The Acts of the Apostles

THE APOSTOLIC DECREE 255
30 : Koivooi'o] €v rco alp.aTi tmv TrpochrjTwv. Tliere
thus remain only the two last arguments— general
considerations whose validity shall be straightway
tested.
On the other hand, in favour of the interpretation
of the Apostolic Decree as giving moral precepts, we
have the following arguments :
(1) In the whole of St. Luke's book, where it deals
with the Gentile Christian controversy, there is no
other reference to the question of prohibited meats,
but only to questions of capital importance—namely,
to Circumcision and the Mosaic Law as a whole. It is
most strange that in a single passage, and that a
passage so important, St. Luke should suddenly in-
troduce rules concerning meats without making any
further remark, or giving any reason for their appear-
ance. Fundamental ethical directions, on the other
^
—
hand, do not suffer from this difficulty.*
* This use of the word is also found in the i^rofane writers {vide
Resch, p. 42). We need no examples to prove that atfia, when
placed side by side with Idolatry and Fornication, as a rule means
"shedding of blood."
2 I omit the arguments in favour of this interpretation which
may be derived from the Pauline epistles, although, after all, there
is no reason for this forbearance.
' St. Peter's vision in chapter x. (the sheet with the unclean
animals) ought not to be adduced here. But even if it is thought
necessary to take notice of this instance, it will be found that it
does not favour the view that chapter xv. deals with regulations con-
cerning meats. The import of chapter x. is that these regulations
were an especially characteristic element of the Law of the Old
Testament from which St. Peter was to shake himself free. How,
then, could St. Luke have related, without turning a hair, that re-
gulations concerning meats were nevertheless imposed upon Gentile
Christians 7