disagree on any point. Now another question comes up: Shall the Gentiles keep the old ceremonial Law of Moses, and be circumcised?[1] It would seem that men of common freedom of thought, who had heard the teaching of Jesus, would not need miraculous help to decide so plain a question. If they had the alleged inspiration, each must know at once how to decide, and all would decide in the same way without consultation. But such was not the fact; they were divided on this very question—plain as it is—and held a meeting of the Christians; the “apostles and elders came together to consider this matter.” It was not a plain case, there was “much disputing” about it. Peter, Barnabas, and Paul, spoke against the Law; James, as chairman of the meeting, sums up the matter before putting the question, takes a middle ground, proposes a resolution that all the Mosaic ritual should not be imposed upon the Gentile converts, but only a few of its prohibitions, which he reckons “necessary things.” He comes to this conclusion, not by special inspiration—of which no mention is made in the meeting—but from Peter's statement of facts, and from a passage in the Prophet who says, that “all the Gentiles might seek after the Lord.” The question was put; the chairman's motion prevailed; a circular was drawn up in the name of the Holy Spirit and the assembly, and sent to the Churches. But Paul and Peter seem to have disregarded it, one going beyond, the other falling short of its requisitions.
Then, again, the apostles differed on some points. Paul and Barnabas had a sharp contention, and separated.[2] Could infallible men fall out? Paul had little respect for those “that were apostles before him,” and “withstood Peter to the face.”[3]
These Apostles were mistaken in several things; in their interpretation of the Old Testament, as any one may see by examining the passages cited by Peter in the Acts,[4] or the writings of Paul.[5] They were all mistaken in this capital doctrine: That Jesus would return to Judea, the
