And on the morrow Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders came there.
Paul reached Jerusalem after a long journey, and the next day he went to James, with all the elders present. This short verse raises questions about who James was, how the church in Jerusalem lived, and the advice he received there.
One writer traces this James through the New Testament, beginning with the letter that carries his name:
The James who wrote it was not the brother of John. Herod killed him in very early years, as Acts 12:2 records. The author of the letter was the James spoken of in Acts 15:13 and Acts 21:18. Paul calls him, "James, the Lord's brother," in Galatians 1:19, and he acknowledges him as one of the "pillars" of the Church in Jerusalem in Galatians 2:9. He does not appear to have gone out to Judea or Samaria or to the farthest parts of the earth. He stayed in Jerusalem, and there he reached a position of great authority.
His place was real. But one writer warns against reading a later church office back into it:
It is clear that this was the great central meeting place for visitors to Jerusalem. The elders, too, made a habit of being present on such occasions. These facts give it a very official character... Tradition makes him the bishop of the church in Jerusalem. But scripture never speaks of "the" bishop; it speaks of "bishops." Scripture also shows that there were more important people than the bishops. James had a place clearly above any of the "elders" (these were the bishops), a place that none of the elders had to the same degree.
Note that Luke says the elders were present — not the church. The distinction matters:
It would appear that James's house was the known place for any special gathering of elders. There must have been very many groups of Christian Jews in Jerusalem, and their numbers now ran into thousands. It seems that large buildings set apart for the assembly were still unknown. This occasion, however, was not a meeting of the whole assembly. Only the elders were present. They no doubt came from those many groups. Their meeting together as elders would do much to keep up order and unity. Yet, while truth governed in a spirit of grace, it took nothing at all away from the responsibility of the assembly.
Paul could have opened with his successes among his own people. He did the opposite:
There was perfect openness on his part. No effort to put prominently forward what God had wrought among the Jews or in the synagogues. He set out in detail the work given him to do among the nations. Doubtless the Lord intended this to enlarge their hearts. In Jerusalem they were used to seeing or hearing very little of their Gentile brothers. When they heard it, they glorified "God."
The praise was genuine. So was the problem sitting underneath it:
James was clearly at the head of the assembly at Jerusalem. In his own person he expressed the strength of that principle of Judaism which still ruled the church there, and God bore with it in His patience. They believed in Jesus, they broke bread at home, but they were all zealous for the law. They offered sacrifices in the temple, and even persuaded Paul to do the same (Acts 21). They were in no way separated from the nation.
The elders gave Paul advice, and he took it. One writer draws the lesson:
Clearly, then, the servant of Christ does well when in humility of mind he counts others better than himself. He does well to take their counsel, to weigh their spiritual judgment, and even to listen to their criticisms and weigh them. Yet even so he must not in the last resort be guided by their opinions but by the Word of God. The passage, Acts 21:18-30, gives us a warning about this.
The pressure came from the prejudices of the believers around him:
To refuse to go along with them would be to say that their thoughts about him were true. To do what they wanted was to take his rule not from the guidance of the Spirit in all liberty of love, but from the ignorant and prejudiced state of these Jewish believers... One must be above the prejudices of others, and free from their influence, to be able to condescend to them in love.
- Welcome. Paul's first move in Jerusalem is to go to James, where all the elders gather. The place had an official character, but scripture never calls it a bishop's seat.
- Report. He lays out God's work among the Gentiles point by point, and his hearers glorify God.
- Undercurrent. The same men who praised God were still tied to the temple, the sacrifices and the nation. God bore with it in patience.
- Counsel. A servant does well to weigh the judgment of others. But in the end the Word of God must rule, not their opinions.
- Freedom. Only someone free from other people's prejudices can stoop to them in love. Paul went along with the plan, and Acts 21:18-30 stands as a warning.
And having saluted them, he related one by one the things which God had wrought among the nations by his ministry.
Paul has reached Jerusalem after a long journey. The next day he visits James, with all the elders present, and what he reports there shapes the rest of the chapter.
This was not a meeting of the whole church. It was a gathering of the elders, at a house already known for such meetings.
It seems James's house was the known place for any special gathering of elders... There must have been very many groups of Christian Jews in Jerusalem, where they now numbered thousands. Large buildings set apart for the assembly were, it seems, still unknown. This occasion, however, was not a meeting of the whole assembly. Only the elders were present. They no doubt came from those many groups, and their meeting together as elders would do much to keep up order and unity.
Paul does not summarise. He gives the details, and he puts forward the part of his work these hearers knew least about.
He was completely open with them. He made no effort to push to the front what God had done among the Jews or in the synagogues. He laid out before them in detail what he had been given to do among the nations. No doubt the Lord meant this to enlarge their hearts. In Jerusalem they were used to seeing and hearing little of their Gentile brothers and sisters.
The report was long, and its subject was what God had done through a ministry He Himself had given.
Once again the Apostle tells what was surely dearest to the hearts of James and the elders: what God had done among the Gentiles through the ministry He had given him. It must have been a very long account, for he went through the things that had happened in His great work in detail — "one by one."
No religious divide has ever run deeper than the one between Jew and Gentile. The cross closed that old order.
In this world no religious difference could match the depth of the one that cut Jews off from Gentiles. Under the law God Himself kept that separation in full, and our Lord did the same up to the cross. The cross closed the old order and brought in the new... From then on Christ becomes everything, and He is worthy of it. As He is all, so He is in all. Before God the distinctions vanish in Him — Jew and Greek, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and free.
The verse credits the work to Paul's ministry. Some split a person's gift from their ministry; one writer shows why that split does not hold.
But the apostleship, which is here called ministry, is called a gift (charisma) in 1 Corinthians 12. So the distinction between gift and ministry is completely false. The only escape would be to claim that the apostles carried out their apostleship, or ministry, without gift. That contradicts the Lord's own words. He told them to wait in Jerusalem until they were "clothed with power from on high" — that is, with gifts for that ministry.
Nobody in the room disputed a word of what Paul said. The problem lay elsewhere in the city.
They all surely listened with keen interest to the account of God's work through his ministry among the Gentiles and in pagan lands, and they glorified God. No one had a word to say against the work of grace that had gone on abroad. But he was in Jerusalem, and damaging reports about him were spreading through the holy city.
Praise and disquiet sat side by side in the same conversation.
But though they were greatly interested, and praised the Lord for the good news, they evidently felt uneasy. They at once called Paul's attention to the fact, that a great number of Jews who believed in Jesus as the Messiah were zealous observers of the law of Moses and were strongly prejudiced against himself.
The meeting moves from report to advice. One writer draws from it a lesson about how far advice should carry a servant of Christ.
So the servant of Christ does well to be humble in mind, to count others better than himself, to seek their advice, to consider their spiritual judgment carefully, and even to listen to their criticisms and weigh them. Yet in the end he must not be guided by their opinions, but by the Word of God. The passage in Acts 21:18-30 gives us a warning about this.
- Report. Paul meets James and the elders and lays out his work item by item, hiding nothing.
- Subject. He puts the Gentile work first, not his success among Jews. These hearers had heard little of it, and the Lord meant the news to enlarge their hearts.
- Source. The report is about what God did. The ministry itself was a gift of power, not a talent Paul brought to the job.
- Response. They glorified God. No one questioned the work abroad; the trouble was the rumours in the city.
- Caution. Weigh the counsel of others with a humble mind. But the final guide for a servant is the Word of God.
And they having heard [it] glorified God, and said to him, Thou seest, brother, how many myriads there are of the Jews who have believed, and all are zealous of the law.
Paul reaches Jerusalem and reports to James and the elders what God had done among the Gentiles through him. They praise God, then point him to a fact that shaped all that followed: tens of thousands of believing Jews in the city were still zealous for the law of Moses.
Paul did not lead with his results among the Jews. One writer notes what the Lord meant this openness to do for men who saw few Gentile believers.
He was completely open. He made no effort to put forward what God had done among the Jews or in the synagogues. He laid out in detail what God had given him to do among the nations. The Lord surely meant this to enlarge their hearts. In Jerusalem they were used to seeing and hearing very little of their Gentile fellow believers.
The word behind "thousands" is bigger than most readers assume.
"You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed. They are all zealous for the law." The true meaning is tens of thousands, myriads. That may give some a larger idea than they are used to of how vast and fast the spread of the gospel was at that time among that nation.
How could sincere faith in Christ sit alongside temple service? One writer answers by pointing to what these believers had never been taught.
No doubt these believers, whether priests, Pharisees, or eager lovers of the law, were for the most part true souls with sincere faith in Christ. Yet nothing they had heard in the gospel made them feel there was any clash between faith in Christ and priestly service in the worn out and desolate temple... They had heard the music of the gospel. But the note that would lift them up and out of all these things had not yet sounded clearly in their ears.
The report about Paul in the next verse was not accurate. He fought one battle hard and left the other alone.
What they said about themselves was true. But what they had been told about Paul was an exaggeration. Whatever his own sense of Christian liberty, no one was more patient with a Jewish conscience. On the other hand, no one was firmer in teaching Gentile believers that they had nothing to do with law, but with Christ dead and risen.
God had not yet told them to stop keeping the law. That timing explains why Paul did not force the issue.
God had not yet sent out the final word telling them the old covenant was ready to vanish away. So how could a man who followed His ways so closely rush ahead? The early days were a time of transition. Christ was preached first to the Jew and then to the Gentile. The Gentile had never been under law, so he grasped the freedom of the gospel far more simply than the Jew. God bore with the Jew in his prejudices until His closing message came.
That closing message came later, in the letter to Hebrew believers.
For the Hebrew believers that letter was the last trumpet call, summoning them to give up every connection with the old system. Until then the change had been gradual. The gap widened and the difference grew sharper, but not every tie was broken until this final call.
Commentators differ here. Some see his patience as wisdom. Others see what he does next as a real misstep — though one that did not cancel his years of faithfulness.
We think that what is recorded in Acts 21:20-26 shows a lapse in Paul's consecration to Christ. But his earlier years of separation and devotion to his Lord were not treated as lost.
The same writer draws a practical rule from the passage. Take counsel seriously, but do not make it the final authority.
So the servant of Christ does well to be humble, to count others better than himself, to ask their advice, to weigh their spiritual judgment, and even to listen to their criticism. Yet in the end he must not let their opinions guide him, but the Word of God. Acts 21:18-30 gives us a warning about this.
- Report — Paul laid out the Gentile work openly. The Lord meant it to widen hearts in a city that saw few Gentile believers.
- Praise — the elders glorified God for that work. The tension here is not about whether Gentiles were saved.
- Myriads — "thousands" means tens of thousands, a measure of how fast the gospel had spread through Israel.
- Zeal — those myriads were true believers who had never cut their ties to the temple and the law. That note had not yet sounded for them.
- Transition — God bore with their prejudices while the change was under way. His final call to leave the old system came later. Commentators differ on whether Paul's yielding here was patience or a lapse. The warning stands: weigh counsel, but let God's Word rule.
And they have been informed concerning thee, that thou teachest all the Jews among the nations apostasy from Moses, saying that they should not circumcise their children, nor walk in the customs.
Paul has just reached Jerusalem, and the elders meet his report of God's work with a warning. A rumour says he tells Jews abroad to drop Moses — was that true, and what should a servant of God do about it?
The word used here for turning away from Moses is the one behind "apostasy." That is why the charge sounded so grave to a strict Jew.
The word 'apostasy' does not appear in the Authorised Version, but the Greek word behind it does. In Acts 21:21 Paul heard that people accused him of teaching the Jews living among the Gentiles to apostatise from Moses. Paul taught freedom from the law through the death of Christ, and to a strict Jew that would look like apostasy.
Kelly shows where Paul actually drew the line. He fought on one front only — keeping Gentiles out from under the law — and dealt patiently with the Jews.
What Paul really taught was that it was wrong to put Gentiles under the law. He did not interfere with the Jews at this time... The apostle took a firm stand against one thing: the effort to bring the Gentiles under law. That was exactly what believers with a Pharisee mindset were eager for. The push might come from Christians who urged Jewish law on others, or from Gentiles taking up the law themselves. Either way, the apostle rejected and condemned that fatal error. But with the Jews themselves he showed the truest patience. It came from his large heart, and also from tender care for consciences that were easily troubled.
One writer separates the two halves of the accusation and finds them unequal — the first flatly contradicted by Paul's own record, the second with a grain of fact in it.
But reports — what harm they have often done! People pick them up, believe them, and spread them around. They never take the trouble to find out what the reports rested on!... What were the reports? First, that he taught the Jews among the Gentiles to forsake Moses... The first of these was completely untrue. Paul had insisted on Timothy's circumcision (Acts 16:3), and that disproved it. The second had some foundation. At Antioch Paul had rebuked Peter to his face, because Peter pulled back from mixing with Gentiles and would not eat with them (Gal. 2:12-14).
Why did the charge cut so deep in Jerusalem? Hole points to a note those believers had not yet heard.
From the beginning thousands believed. They gladly took their place with the rejected Messiah, yet never cut their links with "Judaism" — the whole system set up through Moses. That system was only a shadow of "the good things to come" (Heb. 10:1)... These believers were priests, Pharisees or eager lovers of the law. Most of them were surely true souls with sincere faith in Christ. Yet nothing they had heard in the gospel had made them feel any clash here. They linked faith in Christ with priestly service in the worn-out and empty temple, with the ways of the Pharisees, and with eager law-keeping. They had listened to the gospel melody. But the note that would have lifted them up and out of all this had not yet sounded clearly in their ears.
The report left Paul no clean way out. Darby reads his choice as a step taken under men's pressure, not under the Spirit.
Paul has put himself in front of what men demand of him. To refuse would be to say that their thoughts about him were true. To do what they wanted was to take his rule from the ignorant and prejudiced state of these Jewish believers, and not from the guidance of the Spirit in all the liberty of love... One must be above the prejudices of others, and free from their influence, to be able to stoop to them in love.
Going along with the plan did not settle anything. Darby weighs what came of it.
This is what comes of trying to fit in with the superstitions of others. He did not do it to win souls by avoiding offence. He did it to convince these superstitious Jews that he lived as they did. That only confirmed them in their darkness!
- Rumour. Word reached Jerusalem that Paul told Jews to abandon Moses. Reports do great harm when nobody checks what they rest on.
- Word. "Forsake" here is the word behind "apostasy." Paul taught freedom from the law through Christ's death, and to a strict Jew that looked like desertion.
- Truth. The charge twisted him. He kept Gentiles out from under the law, but he was patient with Jewish consciences — he even had Timothy circumcised.
- Soil. Thousands in Jerusalem believed, yet kept their links to the temple and the law. The note that would have lifted them out of it had not yet sounded.
- Outcome. Paul was asked to disprove a rumour by fitting in with it. Darby's verdict: pleasing prejudice, instead of following the Spirit in liberty, only confirmed men in their darkness.
What is it then? a multitude must necessarily come together, for they will hear that thou art come.
Paul is in Jerusalem, where thousands of believing Jews are zealous for the law. They have heard that he teaches Jews among the Gentiles to abandon Moses, so the elders ask what to do — and their answer shaped the rest of Paul's life.
The elders were not inventing a crisis. Older translations even read that a crowd must come together.
The important question now between Paul and the elders was how to satisfy the prejudices of these Jewish Christians. They knew that crowds of Jews, both converted and unconverted, would gather as soon as they heard Paul had arrived. For a long time they had believed the most serious charges against him. The accusation was "that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or walk according to our customs." So what was to be done?
The trouble ran deeper than rumour. It lay in what the believers of that city still prized.
Another thing that lay behind the suggestion was that there were now thousands of Jews believing in Christ, but they were all zealous for the law. We should have thought they would be zealous for the gospel and its heavenly hopes. But clearly they had not yet grasped the true character of what they had been brought into. It was to such Jewish Christians as these that the Letter to the Hebrews was written.
The elders had a plan ready. It turned on how Paul looked to his own people.
Now Paul was at Jerusalem, and many of his countrymen viewed him as a renegade Jew, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes. His presence, when known, would stir questions and arouse controversy. But suppose he showed by his acts in the temple that he was, after all, as good a Jew as others. Then all would be well, and people could treat the stories going round about him as slander. The elders had four men under a vow. Let Paul follow the custom, pay their expenses and be counted with them. This advice, they urged, would not cancel the Jerusalem council's decree about Gentile converts. That had been a question about Gentiles; this one was about Jews.
Some find nothing in the plan itself that Paul had to refuse.
Nothing is proposed to him, as many have thought, about taking the vow himself. He is only to purify himself ceremonially for his appearance in the temple, and what they advised was nothing new. In fact there was nothing in all their advice that the apostle could not have done with a good conscience. It was part of his privilege to give up his own liberty in tolerance of the ignorant weakness of others. But the question returns, and will return: was it to be understood in this way?
Others weigh what came of it, and ask whose direction Paul was following.
Let us remember that his submission to these customs put an end to the public testimony of the apostle. Still, as we follow Paul's history, let us always keep his work in mind, all his labours, and the blessing that went with them. In this submission to Jewish ceremonies, he was not guided by the Spirit. He followed the advice of the elders. They held tightly to the law, and his position was theirs.
The scene has a lasting use for anyone who serves God.
Clearly, then, the servant of Christ does well when in humility of mind he considers others better than himself. He does well to take their counsel, to weigh their spiritual judgment with care, or even to listen to their criticisms and weigh them. Yet even so he must not in the last resort be guided by their opinions but by the Word of God.
The plan did not protect Paul. Roman soldiers ended up taking him into custody.
Nothing but God's intervention through the Roman power stopped the Jews on the one hand from carrying out their murderous purpose, or Paul on the other from compromising the truth. Standing at the altar of burnt offering with the sacrifices the law required must have brought that compromise about. It was a mercy to the whole church that the Romans took Paul prisoner. Could the teaching of Hebrews have been set out later, if the great champion of the full Christian faith had at this time practically given it up by yielding to the doctrine of expediency?
- Pressure. A crowd was certain to gather. The elders' question grew out of rumours that Paul taught Jews to abandon Moses.
- Cause. Thousands of believing Jews in Jerusalem were still zealous for the law. They had not yet grasped what they had been brought into — the very readers Hebrews was written for.
- Plan. Their answer was a visible act in the temple: Paul would pay the costs for four men under a vow and show himself as good a Jew as any.
- Debate. Commentators differ. Some see an act Paul could have done with a good conscience. Others see advice taken instead of the Spirit's leading, and the end of his public testimony.
- Overruling. The Roman arrest looked like disaster. It kept Paul from compromising the truth — and Hebrews was still to come.
This do therefore that we say to thee We have four men who have a vow on them;
Paul has just reached Jerusalem, and the leaders there tell him a report is spreading: that he teaches Jews abroad to drop the law of Moses. Their fix is the plan of this verse, and it raises a hard question — when should a servant of God take the advice of fellow believers, and when must he not?
The verse does not say which vow the men had taken.
The only cases of vows in the New Testament are those of Paul at Cenchreae... and the four men at Jerusalem. Acts 18:18; Acts 21:23. These were probably vows of Nazariteship, marked by the head being shaved. According to the law the final shaving had to take place at the tabernacle or temple. Num. 6:18.
Finishing the vow cost money, and the elders asked Paul to cover it (verse 24).
When a Nazarite finished his vow, the law required certain offerings in the temple. These offerings cost a lot, as we can see from Numbers 6. People saw it as an act of great merit and piety when a rich brother paid these offerings for a poor brother, and so enabled him to finish his vow. Paul was not rich, but he had a large and tender heart, and he generously undertook to pay the costs of the four poor Nazarites.
The plan aimed at what the crowds would see.
The elders suggest to him that there were four men who had a vow on them. These he should take and purify himself with them, as well as pay the costs. This action, they reasoned, would not only show that the reports were untrue, but that he, the apostle of Gentiles, "walks orderly and keeps the law."
Paul had a principle for meeting Jews on their own ground. Commentators differ over how far he was at fault here.
Of course Paul knew that the Lord Jesus had done away with such vows (Matt. 5:33-37) when He brought in the grace of God to a condemned world. But he probably applied the principle here, "to the Jews I became as a Jew." In this case, however, it seems he carried that principle a little too far. He was in a tight spot, and he probably saw no other way out. When we are in a wrong place we shall find ourselves virtually bound to do the wrong thing.
Listening to fellow believers is right; handing over the final decision to them is not.
Clearly, then, the servant of Christ does well when in humility of mind he counts others better than himself. He does well to take their advice, weigh their spiritual judgment with care, or even listen to their criticisms and weigh them. Yet in the end he must let the Word of God guide him, not their opinions. The passage, Acts 21:18-30, gives us a warning about this.
The sacrifices attached to the vow were the deepest problem.
Notice again the power of old habits. For us it is as clear as daylight: the sacrifices of the Jews are annulled. The precious sacrifice of Christ has abolished them entirely. But here is a crowd of Christians at Jerusalem, zealous for the law, offering sacrifices, and their elders advising Paul to do the same. Let us remember that his submission to these customs put an end to the apostle's public testimony. In this submission to Jewish ceremonies, the Spirit was not his guide; he followed the advice of the elders.
Paul took the advice.
But what was the consequence? It brought him into all the difficulties from which he had been praying, and begging the church's prayers, to be delivered. Compare Romans 15:30-31 with Acts 21, and you will find that this very act was the source of all the difficulties he had foreseen and dreaded... God in His overruling mercy might turn it to good, as He always will with His children. But it is a striking example of the danger of compromising and going along with people's prejudices, instead of acting on the simple guidance of God's Spirit and Word.
God's mercy had the last word.
He also knows how to overrule any mistakes His servants may make. He can close certain lines of service to them and open other lines, which may in the end prove even more important. Paul's imprisonment led to his writing those inspired letters, and they have built up the church for nineteen centuries.
- The vow — four men were finishing what was most likely a Nazarite vow. The law said it had to end at the temple, with offerings that cost money.
- The invitation — the elders asked Paul to join them and pay their costs, so that everyone would see him keeping the law.
- The pressure — in the wrong place, he had no clean option. A principle he had used well elsewhere was stretched too far.
- The line crossed — he followed the elders' advice, not the Spirit's guidance. Christ's death had already abolished the sacrifices involved.
- The cost and the mercy — this step ended his free public testimony and brought the troubles he had prayed to escape. Yet God used the imprisonment that followed to give the church Paul's letters.
take these and be purified with them, and pay their expenses, that they may have their heads shaved; and all will know that [of those things] of which they have been informed about thee nothing is [true]; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, keeping the law.
In Jerusalem, James and the elders tell Paul about a rumour: that he teaches Jews abroad to abandon the law of Moses. Their fix is this verse — a public act in the temple to prove the rumour false.
The four men were finishing a Nazirite vow, which ended with shaving the head. Paying their closing costs for them was a known act of generosity:
When someone completed the Nazirite vow, the law required certain offerings in the temple. These offerings cost a great deal, as we can see from Numbers 6. People counted it an act of great merit and piety for a rich brother to provide these offerings for a poor brother, and so enable him to complete his vow. Paul was not rich, but he had a large and tender heart, and he generously undertook to pay the costs of the four poor Nazirites.
Some translations render the verse's last phrase "walk orderly." One dictionary explains the Greek verb behind it:
But stoicheō (from steichō, 'to go in order') is limited to walking well — walking by a godly rule, as in Galatians 6:16 and Philippians 3:16. Acts 21:24 is the one place where translators render it "walk orderly."
The plan aimed at how Paul would look to the crowd:
Now Paul was at Jerusalem, and many of his countrymen viewed him as a renegade Jew and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes. His presence, once known, would stir up questions and arouse controversy. But suppose he showed by his actions in the temple that he was after all as good a Jew as anyone else. Then all would be well, and people could treat the stories about him as slanders.
For one writer the question is what the plan made Paul look like, and why the moment mattered:
The object was clearly to make him look like a very good Jew indeed. Was that right? Was it the whole truth? Up to the cross the legal system, the first covenant, had God's sanction. After the cross, in principle, it stood judged. The apostle had surely weighed and measured it all; he did not need any man to show him the truth. At the same time there was no small mixture of love for the people, and we know well how that can cloud the single-minded focus which is every Christian's safeguard.
Some say the act itself was within his liberty, and put the whole weight on how onlookers would read it:
In fact the apostle could have done everything they advised with a good conscience. He was free to give up his own liberty, bearing with the ignorant weakness of others. But the question returns, and will return: was it going to be understood in that way?
Others say Paul stretched a good principle too far, because he was in the wrong place to begin with:
Paul probably applied the principle here, "To the Jews I became as a Jew." Here, though, it seems that principle goes a little too far. He was in a difficulty, and probably saw no other way out. When we are in a wrong place we shall find ourselves virtually bound to do the wrong thing.
One writer draws a caution from this passage about how far to follow advice:
Clearly, then, the servant of Christ does well when he humbly thinks of others as better than himself. He takes their counsel, weighs their spiritual judgement, or even listens to their criticisms. Yet in the end he must follow the Word of God, not their opinions. The passage in Acts 21:18-30 gives us a warning about this.
The advice came to the one man least in need of it:
This was not strange advice for the Christians in Jerusalem to give, but it seems a descending path for the apostle Paul to follow. No one knew better than he how to walk as dead with Christ and risen with Him. No one knew better how to please the Lord without fear of the opinions of men, or even of fellow believers.
Paul agreed, and the plan did not settle the trouble. Its failure became his way out:
The eye of the Lord was on His servant. So He allowed him to be persuaded into this compromising position — surely for his profit, and for our warning. Then He delivered him out of it in a very unexpected way.
- Pressure. Thousands of believing Jews were zealous for the law. A rumour said Paul told Jews abroad to abandon Moses.
- Plan. Purify himself with four Nazirites and pay for their offerings. Then everyone would see he "walked orderly" — a phrase meaning to walk by a godly rule.
- Point of dispute. Commentators differ. Some say the advice was within Paul's liberty, and only what onlookers would read into it was wrong. Others say a man in the wrong place stretched a true principle too far.
- Warning. Weigh the counsel of others humbly, but let the Word of God, not their opinion, decide the last step.
- Overruling. The plan failed — and that failure was how the Lord lifted His servant out of a position he could not have escaped himself.
But concerning [those of] the nations who have believed, we have written, deciding that they should [observe no such thing, only to] keep themselves both from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication.
Paul has just arrived in Jerusalem, and the leaders ask him to show the Jewish believers that he still keeps the customs of Moses. Verse 25 is their balancing note: the Gentiles who believed had already been answered in a letter.
The leaders are not making a new rule here. They point back to a decision made years before. Jerusalem had settled the question of circumcising Gentile converts, and had sent the answer out in a letter.
In their past dealings with the Gentiles who believed (Acts 15:22-29), the apostles and elders had acted with divine wisdom. So it is added here that they had written to the Gentiles who believed, giving their judgment (v. 25). These commands were clearly understood before the law was even given to Israel. In such things Christianity only confirms the broad principles God had laid down before Israel existed.
The same four items appear again, word for word, years later. The decision held. It was not a short-term compromise that faded away.
Only at Jerusalem could this question be settled for good. There it was decided, and the leaders held to that decision. James and all the elders confirmed it years later (Acts 21:25).
These four things are not scraps of the law of Moses kept back as a token. Each one touches a right that belongs to God Himself.
To recognize an idol in any way was a direct insult to God, for the idol takes the place that belongs to God. Second, they must avoid sexual immorality. This is a serious violation of the relationships God has set up for the blessing of mankind. Third, they must not eat things strangled, nor blood. God requires that the blood of an animal be drained out before the flesh is eaten. The blood is the life, and we must show this respect for God's rights as the life-giver.
The last two items sound like one item said twice. They are not. The difference lies in what happens to the blood.
There ought to be no question that "blood" means the blood drained out of the animal for cooking. That is plainly different from "strangled," where the aim is to keep the blood from flowing out. Both are forbidden. God demands that man, by going without, should own that life belongs to Him. If any are so self-willed as to say they do not see or understand, let them admit their ignorance and obey. This is not a Jewish or Mosaic rule only. It has held for man ever since Noah and the flood (Gen. 9:4).
The whole weight of the verse falls on what is absent from the list. Circumcision is not there. Law-keeping is not there. When that letter first arrived, the effect on the Gentile churches was relief.
It was Jerusalem that had decided the law was not binding on the Gentiles. When they hear this, they are overjoyed at their freedom from the yoke of slavery that others would have forced onto their necks.
Yet the leaders' own position looks odd. They ask Paul to show his loyalty to Moses, while admitting they asked nothing of the kind from the Gentiles.
They confirmed what they had agreed before about the Gentile converts. They were not expected to keep any such things, though they were urged to keep away from things offered to idols, from blood and from sexual immorality. It is striking that they saw nothing inconsistent in asking Jews to do what Gentiles were not asked to do. They were very slow to give up the Jewish system of things.
There is also a warning here about how far to follow the advice of others.
The servant of Christ does well when he humbly counts others better than himself, asks their advice, weighs their spiritual judgment, and even listens to their criticism. Yet in the end he must not be guided by their opinions, but by the Word of God. Acts 21:18-30 gives us a warning about this.
- Settled — The four rules were not invented in Acts 21. Jerusalem had put them in writing years earlier, and the leaders still stood by them.
- Older — Each item guards something God claimed before Israel existed. Idols take His place. Immorality breaks the bonds He set up. Blood is life, and life is His.
- Distinct — "Blood" is blood drained off for food. "Strangled" is meat with the blood kept in. Both are refused for one reason: life belongs to God.
- Freed — What the list leaves out is the point. Circumcision and law-keeping were never laid on Gentile believers. The churches rejoiced when they heard it.
- Warned — Good men gave Paul advice that did not match what they themselves had written for others. Weigh counsel, but let the Word of God have the last word.