world to illustrate profound spiritual truths. In fact, the letter opens with Paul professing to be “a slave of Christ Jesus” (1:1). Chapter 6 begins with the rhetorical question, “Are we to continue in sin …?” (v. 1), followed by an emphasis on freedom. When the question is repeated, “Are we to sin …?” (v. 15), it is followed by an emphasis on servitude.

A penitent believer “baptized into Christ” (Rom. 6:3) transitions from having been “enslaved to sin” to being “set free from sin” (vv. 6-7).⁵ Obedience to the gospel in this reenacting of Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection renders one no longer “dead” in sin but “alive to God in Christ Jesus” (v. 11) to “walk in newness of life” (v. 4). Submitting to Jesus as “Lord” means that sin ceases to reign as lord and master. God’s grace defeats and replaces sin’s dominion. To be “under grace” (vv. 14-15) is not a license to sin (vv. 1-2) but provides motivation and discipline to live according to the right ways of God, free from the mastery of sin.

Baptized believers in Christ are now committed to righteousness (6:15-23). If the intention of the old Mosaic law was to direct people to live consistently with the divine will, and if “we are not under the law,” are we then left with no standard of morality so that sin is reinvigorated? “By no means!” (v. 15). Freedom from sin is not freedom to sin, which would otherwise be a total misconception of freedom “under grace” apart from the law. Although Christians are liberated from the old Jewish system as a means of justification (cf. 7:1-6), it is entirely untrue that there are no obligations to God’s will under grace. Humble obedience is inextricably linked to faith as a fundamental requisite within the new-covenant system of grace (cf. 1:5; 16:26).

To “present yourselves … as obedient slaves” (6:16a) is an intentional choosing of loyalty and service. The critical decision is between “sin unto death” or “obedience unto righteousness” (v. 16b). Paul is thankful to God that the Romans have chosen the latter, involving the “standard,” “pattern,” “model” [τύπος] of “teaching” [διδαχή] (v. 17), the body of doctrine mutually accepted and followed by first-century churches of Christ: “the doctrine [διδαχή] that you have been taught …” (16:16-17). It is this pattern of instruction “to which you were committed” (ESV), “delivered” (ASV, KJV, NKJV), “handed over” (CSB), “entrusted” (ISV, NASB2020, NRSV) that “has now claimed your allegiance” (NIV).

Obedient faith emanates from the “heart” [καρδία]—the physical, mental, and spiritual core and impetus of action—necessary for “having been set free from sin” and to “have become slaves of righteousness.” In the past the Romans had given themselves over to “impurity” and increasing “lawlessness” but have now changed masters to “righteousness” [δικαιοσύνη] unto “sanctification” [ἁγιασμός] (6:19). The noun “sanctification,” used in Romans only here and in v. 22 (with its verb form [ἁγιάζω] in 15:16), refers to the process of making or becoming holy, set apart for God’s purpose and separated (in thinking, priorities, behavior) from the sinful world.⁶

As former “slaves of sin,” so-called “freedom” was essentially the rejection of righteousness, when sin was the master rather than the righteous ways of God (6:20). Fortunately, the Roman saints are “now ashamed” of their past unrighteousness that produced only “death” (cf. 5:12–6:16), something earned and thus deserved as “wages” (6:23a). Now, having been “set free from sin,” they have committed themselves as “slaves to God” producing the fruit of “sanctification,” a new and holy way of life, “and its end, life everlasting,” something unearned and undeserved as “the gracious gift of God ... in Christ Jesus our Lord” (vv. 22-23).

Due to this God-given freedom in Christ, “we serve [as slaves] in newness of spirit ...” (7:6) and are amenable to the exhortation: “Be devoted to one another in brotherly love, in honor esteeming one another, not slacking in diligence, being fervent in spirit, serving [as slaves] the Lord” (12:10-11).

Further Exhortations

Hebrews affirms freedom from sin (1:3) and freedom from the devil’s power of fear and death (2:14-15). James speaks of the guidance and blessing of “the perfect law of liberty” by which we are mercifully judged (Jas. 1:25; 2:12-13). Peter declares as God’s will that we are to utilize our freedom, not to hide evil but to do good and live our lives as slaves of God (1 Pet. 2:15-16). He further warns Christians, who have been freed from those living in error and the pollutions of the world, of false teachers promising liberty, while they are themselves slaves of corruption alluring God’s liberated ones back into bondage (2 Pet. 2:18-20).

Conclusion

We are accountable for our own decisions and actions, as God allows us freedom to choose.⁷ He calls us to exercise our freedom responsibly by rendering ourselves completely to his will, which is far superior to our own. He offers freedom from ourselves and from the master of sin, so we may wholeheartedly and freely obey him. We are thus delivered from sin’s control and at liberty to obey God in humble service within the glorious realm of his righteousness.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Unless otherwise noted, scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

     ² The relevant Greek terms for this study include the following: (a) the adjective ἐλεύθερος (“free”) in Matt. 17:26; John 8:33, 36; Rom. 6:20; 7:3;1 Cor. 7:21, 22, 39; 9:1; 12:13; Gal. 3:28; 4:22-31; Eph. 6:8; Col. 3:11; 1 Pet. 2:16; Rev. 6:15; 13:16; 19:18; (b) the noun ἐλευθερία (“freedom”) in Rom. 8:21; 1 Cor. 10:29; 2 Cor. 3:17; Gal. 2:4; 5:1, 13[x2]; Jas. 1:25; 2:12; 1 Pet. 2:16; 2 Pet. 2:19; (c) the noun ἐξουσία (in the sense of “right,” “liberty,” “freedom”) in 1 Cor. 7:37; 8:9; 9:4, 5, 6, 12[x2], 18; 11:10; 15:24; 2 Cor. 10:8; 13:10; 2 Thess. 3:9; and the verb ἐλευθερόω (“set free”) in John 8:32, 36; Rom. 6:18, 22; 8:2, 21; Gal. 5:1.

     ³ Mark Cartwright, “Slavery in the Roman World,” Ancient History Encyclopedia (1 Nov. 2013), <Link>. During the first century AD approximately 16-20 percent were reportedly slaves within a population of about 60 million (W. V. Harris, “Towards a Study of the Roman Slave Trade,” MAAR 36 [1980]:117-40); some estimates are as high as 33-40 percent (Keith R. Bradley, Slavery and Society at Rome [Cambridge: University Press, 2014] 33).

     ⁴ The NT does not enjoin, endorse, or condone slavery but simply gives regulatory instructions within the existing social structure. The principles of Christianity would mitigate the harshness of slavery and eventually lead to its demise. See K. L. Moore, “Households and Slavery,” Moore Perspective (24 July 2019), <Link>.

     ⁵ The verbal expression “[he] has been set free” is translated from δεδικαίωται (the perfect passive indicative form of δικαιόω, to “justify”), a primary emphasis in Romans. Thus, to be “justified by faith” (Rom. 3:28; 5:1) clearly involves an obedient faith-response inclusive of baptism.

     ⁶ Cognate with the adjectival ἅγιος (“holy,” “set apart”), as well as ἁγιωσύνη (“holiness”) and ἅγιοι (“saints”) (Rom. 1:7; 8:27; 12:13; 15:25, 26, 31; 16:2, 15).

     ⁷ Freedom without choice is a logical impossibility. A loving God gives us free will and instructions for making the right decisions (2 Tim. 3:16-17), desiring all to be saved and none to perish (1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9).

Related Posts: Free from Sin

Related articles:

 

Image credit: https://www.google.com/search?q=bird+flying+out+of+cage&sca_esv=e0b0fddfa598641b&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS780US780&udm=2&biw=1405&bih=716&sxsrf=APpeQnv-QFWhBPe-hPzej4aE5sLj3BVR_g%3A1783101674406&ei=6vhHapOwGLfQp84P-7HxsQE&oq=bird+flying+out+o&gs_lp=Egtnd3Mtd2l6LWltZyIRYmlyZCBmbHlpbmcgb3V0IG8qAggAMgUQABiABDIFEAAYgAQyBRAAGIAEMgUQABiABDIFEAAYgAQyBRAAGIAEMgUQABiABDIFEAAYgAQyBRAAGIAEMgUQABiABEiLMlCgCljdHnABeACQAQCYAWGgAeYKqgECMTe4AQHIAQD4AQGYAhKgAucLwgIQEAAYgAQYigUYQxixAxiDAcICBhAAGAcYHsICCBAAGIAEGLEDwgILEAAYgAQYsQMYgwHCAgcQIxjJAhgnwgIKEAAYgAQYigUYQ8ICDRAAGIAEGIoFGEMYsQOYAwCIBgGSBwQxNy4xoAfsV7IHBDE2LjG4B9oLwgcGMi0xNy4xyAdagAgB&sclient=gws-wiz-img#sv=CAMSURoyKhBlLXpjMkZDSGxwNFBIUVhNMg56YzJGQ0hscDRQSFFYTToOaDlhVXdQTmRGc3YzZ00gBCoXCgFzEhBlLXpjMkZDSGxwNFBIUVhNGAEwARgHIO_6h_YDSggQARgBIAEoAQ

Psalm 137: The Blessing of Murdering Babies?!

“How blessed will be the one who grabs your babies and smashes them on a rock!” (Psalm 137:9, NET).

Context and Translation

A single verse, read in isolation without a context, is sure to be misunderstood. The setting of Psalm 137 is Babylonian exile. The psalmist and fellow-captives are mourning and reminiscing as they are mocked by their Babylonian captors. The Jewish exiles long for the home they have been forced to leave, so they pray. These words are not issued from God but directed to God.

Verse 7 laments the disgraceful betrayal by the Edomites—descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob’s brother Esau—who had cheered on the Babylonians and rejoiced when the pagan attackers razed the holy city of Jerusalem.¹ The cry for justice then turns against the Babylonians, who themselves were destined for destruction (vv. 8-9).

The Hebrew noun esher [אֶשֶׁר] means “happy” or “blessed,” which in this passage is not necessarily blessed by God but the feeling of delight or happiness (cf. ASV, CSB, ERV, NIV, N/KJV, NLT, N/RSV, WEB). As a prophetic statement, the one who will be happy is the one who repays the personified “daughter of Babylon” for what she has done to God’s people (v. 8).

Being “happy” about one’s own achievements is not the same as being “blessed” by the Lord (Psa. 128:1-2). Jeremiah wondered in amazement, “Why are those happy who deal so treacherously?” (Jer. 12:1, NKJV).² In Malachi 3:13-15, the people complain against God because their perceived “righteous” acts do not seem to give them an advantage over the heathen, and since the Lord has not rewarded them with material blessings, they foolishly consider prideful sinners as the ones who are “happy” or “blessed.”

Murdering Babies

Historically, Babylon’s main enemy was the savage nation of the Medes, known for their brutal atrocities, including dashing babies on rocks (Isa. 13:16-17), a heinous act of cruelty also practiced by the neighboring Assyrians (Hos. 13:16; Nah. 3:10) and Syrians (2 Kings 8:12). But this was not something ever practiced or condoned by the people of God, and certainly never sanctioned by God. The pagan enemy of Babylon is the one who will be happy about killing Babylonian babies. For helpful commentary, see esp. Isaiah 13:1, 15-19; cf. also Jer. 50:9-11; 51:11.

Some have classified Psalm 137 as an imprecatory psalm, wherein the psalmist cries out against the cruel enemies of God’s people and pleads for retributive justice.³ This type of psalm does demonstrate that the God of the Bible is sympathetic and understanding, allowing distressed and tortured souls in the depths of despair and affliction to be honest and real. He invites his suffering and confused children, with their fallible emotions, to speak frankly whatever is on their hearts. However, the words of Psalm 137:8-9 are not descriptive of a righteous Israelite but of a heartless and godless foe.

Conclusion

The poetic words of Psalm 137:8-9 convey the thoughts, not of God or of God’s people, but of the pagan enemy of wicked Babylon. While the Bible is the inspired word of God, it also contains descriptions of and words spoken by Satan and his agents and sinful human beings. When reading any passage of scripture, it is important to consider the context and ask, “Who is speaking?” or “About whom is this speaking?”

The sad reality is, even to this present day, calloused hearts still do not value the sacredness of human life and can be just as cruel. “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” (Isa. 5:20). May we, as God’s people, handle accurately the word of truth and teach accordingly, while serving as beacons of God’s righteousness in this dark world, no matter our circumstances.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ See Lamentations 4:20-21; Ezekiel 25:12-14; Obadiah 10-14.

     ² For an excellent response, read Psalm 73.

     ³ Imprecatory psalms include Psalms 5:10; 17:13; 18:40-42; 35:1-8; 55:9, 15; 58:6-10; 59:13; 69:22-28; 79:6-7; 139:19.

Related Posts: Genocidal God?, One of the Worst Things about Hell, Layers of Context (Part 1) 

Image credit: https://tomtrippblog.wordpress.com/2024/05/16/a-bitter-and-honest-psalm/