May 1, 2022
Acts 21:17-25
“Rumor Has It”
Service Overview: Rumor had it that Paul was teaching Jews to turn away from the law, but this just wasn’t true. To prove it, Paul not only participates in a purification ritual with some local Jews, but pays for their participation OUT OF HIS OWN POCKET! Sometimes the wisest thing to do is to approach open-handed issues in a way that promotes peace or furthers the weightier priorities of Christ’s kingdom.
Memory Verse for the Week:
“Without wood a fire goes out; without a gossip a quarrel dies down.” Proverbs 26:20 (NIV)
Background Information:
- (v. 23). These four men had taken a Nazarite vow, which required that they spend thirty days without touching strong drink or wine and let their hair grow. At the end of that thirty days, they would cut their hair and burn it along with the sacrifices, a purification ritual that lasted seven days in accordance with the feast of Pentecost. (R.C. Sproul, Acts, 323)
- Often a Jew who had been in Gentile territory for a lengthy time would undergo ritual purification upon returning to his homeland. The time period for this purification was seven days. (Grant R. Osborne, Life application Bible Commentary: Acts, 363)
- The Jerusalem Council (see Acts 15) gave indirect approval to Jewish Christians who wished to continue living within the Law; it merely forbade them from forcing the complete Law on Gentiles. Thus, it is possible that there were a large number of Jews in the Jerusalem area who believed in Jesus and still maintained their ancient traditions. (Phillip A. Bence, Acts: A Bible Commentary in the Wesleyan Tradition, Kindle Location 4237)
- The elders informed Paul of the large contingency of Jews who had believed. The problem, however, was that all of those Jews were zealous for the law (15:5), meaning that they probably would not be rejoicing in the success of Paul’s ministry among the Gentiles. This explains the wisdom of James and the elders to have a meeting alone with Paul rather than in an open forum. While they supported Paul and his ministry, he was somewhat of a hindrance to their continued ministry to the Jews. This was the reason behind their request that he join in the purification rites (21:22-24). (Osborne, Acts, 362)
- The circumcising of Gentile converts as a kind of insurance policy, lest faith in Christ should be insufficient in itself, [Paul] denounced as a departure from the purity of the gospel ( 5:2–4). But in itself circumcision was a matter of indifference; it made no difference to one’s status in God’s sight (Gal. 5:6; 6:15). If a Jewish father, after he became a follower of Jesus, wished to have his son circumcised in accordance with ancestral custom, Paul had no objection. (F.F. Bruce, New International Commentary on the New Testament: Acts, 425)
The question to answer…
Why in the world would Paul pay for ceremonies and sacrifices Jesus’ death and resurrection did away with?
Answer…
Because Jesus didn’t come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it, and Paul’s Jewishness didn’t cease by becoming a Christian.
What’s important to know about a text like this?
- The problem: a rumor was hindering effectiveness.
(v.21 | Acts 28:28; Romans 2:25-29; 1 Corinthians 7:19; Galatians 3:14; Colossians 3:11)
In the midst of the jubilation, Luke tells us, a rumor had begun to circulate among the Christians from the Jewish community. People were saying that Paul had taught Jewish converts to forget about the law of God, to despise the temple, and to do away with all the sacred traditions and rituals. This was patently false; Paul had told the Gentile converts that they had freedom in adiaphorous matters, issues of indifference. Yet because there was a desire among some in the church to bring Paul down, he was told that he had to deal with these rumors. (Sproul, Acts, 323)
- The proposal: prove them wrong.
(v. 24 | Deut. 6:18; Psalm 15:1-3; Psalm 35:24; 106:3; Prov. 11:5; 21:3, 15; 1 Peter 2:12)
James devised a plan. He sought to prove to everyone that Paul was a Christian and a loyal Jew. James suggested that Paul visibly participate, along with four Christian Jews, in Jewish purification rites (21:24). A generous contribution to the Temple treasury (pay[ing] their expenses [21:24]), perhaps another ritual haircut (another temporary Nazarite vow? [see 18:18]), and hopefully everything would be okay. (Phillip A. Bence, Acts: A Bible Commentary in the Wesleyan Tradition, Kindle Location 4248)
- The purpose: uproot prejudice and advance unity.
(vv. 24-25 | John 13:34-35; Acts 10:34-35; 15:7-9; Romans 10:12; 1 Corinthians 1:10; Ephesians 4:32; Philippians 2:2; Colossians 3:11; James 2:9; 1 Peter 3:8)
Paul was following his own announced practice. He said that when he was with the Jews, he became as a Jew; when he was with the Gentiles, he became a Gentile; when he was with the weak, he limited himself and became as weak as they. He did this to reach people at their own level. (Stedman, Acts, 280)
Paul wanted to do everything possible to overcome the presence of prejudice in the church. One way he tried to do this was by collecting an offering from the Gentile churches, which he was determined to bring to Jerusalem as a demonstration of the love of Gentile believers for Jews and of the solidarity of the people of God throughout the world. (James Montgomery Boice, Acts, 358)
What’s important to do in light of a text like this?
A. Rejoice when God is on the move!
(vv. 19-20 | Psalm 9:14; 14:7; 32:11; 53:6; 118:15; Isaiah 61:10; Rom. 12:12; Phil. 4:4-7)
Luke writes that when they arrived in Jerusalem, the brethren received them gladly. The next day, Paul and his entourage went and visited James, presumably James the brother of Jesus, and the elders of the community and gave an account of all that had taken place on the missionary journeys. The Jewish Christians, who now numbered in the thousands, were beside themselves with joy, and they began to celebrate for the work God had accomplished through the missionary enterprise of Paul and his comrades. (R.C. Sproul, Acts, 323)
Success depends entirely and absolutely on the immediate blessing and influence of God. (Jonathan Edwards, “God Glorified in Man’s Dependence” sermon, c.1731)
B. Reject listening to, and/or propagating, rumors.
(Ex. 23:1; Prov. 11:13; 16:28; 18:8; 20:19; 26:20; 2 Tim. 2:23; Titus 3:2-9; James 3:3-8)
When the fire came down and God’s glory filled the temple, would you have considered taking a sledgehammer and striking the temple? Of course not! Then why are we so quick to gossip, slander leadership, and divide the Church? If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy that person. Why is God so harsh about this? Paul explained that God’s temple is sacred, and we—collectively—are that temple. Every time you speak evil about a member of the Church, it is like taking a sledgehammer to the temple. Are you sure you want to keep doing that? (Francis Chan, Letters to the Church, 38)
Look up to a sympathizing Savior at God’s right hand, and pour out your
heart before Him. He can be touched with the feelings of your trials, for
He Himself suffered when He was tempted. Are you alone? So was He.
Are you misrepresented and slandered? So was He. Are you forsaken by
friends? So was He. Are you persecuted? So was He. Are you wearied in
body and grieved in spirit? So was He. Yes! He can feel for you, and He
can help as well as feel. (J.C. Ryle, Practical Religion, 22)
C. When it comes to open-handed matters, stick to your convictions, but live in peace anyways.
(Ps. 34:14; Mat. 5:9; Romans 12:18; 14:1-23; Galatians 5:22; Hebrews 12:14; James 3:18)
It is the sign of a truly great man that he can subordinate his own wishes and views for the sake of the Church. There is a time when compromise is not a sign of weakness but of strength. (William Barclay, The Acts of the Apostles, 156)
Paul was able to compromise for unity without sacrificing his union with Christ. Secondary things did not matter because of his ultimate commitment to Christ. (Lloyd J. Ogilvie, The Communicator’s Commentary: Acts, 305)
We have a tendency to argue and divide over trivial matters when we forget hell exists. (Francis Chan, Letters to the Church, 124)
Gospel Application…
Never forget! The gospel is the good news of God’s grace, not personal performance.
(Romans 2:25-29; 5:8; 6:14; Ephesians 2:8-9; 1 Corinthians 7:19; James 4:6)
Christ fulfilled the law and released people from its burden of guilt. But the law still teaches many valuable principles and gives guidelines for living. Paul was not observing the laws in order to be saved. He was simply keeping the laws to avoid offending those he wished to reach with the gospel. (Grant R. Osborne, Life application Bible Commentary: Acts, 364)
Spiritual Challenge Questions…
Reflect on these questions in your time with the Lord this week, or discuss with a Christian family member or Life Group.
- When, or in what matters are Christians often tempted to make a rule or tradition as important as God’s written Word?
- How can we discern when to stand up for certain beliefs and when we should give in for the sake of others?
- Have you ever found yourself in a situation where someone is passing along information about someone else which is not meant to result in their benefit (i.e. rumors, slander, gossiping)? What are some ways we can not only avoid those situations, but promote grace and truth over gossip or slander?
- What were some of Paul’s greatest concerns for the church? How did he demonstrate those concerns, and how might we reflect similar conviction?
Quotes to note…
[Paul’s] consent to the plan of the elders is an illustration of his own teaching on the subject of expediency in ethical concerns where matters of moral principle are not at stake (cf. 1 Corinthians 8 and 9). In the light of this it was not wrong for Paul to do as he did. Whether it was wise has often been debated. There is little evidence that the action produced the desired effect; it did lead to his arrest and nearly to his death. (Arnold E. Airhart, Beacon Bible Expositions: Acts, 248)
[Paul] adopted the same flexible attitude to such customs as observance of special days or abstention from certain kinds of food: “let everyone be fully convinced in his own mind” (Rom. 14:2–6). He himself was happy to conform to Jewish customs when he found himself in Jewish society. Such conformity came easily to him, in view of his upbringing, but he had learned to be equally happy to conform to Gentile ways in Gentile company. (F.F. Bruce, The New International Commentary on the New Testament: Acts, 425)
Paul did warn the Gentiles not to get involved in the old Jewish religion (Gal. 4:1–11), but he nowhere told the Jews that it was wrong for them to practice their customs, so long as they did not trust in ceremony or make their customs a test of fellowship (Rom. 14:1— 15:7). There was freedom to observe special days and diets, and believers were not to judge or condemn one another. The same grace that gave the Gentiles freedom to abstain also gave the Jews freedom to observe. All God asked was that they receive one another and not create problems or divisions. (Warren Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, 392)
Mobs are stirred up by prejudice and exclusivism, not by reason and just charges. Religious fervor is as dangerous as political hatred. (Lloyd J. Ogilvie, The Communicator’s Commentary: Acts, 306)
All along, Paul has taught the Jews from their own Scriptures that the beautiful symbols of Judaism are pictures that point to Jesus Christ. The ritual sacrifices represent the sacrifice of Jesus upon the cross. Jesus did not come to do away with the Old Testament rituals but to fulfill them. Throughout the book of Acts we see Jewish Christians going to the temple and offering sacrifices. The sacrifices ended when the temple was destroyed in AD. 70 (in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy in Luke 21:20—24). (Ray C. Stedman, God’s Unfinished Book: Acts, 280)
The church seems to have always been susceptible to the legalist, the one who demands religious performance out of those who wish to be numbered among the faithful. These Jerusalem leaders seemed to have been intimidated by their Jewish Christian brothers and were riding a fence, placating the zealous at the price of grace. (Grant R. Osborne, Life application Bible Commentary: Acts, 364)
Again we wonder: did Paul groan inside at the necessity of proving his integrity? We do not know. After all he’d faced out on the frontiers, the test of his loyalty to the Law of Moses and customs of Israel must have seemed absurd, if not an affront. But the courage of the Lord stabilized him. Christ was his security, not people; not even fellow believers. (Lloyd J. Ogilvie, The Communicator’s Commentary: Acts, 305)
Paul had received his education in Jerusalem. The city had for centuries been the worship center for Paul’s people. Likely Paul prayed for at least one more chance to preach the good news of Jesus to his home city. He received that opportunity, but, unfortunately, Paul’s ministry there did not produce new converts or establish a new church. Instead, God allowed His servant, for all practical purposes, to be laid aside for several years. Even so, God still fulfilled His plan. (Phillip A. Bence, Acts: A Bible Commentary in the Wesleyan Tradition, Kindle Location 4216)
Despite the broad-minded decisions of the Jerusalem Council (see commentary on Acts 15), these Jewish Christians evidently saw Gentile Christians, who did not keep the full requirements of the Jewish Law, as second-class believers. Certainly some of the Jewish converts could have viewed the Law in a more flexible manner, as Stephen, Paul, and others had; James may have exaggerated with the word all. But it might not be surprising if a majority of the Jewish Christians maintained strong loyalty to the Law. (Phillip A. Bence, Acts: A Bible Commentary in the Wesleyan Tradition, Kindle Location 4226)
There is no evidence that Paul had, in Jerusalem, spoken directly against Jewish customs. Yet, these Jews may have known that Paul had previously taught Gentiles that circumcision was no longer necessary as a means to God (see Galatians 5:6; Romans 2:25-29). In any case, the Jews in Jerusalem followed the pattern their brothers elsewhere had followed. They became jealous of Paul and afraid of his message. (Phillip A. Bence, Acts: A Bible Commentary in the Wesleyan Tradition, Kindle Location 4260)
Upon their arrival in Jerusalem, Paul and his friends were received warmly, a testimony to the growing reputation of the apostle and gratitude for the generous gift he was bringing from the churches (see 24:17; Romans 15:25-27; 1 Corinthians 16:1-4; 2 Corinthians 8:13-14; 9:12-13). (Grant R. Osborne, Life application Bible Commentary: Acts, 360)
Aware, however, of the strong Jewish animosity toward Paul, James and the elders encouraged the apostle to participate in a public Jewish ceremony of purification at the temple. Such an act, they felt, would quell the false rumors circulating about Paul—that he was actively undermining the Mosaic law. (Grant R. Osborne, Life application Bible Commentary: Acts, 361)
James, Jesus’ brother, was the leader of the Jerusalem church (15:13-21; Galatians 1:19; 2:9). He was called an apostle, even though he wasn’t one of the original twelve who had followed Jesus. (Grant R. Osborne, Life application Bible Commentary: Acts, 361)
The Jerusalem elders responded well to Paul’s report of what God had done among the Gentiles. They praised God—a testimony to their love for the spread of the gospel and their submission to the way God directed his movement. (Grant R. Osborne, Life application Bible Commentary: Acts, 362)
…who live among the Gentiles to turn away from Moses (“turn away” is the Greek word apostasian, from which the word “apostasy” comes). (Grant R. Osborne, Life application Bible Commentary: Acts, 363)
The Jerusalem council (chapter 15) had settled the issue of circumcision of Gentile believers. Evidently, there was a rumor that Paul had gone far beyond the council’s decision, even forbidding Jews to circumcise their children. It was true that Paul was downplaying the importance of circumcision and did not require keeping the Jewish customs, but that was for the Gentiles, not for the Jews. (Grant R. Osborne, Life application Bible Commentary: Acts, 363)
The rumors about Paul, of course, were not true, but Paul willingly submitted to this Jewish custom to show that he was not working against the council’s decision and that he was still Jewish in his lifestyle. (Grant R. Osborne, Life application Bible Commentary: Acts, 363)
(Sometimes believers must submit to authorities to avoid offending others, especially when such offense would hinder God’s work.) (Grant R. Osborne, Life application Bible Commentary: Acts, 363)
Paul’s generous offer to pay these expenses and join them would refute the reports about him and show that he was living in obedience to the law. (Grant R. Osborne, Life application Bible Commentary: Acts, 363)
Those who think Paul was wrong for going along with this request by the elders forget one of the marks of Paul’s ministry: “To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law” (1 Corinthians 9:20 NIV). This was one of those times when it was not worth offending the Jews, so Paul wisely chose to comply. (Grant R. Osborne, Life application Bible Commentary: Acts, 364)
[Paul] engaged in this Jewish custom not because he had to but because he wanted to keep peace in the Jerusalem church. Although Paul was a man of strong convictions, he was willing to compromise on nonessential points, becoming all things to all people so that he might save some (1 Corinthians 9:19-23). Churches can split over disagreements about minor issues or traditions. Instead, like Paul, we should remain firm on Christian essentials but flexible on nonessentials. Of course, no one should violate his or her true convictions, but sometimes we need to exercise the gift of mutual submission for the sake of the gospel. (Grant R. Osborne, Life application Bible Commentary: Acts, 364)
James and the other elders “praised God” because of all He was doing among the Gentiles. But there was another matter of deep concern that was affecting the Jerusalem church. “Many thousands,” literally tens of thousands (Gk. muriades), among the Jews in the Jerusalem area had believed on Jesus as their Messiah, Lord, and Savior. Yet they were still “zealous for the law”: eagerly devoted to the law of Moses. They considered themselves Jews who had found the true Messiah. (Stanley M. Horton, Acts, Kindle Location 7983)
False teachers, probably Judaizers or else unconverted Jews from Asia Minor, Macedonia, or Greece, had come among the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem. They had been telling the Jerusalem believers that Paul was teaching “all the Jews who live among the Gentiles” (the nations outside Palestine) not to circumcise their children. They also had said that Paul taught them to stop conducting their lives according to their (Jewish) customs. This was nothing but slander. Paul had had Timothy circumcised (Acts 16: 3); he had recently taken and fulfilled a vow himself (18: 18) and had observed Jewish feasts (20:6, 16). He had even now traveled far to observe the Feast of Pentecost (20:16). His letters show he did not ask Jewish Christians to stop observing their customs. (Stanley M. Horton, Acts, Kindle Location 7992)
James and the elders had a suggestion that they hoped would avoid a split in the Church. They saw a way to stop the rumors and show they were false. Four of the Jewish believers had taken a vow upon themselves, obviously a temporary Nazirite vow. By this vow any Israelite man or woman could declare their total dedication to God and to His will. (Stanley M. Horton, Acts, Kindle Location 8000)
Paul did not have to take the vow himself. But he was asked to go through ceremonies of purifying himself along with them and pay for the sacrifices so they could complete the vow and shave their heads. This would show the believers and everyone in Jerusalem that Paul did not teach Jewish believers to go against the customs of their fathers. It would also answer all the false things said about Paul and would demonstrate that Paul himself was “living in obedience to the law” (cf. 1 Cor. 9: 19– 23). (Stanley M. Horton, Acts, Kindle Location 8006)
That the Gentiles were being saved by faith in Christ without works of the law, presented no problem to this group. Indeed, for this “they glorified the Lord.” Nevertheless, they confronted a problem concerning Paul’s presence in Jerusalem which involved the believers and the populace as a whole. (Arnold E. Airhart, Beacon Bible Expositions: Acts, 247)
At the fulfillment of a Nazarite vow a man shaved his head and burned the hair at the door of the Temple. Then he offered two lambs and a ram, along with meal and drink offerings. Frequently poor worshippers could not afford these offerings, and then some wealthy person provided the money for them as an act of piety. The elders proposed that Paul pay the charges for the four men involved, as well as participate with them in the Temple ritual of purification. This would prove to all that Paul himself reverenced the law. (Arnold E. Airhart, Beacon Bible Expositions: Acts, 247)
[Paul] insisted that Gentiles should be entirely free of the Mosaic ceremonial law. Circumcision was to him nothing in itself (1 Cor. 7:19). Jewish Christians might keep the ceremonial law if they chose, but they would do it as Jewish custom, not as a Christian obligation. (Arnold E. Airhart, Beacon Bible Expositions: Acts, 248)
On this occasion Paul was doubtless motivated by his great passion to win his countrymen to Christ and to cement the Church. He would become ” as under the law” so that he might win those under the law. (Arnold E. Airhart, Beacon Bible Expositions: Acts, 248)
While there was rejoicing over Paul’s report, there was also apprehension about Paul’s reputation among believing Jews who were zealous for the Law. A patently false report had gone out concerning Paul. It was true Paul taught Gentiles that it was religiously inconsequential whether they circumcised their sons or not and he did not teach them Jewish customs. However, he never taught Jews not to circumcise their sons or to disregard Jewish customs. (John F. Walvoord, The Bible Knowledge Commentary, New Testament, 416)
Was Paul wrong in entering into this arrangement, which was a specific part of the Law? For several reasons it may be said he was not:
(1) Paul himself had previously taken a Nazirite vow (Acts 18:18).
(2) Later he unashamedly referred to this incident before Felix (24:17-18).
(3) This action on Paul’s part only confirmed one of the principles of his ministry which was to become like a Jew to win the Jews, and to become like one under the Law to win those under it (1 Cor. 9:20).
(4) One of Paul’s goals for the Jerusalem trip, along with relief of the poor, was the unifying of Jews and Gentiles.
(5) Paul was not denying the finished work of Christ by offering animal sacrifices. The epistles Paul had already written by this time (Gal., 1 and 2 Thes., 1 and 2 Cor., Rom.) make it clear that such a denial was incomprehensible. He must have looked on these sacrifices as memorials. After all, this will be the significance of millennial sacrifices (Ezek. 43:18-46:24; Mal. 1:11; 3:3-4).
(6) Paul later asserted he did not violate his own conscience (Acts 23:1). (John F. Walvoord, The Bible Knowledge Commentary, New Testament, 416)
Nowhere in Acts (except later at 24:17, in reporting Paul’s speech before Felix) has Luke mentioned this collection for the Christians of Jerusalem, probably because he did not know how to explain to his Gentile readers (1) its significance as being much more than a way of currying favor and (2) Paul’s fears that the Jerusalem Christians might not accept it. But the presentation of this collection was the chief motive of Paul’s going to Jerusalem (cf. 1 Cor 16:1-4; Rom 15:25-27). And he felt it absolutely necessary to present it personally to the Jerusalem church so that it be viewed as a true symbol of faith and unity and not as a bribe-though he feared both opposition from the Jews and rejection by the Jewish Christians of the city (cf. Rom 15:30-31). (Richard N. Longenecker, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, John and Acts, 519)
25 Many commentators have argued that the fourfold Jerusalem decree (cf. 15:20, 29) has no relevance to this situation but was only brought in to inform Paul for the first time of something drawn up behind his back at Jerusalem after the Jerusalem Council. Yet the reference to the decree here is closely connected with what has gone before and should be viewed as a reminder of the early Christians’ agreed-on basis for fellowship between Jewish and Gentile believers. Having urged Paul to follow their proposed course of action, the leaders of the Jerusalem church go on to assure him that this in no way rescinds their earlier decision to impose nothing further on Gentile converts than these four injunctions given for the sake of harmony within the church and in order not to impede the progress of the Jewish Christian mission. (Richard N. Longenecker, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, John and Acts, 520)
Nothing is said about the gift which Paul and his companions brought, but it helps to understand Luke’s account if the gift is borne in mind. Both Paul and James could remember the injunction to “remember the poor” which, on a previous visit to Jerusalem, Paul had received from the “pillars” of the church (Gal. 2:10). (F.F. Bruce, The New International Commentary on the New Testament: Acts, 424)
But there was something that caused them serious anxiety, and now they had an opportunity of unburdening their minds to Paul about it. It was freely rumored in Jerusalem that Paul not only refused to impose the requirements of the Jewish law on his Gentile converts (and, despite the Jerusalem decree, this was probably still resented by some of the “zealots for the law” in the church); he actually dissuaded Jewish believers, it was said, from continuing to practise their ancestral customs, handed down from Moses: he even encouraged them to give up circumcising their sons. James and the elders evidently regarded these rumors as false; but it would take more than a merely verbal assurance to persuade those who paid heed to such rumors that they had been misinformed. (F.F. Bruce, The New International Commentary on the New Testament: Acts, 425)
The Jerusalem leaders had agreed years before that Paul should minister to the Gentiles (Gal. 2:7–10), and the elders rejoiced at what they heard. The phrase “declared particularly” means “reported in detail, item by item.” Paul gave a full and accurate account, not of what he had done, but of what the Lord had done through his ministry (see 1 Cor. 15:10). (Warren Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, 391)
You get the impression that the legalists had been working behind the scenes. No sooner had Paul finished his report than the elders brought up the rumors that were then being circulated about Paul among the Jewish Christians. It has well been said that, though a rumor doesn’t have a leg to stand on, it travels mighty fast! (Warren Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, 391)
It seems incredible that Paul’s enemies would accuse him of these things, for all the evidence was against them. Paul had Timothy circumcised before taking him along on that second missionary journey (Acts 16:1–3). Paul had taken a Jewish vow while in Corinth (Acts 18:18), and it was his custom not to offend the Jews in any way by deliberately violating their customs or the law of Moses (1 Cor. 9:19–23). However, rumors are not usually based on fact, but thrive on half-truths, prejudices, and outright lies. (Warren Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, 392)
If it had been a matter involving somebody’s personal salvation, you can be sure that Paul would never have cooperated, for that would have compromised his message of salvation by grace, through faith. But this was a matter of personal conviction on the part of Jewish believers, who were given the freedom to accept or reject the customs. (Warren Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, 392)
The church leaders glorified God for all that He had done through Paul. But the time of praise was quickly followed by the sharing of a problem. The Apostle’s presence in Jerusalem presented the leaders with a dilemma. He was under heavy criticism, not only from the officialdom of Israel, but from fellow Christians. Hostility from the Hebrew leaders was one thing, but criticism from believers was more difficult to take. (Lloyd J. Ogilvie, The Communicator’s Commentary: Acts, 303)
The problem was with the converted Jews who had become disciples, and had swelled the ranks of the Jerusalem church. They believed in Christ, but were still “zealous for the law” (v. 20). An old problem reared its ugly head. Rumors had reached the Hebrew Christians that Paul was telling Jews among the Gentiles to forsake the Law of Moses, encouraging them not to circumcise their children and not to keep the customs of Israel. The very people who should have rejoiced with Paul over the success of his ministry were the source of negative criticism that was raging in the church at Jerusalem. (Lloyd J. Ogilvie, The Communicator’s Commentary: Acts, 304)
Most of us are able to withstand criticism from our protagonists or enemies. It is when fellow Christians criticize us that it hurts deeply. (Lloyd J. Ogilvie, The Communicator’s Commentary: Acts, 304)
Imagine how Paul must have felt. He was bursting with the joy of the victories of the Lord in Asia Minor, Macedonia, and Greece. His homecoming was denied the triumph because of the criticism of those who had chosen to believe, and pass on, the rumors about his ministry. (Lloyd J. Ogilvie, The Communicator’s Commentary: Acts, 304)
We wonder why the leadership of the Jerusalem church was not as decisive with the critics as they were with Paul when they told him what to do to diffuse the criticism. (Lloyd J. Ogilvie, The Communicator’s Commentary: Acts, 304)
Remember that the Apostle himself took that vow when returning to Jerusalem from the second missionary journey (Acts 18:18). (Lloyd J. Ogilvie, The Communicator’s Commentary: Acts, 305)
When Paul arrived in Jerusalem, he presented the church with a problem. The leaders accepted him and saw God’s hand in his work; but rumours had been spread that he had encouraged Jews to forsake their ancestral faith. This Paul had never done. True, he had insisted that the Jewish Law was irrelevant for the Gentile; but he had never sought to draw the Jew away from the customs of his fathers. (William Barclay, The Acts of the Apostles, 155)
This was a vow taken in gratitude for some special blessing from the hand of God. It involved abstention from meat and wine for thirty days, during which the hair had to be allowed to grow. It seems that sometimes at least the last seven days had to be spent entirely in the Temple courts. At the end certain offerings had to be brought— a year old lamb for a sin-offering, a ram for a peace offering, a basket of unleavened bread, cakes of fine flour mingled with oil and a meat offering and a drink offering. Finally, the hair had to be shorn and burned on the altar with the sacrifice. It is obvious that this was a costly business. Work had to be given up and all the elements of the sacrifice had to be bought. It was quite beyond the resources of many who would have wished to undertake it. So it was considered an act of piety for some wealthier person to defray the expenses of someone taking the vow. That was what Paul was asked to do in the case of these four men and he consented. By so doing he could demonstrate so that all could see it that he was himself an observer of the Law. (William Barclay, The Acts of the Apostles, 155)
Paul never taught the Jews to abandon the Law. He only taught that the Gentiles should not be subject to these Jewish provisions. (Ray C. Stedman, God’s Unfinished Book: Acts, 280)
Paul was a missionary to the Gentiles; God had called him to be so. But he was still a Jew, and he had a heart for the Jewish people. He even Says in Romans 9: “I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, the people of Israel” (vv. 3—4). I do not know that I would say that. I doubt if there are many Christian, today who could say and actually mean that they would be willing to be sent to hell for the sake of their own people, whoever those people might be. Yet that is what Paul said. He meant it. He loved his people and was concerned for them. If he had not been concerned for them, he would not have gone to Jerusalem for this final time, particularly after having received the many warnings he did receive against going. (James Montgomery Boice, Acts, 358)
The church in Jerusalem was composed largely of Jews who wanted to maintain as many of their Jewish traditions as possible. There are ways In which that might be done rightly, at least in part, just as German Christians can retain certain German customs while still being Christians and Asians can retain certain Asian customs, and so on. But it was more complicated than that in this case, because so much of the Jewishness of the church was wrapped up in traditions that had been fulfilled and abolished by Christ’s Coming. The Jerusalem church was trying to maintain not merely the moral standards of the law of Moses, which are binding upon all men and women but also the Law’s system of ceremonial purifications and observances. (James Montgomery Boice, Acts, 360)
It is true that when this issue came to a head at the great council of Jerusalem recorded in Acts 15 the battle was won for the cause of Gentile liberty. But the problem did not go away then, at least not for the Jerusalem believers. In Jerusalem the law was still very important, and anybody who suggested that it was not necessary or even proper to keep the ceremonial law was suspect. (James Montgomery Boice, Acts, 360)