The Relationship of Jewish and Gentile Believers to the Law Between A.D. 30 and 70 in the Scripture

129 curiously he is the one who formulates the decree. 206 How is he able to make such an authoritative statement? In this view, his authority is not personal but, as he demonstrated before (15: 16-18), found in the text. James feels the freedom to decree church-wide policy because he does so in accordance within the guidelines of Scripture. One final objection is that not all of the commandments from the Law which apply to Gentiles are included here. 207 The only other commandment likely to be included which is applied to the stranger is the sabbath, "but the seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God; in it you shall not do any work, you , or your son, or your daughter , your manser– vant , or your maidservant , or your cattle , or the sojourner who is within your gates (Exod 20:10) . 208 Deuteronomy 5: 14, however , clarifies that the law does not apply indiscriminately to Gentiles but to those who were slaves in a Jewish household. That is , in fairness , a Jewish master could not force anyone or anything under his care including his Gentile slave to work -<,., seven days a week: but the seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God ; in it you shall not do any work, you , or your son, or your daughter , or your manservant , or your maidservant, or your ox, or your ass , or any of your cattle , or the sojourner who is within your gates, that your manservant and your maidservant may rest as well as you (Deuteronomy 5: 14). The final statement of James (15 :21) has given rise to a number of interpre- 206 Note the emphatic wording of the text, eta lyw Kpfvw (15:19) . 207 chwartz says of the ritual unders tanding, "all ver ion of the e planation ha e great difficulty in explaining why only some Mosaic requirement - even onl ome of th demands Mo aic law makes of Gentile - are here adopted," chwartz, "Th Futilit f Preaching Mo e (Act 15,21)," 278, though unfortunate} he gi e n e ampl . 208 th r command in ol ing apital rime , th " in f a high h nd " ( um 1 ·30) and bla phemy (Le 24:1 ) were not in luded p rhap b au th J i hp pl di not en ha e h uthority o ute u h nt nee in I ra I I t Ion th di p r r p rh p h e rticul r law in I ing p ta nt for r n rat p pl .