[81:4] They, not improbably, included the elders throughout Palestine who usually repaired to the capital to celebrate the national solemnities.  This meeting, therefore, seems to have been constructed on a broader basis than what a superficial reading of the narrative might suggest.  Amongst its members were the older apostles, as well as Barnabas and Paul, so that it contained the principal founders of the Jewish and Gentile Churches:  there were also present the elders of Jerusalem, and deputies from Antioch, that is, the representatives of the two most extensive and influential Christian societies in existence:  whilst commissioners from the Churches of Syria and Cilicia, and elders from various districts of the holy land, were, perhaps, likewise in attendance.  The Universal Church was thus fairly represented in this memorable Synod.

The meeting was held A.D. 51, and Paul, exactly fourteen years before, [82:1] had visited Jerusalem for the first time after his conversion. [82:2] So little was then known of his remarkable history, even in the chief city of Judea, that when he “assayed to join himself to the disciples, they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple;” [82:3] but now his position was completely changed, and he was felt to be one of the most influential personages who took part in the proceedings of this important convention.  Some have maintained that the whole multitude of believers in the Jewish capital deliberated and voted on the question in dispute, but there is certainly nothing in the statement of the evangelist to warrant such an inference.  It is very evident that the disciples in the holy city were not prepared to approve unanimously of the decision which was actually adopted, for we are told that, long afterwards, they were “all zealous of the law,” [83:1] and that they looked with extreme suspicion on Paul himself, because of the lax principles, in reference to its obligation, which he was understood to patronise. [83:2] When he arrived in Jerusalem on this mission he found there a party determined to insist on the circumcision of the converts from heathenism; [83:3] he complains of the opposition he now encountered from these “false brethren unawares brought in;” [83:4] and, when he returned to Antioch, he was followed by emissaries from the same bigoted and persevering faction. [83:5] It is quite clear, then, that the finding of the meeting, mentioned in the fifteenth chapter of the Acts, did not please all the members of the church of the metropolis.  The apostle says expressly that he communicated “privately” on the subject with “them which were of reputation,” [83:6] and in the present state of feeling, especially in the head-quarters of Judaism, Paul would have recoiled from the discussion of a question of such delicacy before a promiscuous congregation.  The resolution now agreed upon, when subsequently mentioned, is set forth as the act, not of the whole body of the disciples, but of “the apostles and elders,” [83:7] and as they were the arbiters to whom the appeal was made, they were obviously the only parties competent to pronounce a deliverance.