Acts 21:1-40

What is the theme of this chapter?

From Miletus to Caesarea, to Jerusalem.

What is the key verse(s) of this chapter? Verses 20-21

And when they heard it, they glorified God. And they said to him, “You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed. They are all zealous for the law, and they have been told about you 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.

What can I apply to my life from this chapter (things to do/avoid)?

Well, I could put here that I can avoid falling into temptation like Paul did when he decided to go along with what James purposed — IF I believed Paul was wrong in doing so.  But I'm still not convinced that he was.

So thinking out loud here, it seems obvious that the second and third passages below are connected.  But what if all three passages are connected?  Williams tells us that Paul had taken "the vow of a temporary Nazirite" and that "the period engaged in the vow expired at the time of reaching Cenchreae."  Walker makes a point of saying this about this same Acts 18 passage: "According to the letter of the law, this ceremony should take place in the temple of Jerusalem; but we have evidence that, at that period, a person who had taken a temporary Nazirite vow was allowed to poll his head elsewhere provided that he carried the hair so polled with him to the temple and burnt it with the rest of his hair when finally shaven there.  Josephus speaks of these modified Nazirite vows (Wars. II.15.1).  It would appear that St. Paul had taken a Nazirite vow, possibly on deliverance from some great danger, and that he polled his head before embarkation, intending to complete the ceremonies of his vow in Jerusalem."  So Paul arrives in Jerusalem in Acts 21 and James suggests he joins with 4 others who are under Nazarite vows and pay for the completion of their vows — plus his own.

After this, Paul stayed many days longer and then took leave of the brothers^[c] and set sail for Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila. At Cenchreae he had cut his hair, for he was under a vow. ¹⁹ And they came to Ephesus, and he left them there, but he himself went into the synagogue and reasoned with the Jews. ²⁰ When they asked him to stay for a longer period, he declined. ²¹ But on taking leave of them he said, “I will return to you if God wills,” and he set sail from Ephesus (Acts 18:18-21).

Do therefore what we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow; ²⁴ take these men and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses, so that they may shave their heads. Thus all will know that there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself also live in observance of the law (Acts 21:23-24).  

But this I confess to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I worship the God of our fathers, believing everything laid down by the Law and written in the Prophets, ¹⁵ having a hope in God, which these men themselves accept, that there will be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust. ¹⁶ So I always take pains to have a clear conscience toward both God and man. ¹⁷ Now after several years I came to bring alms to my nation and to present offerings. ¹⁸ While I was doing this, they found me purified in the temple, without any crowd or tumult (Acts 24:14-18). 

One thing I noticed about Gaebelein's and Stam's take on this whole thing too is they make much of saying that Paul going to Jerusalem was part of God's permissive versus directive will, that God didn't direct Paul to Jerusalem but did permit it.  I have never thought that Scripture supports the view of there being two parts to God's will.  In my mind, God's permissive will is the free will God has given to man.

I realize, however, that all this took place during the transitional period. God's will today is absolute and can only be found in Scripture.  But during the Pentecostal (transitional) period, God did specifically direct men (like Paul) apart from Scripture. To me, then, if God had not wanted Paul to go to Jerusalem, He would have said, "don't go" similar to what we read in Acts 16:1-10:

Paul came also to Derbe and to Lystra. A disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but his father was a Greek. He was well spoken of by the brothers at Lystra and Iconium. Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him, and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those places, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. As they went on their way through the cities, they delivered to them for observance the decisions that had been reached by the apostles and elders who were in Jerusalem. So the churches were strengthened in the faith, and they increased in numbers daily. And they went through the region of Phrygia and Galatia, having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia. And when they had come up to Mysia, they attempted to go into Bithynia, but the Spirit of Jesus did not allow them. So, passing by Mysia, they went down to Troas. And a vision appeared to Paul in the night: a man of Macedonia was standing there, urging him and saying, “Come over to Macedonia and help us.” And when Paul had seen the vision, immediately we sought to go on into Macedonia, concluding that God had called us to preach the gospel to them.

It seems that Paul himself interpreted what was told him as information and warning, not as a prohibition, too. Stam even concedes that "he [Paul] was not able to view Agabus' warning in the same way as did his friends."

This is the way I see it: Those who were warning Paul in every city, knew by the spirit of prophecy that if he went to Jerusalem, many terrible things would happen to him. So out of love for Paul, they advised him not to go.  I believe God was preparing Paul — and the people — for what was ahead and then left it up to Paul to decide whether or not to go. When Jesus went up to Jerusalem to die, he first prepared His disciples so that they wouldn't be so radically shaken (Lk 18:1-34; Jn 14-16).

I'm not going to dig my heels in on this view, though.  I will remain open to receiving further light on the subject.

Additional observations/questions:

These quotes from William's Complete Bible Commentary make a lot of sense to me:

"The subject of this Book [Acts] being the offer of the Kingdom to Israel and their rejection of it, and not, as it is unfortunately called 'The Acts of the Apostles,' it necessarily closes here [Acts 28].

"In passing, therefore, immediately from Acts to Ephesians, the reader advances from the 'Kingdom' to the 'Church.'

"At the opening of this Book the Kingdom was offered to the Jews of the Homeland at Jerusalem, the capital of the Hebrew world, and at the close of the Book to the Jews of the Dispersion at Rome, the capital of the Gentile world.  The offer was rejected, and a just judgment destroyed their City and Temple, and scattered them among all nations.  Divine relations were broken; and will continue so up to the pre-determined time of Acts 15:16.  That judgment closed the Pentecostal era.

"The Apostle Paul had a triple ministry — to Israel (Acts 9:15); to the Gentiles (Rom 9:13); and to the Church (Col 1:25-27).  He was an Israelite (Rom 11:1); and there is, therefore, no conflict between his teaching in Galatians and his action in offering the sacrifices of Num. 11:13, 21 (Acts 21:23-26).  Those sacrifices pointed backward as well as forward to Calvary.  They were Divinely ordained.  The Epistle to the Hebrews illustrates his ministry to the Jews; the Epistle to the Romans, his ministry to the Nations; and the Epistle to the Ephesians, his ministry to the Church."

Acts 21:27-40

When the seven days were almost completed, the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and laid hands on him, crying out, “Men of Israel, help! This is the man who is teaching everyone everywhere against the people and the law and this place. Moreover, he even brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place.” For they had previously seen Trophimus the Ephesian with him in the city, and they supposed that Paul had brought him into the temple. Then all the city was stirred up, and the people ran together. They seized Paul and dragged him out of the temple, and at once the gates were shut. And as they were seeking to kill him, word came to the tribune of the cohort that all Jerusalem was in confusion. He at once took soldiers and centurions and ran down to them. And when they saw the tribune and the soldiers, they stopped beating Paul. Then the tribune came up and arrested him and ordered him to be bound with two chains. He inquired who he was and what he had done. Some in the crowd were shouting one thing, some another. And as he could not learn the facts because of the uproar, he ordered him to be brought into the barracks. And when he came to the steps, he was actually carried by the soldiers because of the violence of the crowd, for the mob of the people followed, crying out, “Away with him!” As Paul was about to be brought into the barracks, he said to the tribune, “May I say something to you?” And he said, “Do you know Greek?  Are you not the Egyptian, then, who recently stirred up a revolt and led the four thousand men of the Assassins out into the wilderness?”  Paul replied, “I am a Jew, from Tarsus in Cilicia, a citizen of no obscure city. I beg you, permit me to speak to the people.” And when he had given him permission, Paul, standing on the steps, motioned with his hand to the people. And when there was a great hush, he addressed them in the Hebrew language, saying:


brought Greeks into the temple  - "Verse 29 explains that the crowd assumed (though it was untrue) that Paul had taken Trophimus, a Gentile, into the inner courts of the Temple, which were reserved for Jews only.  This was an offense punishable by death." (Ryrie)

"The outer court of the temple, which was called the Court of the Gentiles, was open to everybody.  Then there was an inner court, which was known by the name of the Court of Israel.  This court was separated from the outer court by the middle wall of partition.  There were barriers and pillars with inscriptions in Greek and Latin, warning strangers under the penalty of death not to advance into that holy court.  Inside the barrier was a high wall, which surrounded the inner court, and in this wall were doors (Verse 30).  The eastern part of the Court was reserved for women; then a colonnade ran around the Court of the women: in its angles were chambers.  One of these was called the House of the Nazarites, where the Nazarites boiled the peace offerings, shaved their heads, and burnt the hair.  Here most likely the Jews from Asia discovered the despised and hated Apostle.  Now their hour had come to carry out the satanic desire of putting the Apostle out of the way." (Gaebelein)

"Meaning the inner portion of the temple.  The outer 'Court of the Gentiles' was open to all.  Beyond that was a raised narrow platform bounded by a lofty wall, through which admittance was obtained by gates to a raised plateau containing the temple proper, with its court of the Women, Court of the Israelites, and Court of the Priests.  The actual boundary for Gentiles was a low stone barrier, three cubits in height, which ran round the court at the foot of the steps leading to the narrow platform, and therefore down below the lofty wall.  Josephus tells us (Antiq. XV.11.6; Wars XV.5.2), that it contained pillars at intervals with inscriptions forbidding Gentiles to go beyond.  One of these has been recovered and reads, 'No man of another nation to enter within the fence and enclosure around the temple.  And who so is caught will have himself to blame that his death ensues'.  This was 'the middle wall of partition' referred to in Eph. 2:14.  Seeing the apostle busy with ceremonies in the company of others in the inner court, the Asian Jews supposed that he had taken Trophimus beyond the prescribed barrier." (Walker)

word came to the tribune - "The cloisters or colonnades in the Court of the Gentiles communicated at the north-west corner by a flight of steps with the fortress of Antonia, which was built on a rocky eminence close by and commanded a view of the temple and what went on there.  It had originally been built as a fortress palace by Herod the Great, but was now occupied by the Roman garrison.  The near presence of this fortress was a constant source of irritation to the Jews.  News of the commotion proceeding in the temple was carried up to the fortress, the soldiers of which were kept in readiness under arms at festival seasons to quell disturbances..." (Walker)

the tribune of the cohort - "Or, 'the chiliarch of the cohort'.  The military tribune in question was in command of a thousand men, of whom 750 would be infantry and 250 cavalry." (Walker)

"Immediately the chief captain, Claudius Lysias, with a detachment of soldiers, ran down to investigate and restore order." (Stam)

centurions - "Officers subordinate to him, each commanding a hundred soldiers." (Walker)

was actually carried by the soldiers - "... the confusion was so great that it was impossible for Lysias to get at the root of the trouble.  As it had been Ephesus, 'some cried one thing, some another' (Cf. Ver. 34 with 19:32).  Lysias therefore 'commanded him to be carried into the castle,' and Paul actually had to be carried up the stairs by the soldiers, so great was 'the violence of the people.'" (Stam)

“May I say something to you?” - "The fact that Paul addressed him in Greek surprised the chief captain, who had supposed him to be an Egyptian with whom Rome had previously had trouble." (Stam)

the Egyptian - "The historian Josephus records such an event in A.D. 54.  The leader disappeared.  The tribune jumps to the conclusion that Paul is he." (Ryrie)

"Josephus tells us (Wars ii.13.5) that an Egyptian, posing as a prophet, got together 30,000 men and led them to the Mount of Olives, with intent to overpower the Roman garrison and seize Jerusalem, but that Felix fore-stalled him by attacking him, when the Egyptian ran away and the greater part of his followers were destroyed or taken prisoners.  In another account of the same event (Antiq. xx.8.6), he says that only 400 were slain and 200 taken alive; so that his numbers are clearly unreliable, while the incident itself is authentic.  The event was quite a recent one, so that it was natural for the chief captain to think that the run-away 'Egyptian' had returned to make a fresh attempt at insurrection." (Walker)

from Tarsus in Cilicia - "A city with a renowned university.  This would account, in the chief captain's eyes, for Paul's Greek culture." (Walker)

a citizen - "This refers to the municipal, not the imperial, franchise (Acts 22:25-29).  He was an enfranchised citizen of Tarsus as a Greek municipality, as well as a Roman citizen of the empire (Acts 16:37-38)." (Walker)

of no obscure city - "In other words, 'of a distinguished city'.  Tarsus ranked high among the intellectual cities of the Roman East, and bore upon its coins the proud titles 'metropolis' and 'autonomous' (self-governing).  The adjective mean or undistinguished occurs only in this verse." (Walker)

he addressed them in the Hebrew language - "But now Lysias is in for another surprise, for Paul turns at the top of the stairs to address the multitude, not in Greek, which all could understand, but in Hebrew!  In his alertness and presence of mind, the apostle had at least two reasons for this.  First, to conciliate the Jews.  They would expect him to address them in Greek; instead he does so in the language which none but the Circumcision could understand and which was associated in their minds with all that was sacred in the Judaism they fought for.  This would speak to them of loyalty to God's law rather than apostasy from it (See Acts 22:2).  Secondly, he did not wish Lysias to understand.  To Lysias he had just said: 'I am ... a Jew of Tarsus ... a citizen of no mean city' (Ver. 39) but to the Jews he now says in Hebrew: 'I am verily ... a Jew, born in Tarsus ... yet brought up in this city ...' (Acts 22:3).  To them he places Tarsus in the back ground and places the emphasis upon Jerusalem.  Also, it would be better if Lysias did not hear how he had persecuted many of his kinsmen 'to the death' or he might prejudice the captain against him." (Stam)

Acts 21:17-26

When we had come to Jerusalem, the brothers received us gladly. On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. After greeting them, he related one by one the things that God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. And when they heard it, they glorified God. And they said to him, “You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed. They are all zealous for the law, and they have been told about you 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. What then is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come. Do therefore what we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow; take these men and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses, so that they may shave their heads. Thus all will know that there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself also live in observance of the law. But as for the Gentiles who have believed, we have sent a letter with our judgment that they should abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality.” Then Paul took the men, and the next day he purified himself along with them and went into the temple, giving notice when the days of purification would be fulfilled and the offering presented for each one of them.


we had come to Jerusalem - "The Jewish church had become numerically powerful in Jerusalem and Judaea.  Since the scattering of Acts 8:1 the rulers of Israel had lost Saul of Tarsus, the flaming leader of their rebellion against Christ, and had themselves become less aggressive.  The result was that great numbers had returned to Jerusalem until, some ten years later, not only was there a 'multitude' of believers in the city, but they had attained so favorable a position that the Church could hold the great council of Acts 15 with no on to molest.  And now, another thirteen or fourteen years later, there are evidently greater numbers than ever (Acts 21:20).  Granted that many of the believers present in Jerusalem at this time had come from distances, the great majority would still have been from Jerusalem and Judaea." (Stam)

brothers received us gladly - "In Jerusalem, evidently at Mnason's home, 'the brethren' held an informal and hearty welcome for the party.  It is evident that these brethren, however, did not include James and the elders, for Paul and his associates visited them 'the day following' (Ver. 18)." (Stam)

Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present - "It is with sadness that we view the condition of the Church at Jerusalem at this time ... We have already seen how Peter was the Christ-appointed leader of the Messianic Church in those early days when 'they were all filled with the Holy  Ghost' (See Matt 16:19; Acts 1:15; 2:14; 2:27; 5:29; etc.).  We have seen too, how James 'the Lord's brother' (not even one of the twelve) gradually gained the ascendance over Peter, probably because of his physical relationship to our Lord.  Thus we find Peter reporting to 'James and to the brethren' in Acts 12:17.  Later Paul mentions James alone as present with Peter at Jerusalem during an earlier visit there (Gal 1:19).  Next we find Peter merely testifying at the council at Jerusalem, while James presides and brings the council to a close with the words: 'Wherefore, I decide' (Acts 15:19).  Still later, at Antioch, we see Peter intimidated by 'certain [who] came from James,' so that he separates himself from Gentile believers with whom he has been enjoying fellowship (Gal 2:11-12).  And now Paul and his companions go in unto James, and so final is his authority that the record states merely that 'the elders were present' (acts 21:18).  At the council, some fourteen years previous, 'the apostles and elders' had gathered together to discuss Gentile liberty from the law (Acts 15:6).  Now there is no trace of evidence that any of the apostles are even present; the record mentions only 'James and the elders.'  If any of the twelve apostles are to be included among the 'elders,' but are not even designated as apostles, we have still further evidence of the secondary character of their position at this time.  James, whose very name means 'Supplanter,' has wholly taken over Peter's position.  In commenting on the Jerusalem council later, Paul had called 'James, Cepha and John' (with James at the head) those 'who seemed to be somewhat' and 'who seemed to be pillars,' pointing out that 'the gospel of the circumcision' had been committed 'to PETER' (Gal 2:6-9).  This elevation of James over Peter and the eleven, whom our Lord had appointed, is evidence of the spiritual decline among the Judaean believers after the raising up of Paul and it has an important bearing on the passage we are now to consider ... Years before, at the great Jerusalem council, Peter had stated that God had put 'no difference' between them and the Gentiles, purifying the Gentiles' hearts by faith.  He had further urged his brethren not to place a yoke upon the neck of the Gentile disciples which neither the Jewish fathers nor their children had been able to bear (Acts 15:9-10).  He had even gone so far as to say: 'But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they' (Ver. 11).  As a result of this magnificent testimony James, Peter, John and the whole church had given solemn and public recognition to Paul as the apostle of the uncircumcision and the apostle of grace (Acts 15:23-29; Gal 2:7-9).  The church at Jerusalem should have gone on from there, as Peter did (2 Pet 3:15-18) and should now have accepted Paul in accordance with that agreement.  But under James and his party they had declined and gone backward, rather than forward, spiritually.  Geikie says of this: '...whereas some time ago, only a portion of these were extreme in their Jewish ideas (Acts 15:1,5) all were now fanatically zealous of the law.  So rapidly had the extreme party in the nation spread their bitterly irreconcilable Judaism ...' (New Testament Hours, Vol. III. P. 375)." (Stam)

They are all zealous for the law - "The church in Jerusalem had become strong; its membership numbered myriads (literal translation).  But they were in a transition period.  They had accepted the Lord Jesus Christ [as Messiah], and yet they held on to the law of Moses.  They were all zealous for the Law.  They kept all the ordinances of the Law, abstained from certain meats, kept the feast days, went to the temple, made vows, and purified themselves ... The fullest teaching on the break which had to come between Christianity and Judaism had not yet been given.  The Epistle to the Hebrews furnished this argument and contains the solemn warning of the grave danger of apostasy from the Gospel by clinging to the shadow-things, which are past.  To go outside of the camp and bear His reproach is the great exhortation given in that Epistle to these Jewish Christians.  No doubt the Apostle Paul wrote that Epistle to his beloved brethren in Jerusalem." [See also a few chapters further on, Acts 23:11 - 'The following night the Lord stood by him and said, “Take courage, for as you have testified to the facts about me in Jerusalem, so you must testify also in Rome.”'] (Gaebelein)

telling them not to circumcise their children - "Paul proclaimed that circumcision was not necessary to be saved, but the report that he told Gentiles not to circumcise their sons deliberately twisted Paul's words to foster animosity against him." (Ryrie)

"Now this charged was rather complicated by prejudice, as such charges often are.  As it stood it was false.  Paul had started no rebellion against Moses or the law.  To say that the law was fulfilled by Christ is not to deny but to confirm its claims.  But the apostle did teach that the law had been fulfilled in Christ and that it was therefore unnecessary to observe its ceremonial rites—and the taught this not only to the Gentiles but also to the Jews which were among them.  'After the reading of the law and the prophets' in the Pisidian synagogue, the rulers asked Paul for a 'word of exhortation.'  In response the apostle gave them a word of exhortation with respect to each. With respect to the law he exhorted them not to trust in it, but to trust in Christ, saying: 'Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that THROUGH THIS MAN IS PREACHED UNTO YOU THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS: And by Him all that believe are justified from all things, from which YE COULD NOT BE JUSTIFIED BY THE LAW OF MOSES' (Acts 13:38-39)." Certainly there were Jewish believers among the Galatians and they were included in the number of those whom the apostle wrote Gal 2:4, 19; 3:3, 24-25; 4:9-11; 5:1-2; 6:12-14).  The Galatian congregations were, of course, largely made up of Gentiles, but the apostle did not single the Gentiles out as he wrote about circumcision, so that the principle certainly applied also to those already circumcision, so that the principle certainly applied also to those already circumcised and had its bearing on any contemplated circumcision of their their children.  Nor can it be said that in the Galatian letter the apostle argued only against seeking to be justified by the law, for he clearly warns those already justified against becoming 'entangled' again by submitting to one of its rites, warning them that submission to one implies the responsibility to obey all (See Gal 3:1, 3).  And in this connection he had warned them that 'a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump' (Gal 5:9) ... And to both the Jewish and Gentile believers at Corinth he had written 2 Cor 11:2-3.  And only recently he had written to the believers at Rome—and especially to the Jewish believers among them—in the same vein: 'Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God' ... 'But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code. (Rom 7:4,6).  Indeed, if Paul had not taught the Jews among the Gentiles to give up Judaism, what right did he have to rebuke Peter for reverting to it while visiting with the Gentiles at Antioch?  Peter, remember, had been 'living after the manner of Gentiles, and NOT as do the Jews' while there at Antioch.  And 'the other Jews' among them had been doing the same, until 'certain came from James.'  Then Peter and the other Jewish believers began living 'as do the Jews' again and were rebuked by Paul for their dissimulation (Gal 2:11-14).  We cite these passages, and could cite others, only to show that while Paul had not, to be sure, apostatized from Moses, he had taught the Jews among the Gentiles that the law had been fulfilled in Christ and that therefore they were to enjoy freedom from its yoke, so that the current reports about the apostles were not exactly 'nothing' as James intimated (Ver. 24)." (Stam)

Do therefore what we tell you - "... the council at Jerusalem, while it had closed the mouths of the Judaizers as far as public opposition to Paul's message of grace was concerned, had by  no means won them to the attitude which had displayed in his noble declaration of Acts 15:8-11.  Instead they had dogged Paul's footsteps wherever he had gone, seeking to undermine his ministry among the Galatians, the Corinthians and the Gentile believers in general.  Indeed, Peter himself, along with other Jewish believers, including even Barnabas, had nearly caused serious division in the church at Antioch under the influence of 'certain [that had come] from James' (Gal 2:12-13) ... Their proposition, therefore, was this: Paul himself was evidently not under a vow at this time, but they had four men who were, and Paul could join publicly with them in their vow by purifying himself and paying for the sacrifices marking the consummation of their vow—a considerable amount, since two doves or pigeons, one he-lamb, one ewe lamb and a ram had to be offered for each of the four (Num 6).  This procedure was evidently not uncommon at that time.  Indeed, Josephus tells how Agrippa I courted Jewish favor by thus financing Nazarite vows (Ant. XIX, 6,1)." (Stam)

pay their expenses - "Paul was being asked to pay the expenses involved in the offerings required at the completion of the Nazirite vow these four men had taken (cf. Num. 6:13-21).  He was being urged to take actions that would indicate that he was, after all, a 'middle-of-the-road' Jewish-Christian." (Ryrie)

Paul took the men, and the next day he purified himself along with them - "Acting as then seemed best (1 Cor 9:20), though his desire to avoid misunderstanding and friction was not hereby gratified.  One of his special objects at this juncture was, it would seem, to conciliate the Judaean churches and to promote Christian unity.  He had probably purified himself and offered the usual offerings on his previous visit (Act 18:18), so that he was not now violating anything which he regarded as a principle ... The shaving of the head was connected with the fulfilment of the vow of the Nazirite (Num. 6:13-21).  According to the letter of the law, this ceremony should take place in the temple of Jerusalem; but we have evidence that, at that period, a person who had taken a temporary Nazirite vow was allowed to poll his head elsewhere provided that he carried the hair so polled with him to the temple and burnt it with the rest of his hair when finally shaven there.  Josephus speaks of these modified Nazirite vows (Wars. II. 15.1).  It would appear that St. Paul had taken a Nazirite vow, possibly on deliverance from some great danger, and that he polled his head before embarkation, intending to complete the ceremonies of his vow in Jerusalem.  Though the vindicator of Gentile liberty, he confirmed himself, in various respects, to the laws and customs of his own people (see Acts 20:6, 16; 21:26;27:9; 1 Cor 9:20)." (Walker)

"In his own soul he knew that all the commands of the law and the law itself had been abolished by the death of Christ.  The ordinances had been nailed to the cross.  The Holy Spirit foreseeing what would happen had warned him, as we have seen, not to go to Jerusalem.  He went to the city and with this he stepped upon dangerous ground.  He had left the way into which God had called him, and though it was his all-consuming love for his own brethren which was the motive, he became ensnared by the enemy." (Gaebelein)

"...Peter was rebuked for his failure at Antioch; would not God have rebuked Paul if he were similarly guilty?  In the first place, no careful student of the record would say that Paul was 'similarly guilty' in agreeing to offer the sacrifices of the Nazarite.  Peter went back on the light he had received, 'fearing them which were of the circumcision' (Gal 2:12).  Paul, on the other hand, became involved in this vow out of a burning love to his kinsman whom he hoped would thereby be won to listen to his testimony about Christ." (Stam)

"Much is said about the two programs that run side by side through the latter part of Acts. We have no objection to the term 'side by side,' if only it is understood that it was not God's purpose for both programs to continue with equal force during those years. Just as the new program gradually emerged, the old was gradually to pass away. There was to be a transition from the one to the other. Peter's part in the conversion of Cornelius and his household, his words in Acts 15:8-11 and the decision of the Jerusalem council alone had indicated that even on the part of the Jewish believers there was to be a gradual liberation from the law. The breaking down of 'the middle wall of partition' was to affect those on both sides ... But had he not also written: "And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; to them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law"? (1 Cor 9:20-21).  This passage is thought by some to contain the full justification of Paul's involvement in Judaism at this time.  They suppose that it means that he alternately placed himself in subjection to the law and at liberty from it as he labored, now with Jews and then with Gentiles ... We believe that the passage in 1 Cor. 9 simply means that, sympathetically, he placed himself mentally in the position of those with whom he dealt.  He did not go back into Judaism while among Jews, but, recognizing their prejudices, he refrained from doing what might offend them—so that he might gradually teach them the same truths he had taught the Jews at Pisidian Antioch: justification from all things by faith in Christ, apart from the law (Acts 13:38-39) ... How could either Peter or Paul have practiced the popular interpretation of 1 Cor 9:20-21 here at Antioch anyway, with both Jews and Gentiles present?  In such cases the fruits of duplicity would surely be reaped!  And note further that Paul rebuked Peter on this occasion, not for crossing a Jewish-Gentile line the wrong way or at the wrong time, but for going back on light received (Gal 2:15-19).  Peter had learned by a special vision and by the conversion of Cornelius that God had made no difference between Jew and Gentile and he had publicly stated this, and more, at the council at Jerusalem.  Now, by separating the Jews from the Gentiles at Antioch, he was building again that which he had destroyed, and thus making himself a transgressor (Gal 2:18).  Thus it is not enough to argue that there was one program for the Jew and another for the Gentile, during the latter part of Acts, for it was on the basis of revealed truth as to Old Testament rites that Paul fought for Gentile liberty from them, and it was on the basis of revealed truth also that the Jewish program was gradually to be abandoned (Acts 15:8-11; Heb 10:1-39, etc.)." (Stam)

"Why should he [Paul] try to prove to the Jews that he 'walked orderly and kept the law' when he certainly had not done so among the Gentiles?  He had come to Jerusalem to bring an offering to the poor saints there and to 'testify the gospel of the grace of God.'  There is no record that the offering was gratefully received, and surely he could not 'testify the gospel of the grace of God' by offering blood sacrifices.  But even the sacrifices were not actually offered.  So far from James' plan succeeding, a great commotion and Paul's arrest 'when the seven days were almost ended,' prevented him from having any part in the offering of the proposed sacrifices." (Stam)

Acts 21:1-16

And when we had parted from them and set sail, we came by a straight course to Cos, and the next day to Rhodes, and from there to Patara. And having found a ship crossing to Phoenicia, we went aboard and set sail. When we had come in sight of Cyprus, leaving it on the left we sailed to Syria and landed at Tyre, for there the ship was to unload its cargo. And having sought out the disciples, we stayed there for seven days. And through the Spirit they were telling Paul not to go on to Jerusalem. When our days there were ended, we departed and went on our journey, and they all, with wives and children, accompanied us until we were outside the city. And kneeling down on the beach, we prayed and said farewell to one another. Then we went on board the ship, and they returned home. When we had finished the voyage from Tyre, we arrived at Ptolemais, and we greeted the brothers and stayed with them for one day. On the next day we departed and came to Caesarea, and we entered the house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, and stayed with him. He had four unmarried daughters, who prophesied. While we were staying for many days, a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea. And coming to us, he took Paul's belt and bound his own feet and hands and said, “Thus says the Holy Spirit, ‘This is how the Jews at Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.’” When we heard this, we and the people there urged him not to go up to Jerusalem. Then Paul answered, “What are you doing, weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be imprisoned but even to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.” And since he would not be persuaded, we ceased and said, “Let the will of the Lord be done.” After these days we got ready and went up to Jerusalem. And some of the disciples from Caesarea went with us, bringing us to the house of Mnason of Cyprus, an early disciple, with whom we should lodge.


Cos - "A fertile island off the coast of Caria, forty nautical miles distant to the south of Miletus, at the south-west corner of Asia Minor.  It was important as a commercial centre, lying, as it did, on a trade route; as also for its famous temple of Aesculapius (the Greek god of medicine) and for its medical school.  It was incorporated in the Roman province of Asia.  There was constant communication between Cos and Alexandria.  St. Paul's vessel apparently anchored there for the night, at the town of Cos on the eastern side of the island of the same town." (Walker)

Rhodes - "'The isle of roses', as its name implies.  It lies off the coast of Caria, south-east of Cos.  It is forty-three miles long, with a maximum breadth of twenty miles — and is twelve miles from the mainland at its nearest point.  In the pre-Roman period, it was politically paramount in that part of Asia Minor, the greater portions of Caria and Lycia being subject to it.  Under the Romans, however, it lost most of its greatness, though its geographical position still rendered it commercially important.  Its great city, of the same name, was at the extreme north-east corner of the island.  Rhodes became famous again the fourteenth century A.D. through its Christian warriors 'the knights of Rhodes', who successfully opposed the Turks for many years, till they transferred themselves to Crete, Sicily, and finally to Malta.  St. Paul's ship spent the night in the roadstead of the town of Rhodes." (Walker)

"This famous city, named after the 'the island of roses' on which it was situated, was one of the busiest harbors on the archipelago.  And there, some 340 years before, had been erected one of 'the seven wonders of the world,' a great bronze statue of Apollo which stood 105 feet high.  Some historians say that the great Colossus stood astride the harbor, but this is questioned by others.  About 224 B.C., however, an earthquake hurled it into the sea, where it remained a mass of bronze until about 656 A.D., when the Saracens took possession of the island and sold the metal to a Jewish dealer who employed 900 camels to carry it away.  At the time when Paul entered the harbor, if historians are correct, the harbor was still strewn with pieces of the Colossus, only parts of the two legs still standing on their bases." (Stam)

Patara - "A city on the coast of Lycia, almost due east of Rhodes.  It was near the mouth of the river Xanthos, and was the harbour for the towns lying inland in the valley of the Xanthos, besides forming an important station for coasting steamers.  It was a highly prosperous city.  St. Paul's ship would have a straight run, at that time of the year, across from Rhodes to Patara.  There they trans-shipped (v. 2)." (Walker)

crossing to - "That is, 'crossing over the open (Mediterranean) sea'.  The prevailing wind in the Levant throughout the summer mouths is from the west, so that sailing vessels could run direct from Lycia to the Syrian coast.  Those travelling in the opposite direction, however, i.e. from Syria to Lycia, had to hug the coast of Asia Minor past the east end of Cyprus, as the wind was contrary, and they could not make the cross-sea passage (see Acts 27:2-5)." (Walker)

"Doubtless they sailed only by day on this part of the journey, but the prevalence of the northwest wind in the Aegean Sea would speed them along.  Dr. Clarke, in a firsthand report, says of this: 'It is surprising for what a length of time, and how often, the NW rages in the Archipelago.  It prevails almost unceasingly through the great part of the year' (Vol. III, P. 380)." (Stam)

we stayed there for seven days - "Soon they landed at Tyre, where 'the ship was to unladen her burden' (ver. 3).  At this time Tyre was in the state of decline from her glory in the days when such dire prophecies were made against her, to her desolation at the time of their fulfilment.  Luke's account of the entire voyage, from Troas to Tyre, gives the impression that the weather had all along been highly favorable.  Moreover, the advantage of finding a ship at Patara waiting to said had not only relieved Paul of his anxiety about reaching Jerusalem in time for Pentecost, but had given him considerable time to spare.  'Finding disciples,' therefore, the company 'tarried there seven days' (Ver. 4) evidently the length of time it would take for the ship, a large sea-going vessel, to unload her cargo and reload." (Stam)

through the Spirit they were telling Paul not to go on to Jerusalem - "Paul was being led by the Holy Spirit to go to Jerusalem, knowing that capture awaited him there (Acts 20:23).  Those who tried to dissuade him (Acts 21:4) did so because they knew through the Spirit what was ahead for him." (Ryrie)

"As we have pointed out, it was not mere concern for Paul's welfare that constrained these disciples to urge him not to continue on his way to Jerusalem; they spoke 'by the Spirit.'  We have also shown that the phraseology, in the Greek, does not indicate a direct prohibition, but rather a warning and a plea.  It is probably, further, that Paul understood that this warning was from the Spirit, for he had already said: 'The Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions abide me' (Acts 20:23).  His responses to such pleas and warnings indicated strongly that he did not regard them as a divine prohibition against his going to Jerusalem, but considered them rather as a challenge and a test of his faithfulness (See Acts 20:24; 21:13).  Thus, while the apostle's motives and purposes were noble indeed, it cannot be said that he was in the directive will of God in going to Jerusalem.  Surely the Spirit's persistent warnings against going to Jerusalem were not to be construed as His leading to go there." (Stam)

Ptolemais - "Called 'Acco' in the Old Testament times (Judges 1:31), having been formerly a Philistine town.  It is now well known as "Acre'.  It is at the northern extremity of the Bay of Acre, which bends round to Mt. Carmel in the south.  Its name was derived from Ptolemy I Philadelphus, when it passed into his possession.  Under the Romans, it received special colonial privileges.  It shared with Tyre, Sidon, Antioch, and Caesarea the trade of that coast.  It is about thirty miles south of Tyre." (Walker)

Philip the evangelist - "He was previously mentioned in Acts 6:5 and Acts 8:5." (Ryrie)

"Their host there was the well known Philip, like Paul a Hellenist, and therefore probably more sympathetic to Paul's cause than the Hebrew believers were.  Philip had originally been one of the seven treasurers who had had oversight of 'the daily ministration' in Pentecostal days when the believers at Jerusalem had had 'all things common' (See Acts 6:1-5).  Since that time, however, the Jerusalem church had been scattered by a 'great persecution' and Philip had been used rather as an evangelist (See Acts 8:4-40).  But while Philip was perhaps no longer actively a treasurer of the Church at Jerusalem, the fact that in addition to being called 'Philip the evangelist' here, he is also designated as 'one of the seven,' may well imply that he still had enough association with, or knowledge of, financial matters in the Church at Jerusalem to have relieved Paul of the necessity of personally delivering the 'collection' he had gathered for its poor." (Stam)

He had four unmarried daughters, who prophesied - "This Philip also had four daughters which had given themselves to God's service as phophetesses (Acts 21:9).  There was nothing wrong, of course, in women prophesying in those days, for Joel had specifically predicted with regard to Pentecost: 'Your daughters shall prophesy,' (Acts 2:17) and in the light of the Spirit's witness 'in every city' along Paul's journey that 'bonds and afflictions' awaited him at Jerusalem, it is not to be doubted that these damsels added their Spirit-inspired testimony to those already given." (Stam)

Agabus - "Presumably the same one who prophesied of the famine to come in Jerusalem (Acts 11:28)." (Ryrie)

"...Agabus, a known and trusted prophet who had, years before, predicted the great famine which was to impoverish the Judaean saints.  At that time he had been instrumental in procuring the first Gentile contribution for the poor believers of Judaea." (Stam)

"And if the Holy Spirit had so solemnly warned him, and he rejected these warnings, the Lord in His own gracious way over-ruled it all to His own glory and to foreshadow what might be termed 'the captivity of the Gospel.'  God permitted it all for His own wise purpose  He knows the end from the beginning.  The blessed Gospel of the Grace and Glory of God committed to the Apostle Paul was soon to be set aside by man and the judaistic form, that perverted Gospel, to gain the victory.  And Paul himself arrested in Jerusalem given over into the hands of the Gentiles and sent to Rome." (Gaebelein)

"The question, of course, is whether the Spirit thus warned him to deter him from his purpose or to prepare him for the ordeal.  We believe the former is the case.  Has it ever been God's way to prepare His servants for testings by warning them about them?  Has He not rather done this by encouraging them as to His faithfulness?  Certainly this is so in the case of Paul himself (See Acts 18:9; 23:11; 27:23-25).  Certainly all those present understood Agabus' prophecy as a warning to Paul that he should not proceed, for both his co-workers, including even Luke, and the belivers at Caesarea began to plead with him, with tears, to abandon his purpose (Acts 21:12-13)." (Stam)

Thus says the Holy Spirit - "(See Acts 20:23-24.)  The words make it clear that a warning, not a prohibition, is intended." (Walker)

he would not be persuaded - "Paul's response to the pleas of his friends reveals something of the greatness of the man and of his motives.  With a heart bleeding for his kinsmen and with a deep sense of obligation toward the Christ he had taught them to hate, he was not able to view Agabus' warning in the same way as did his friends.  He was no fanatic or would-be martyr; he was a veteran in persecution, with scars to show, yet he was by no means a stoic.  Rather, he had a sensitive, affectionate nature, and the tearful appeals of his companions and friends were crushing him and caused him to exclaim: 'What mean ye to weep and to break mine heart? for I am ready not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus' (Acts 21:13)." (Stam)

“Let the will of the Lord be done.” - "Likely they finally acknowledged that it was the Lord's will for Paul to go to Jerusalem." (Ryrie)

"In the light of the context it is, of course, erroneous to conclude from this that Paul's friends now saw Paul's purpose to be in accord with the directive will of God.  They rather spoke of God's permissive will, resigning themselves to what was seen to be inevitable." (Stam)

Acts 20:1-38

What is the theme of this chapter?

Greece, Troas and the elders of Ephesus.

What is the key verse(s) of this chapter? Verses 26-27

Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all, for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God.

What can I apply to my life from this chapter (things to do/avoid)?

It really struck me that Paul knew that after his departure, savage wolves would come in among them, not sparing the flock; and from among them men would arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them (vs 29-30).  It's so important to not be carried away by false doctrine. I can't even trust myself because none of us are immune. Instead, I must be on the alert and look to God continually for grace to remain true (v 31).

I wonder why the Church today doesn't take this more seriously?  Everything is acceptable now, as long as the very basic truths are believed.  It seems that in order to keep the peace, we've decided not to talk about the things on which we disagree, even to the point of avoiding certain portions — and whole books! — of Scripture.

Additional observations/questions:

I have now read Stam's perspective regarding whether or not Paul was following God's will in going to Jerusalem.  He agrees with Gaebelein, but stresses that it "is by no means easy to determine and, depend upon it: those who deal with the subject as though it were a simple matter have given serious consideration to only one side of it—their side."  He even went so far to as list the arguments for each side, which I have included in my notes.  I'm still leaning toward the Holy Spirit leading Paul to Jerusalem — capital "s" for Spirit — but will continue to keep an open mind about it as we go forward into chapter 21.

Acts 20:17-38

Now from Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called the elders of the church to come to him. And when they came to him, he said to them: “You yourselves know how I lived among you the whole time from the first day that I set foot in Asia, serving the Lord with all humility and with tears and with trials that happened to me through the plots of the Jews; how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you in public and from house to house, testifying both to Jews and to Greeks of repentance toward God and of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. And now, behold, I am going to Jerusalem, constrained by the Spirit, not knowing what will happen to me there, except that the Holy Spirit testifies to me in every city that imprisonment and afflictions await me. But I do not account my life of any value nor as precious to myself, if only I may finish my course and the ministry that I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God. And now, behold, I know that none of you among whom I have gone about proclaiming the kingdom will see my face again. Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all, for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God. Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood.  I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them. Therefore be alert, remembering that for three years I did not cease night or day to admonish every one with tears. And now I commend you to God and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up and to give you the inheritance among all those who are sanctified. I coveted no one's silver or gold or apparel. You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my necessities and to those who were with me. In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’” And when he had said these things, he knelt down and prayed with them all. And there was much weeping on the part of all; they embraced Paul and kissed him, being sorrowful most of all because of the word he had spoken, that they would not see his face again. And they accompanied him to the ship.


elders - "These leaders of the group were recognized by all, since the church knew whom to send." (Ryrie)

"Margin, 'overseers', the title which, as time went on, became confined to the office which corresponds with the modern episcopate.  Throughout the New Testament, however, the terms 'presbyter', 'bishop', as here (vv. 17, 28), denote two aspects of the same office, the former pointing to the minister's weight of years and standing (elder), and the latter to his work of supervision (overseer)." (Walker)

I have gone about proclaiming the kingdom - "In Verse 24 of our passage the apostle makes it clear that the particular ministry he had received of the Lord Jesus was 'to testify the gospel of the grace of God.'   This was his special ministry.  But this does not mean that he would not confirm what Peter and the twelve had taught about the Messiahship of Christ.  Could anyone suppose that those who persisted in denying that the crucified Jesus was the true Messiah could possibly trust Him as their personal Savior?  Assuredly  not!  And thus it was that Paul sought first to convince the Jews everywhere that 'Jesus is the Christ.'  So it is that in the passage before us he declares that he had testified to both Jews and Greeks, 'repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus  Christ' (Ver. 21).  Now it is quite true that as repentance was the message of John the Baptist, Christ and the twelve, so grace is the message for today.  But this does not mean that repentance has no place today.  Repentance is not penitance; much less is it penance.  It is rather a change of mind and attitude.  Grace had been Paul's special message up to this time yet repentance was a part of that message, as was also faith toward the Lord Jesus Christ.  As to his preaching 'the kingdom of God' (Ver. 25) he still speaks of 'inheriting' the kingdom of God in Eph 5:5 and of his 'fellow workers unto the kingdom of God' in  Col 4:11, both of which passages were written considerably after the close of Acts.  It must be remembered that this term, unlike 'the kingdom of heaven' (found only in Matthew), is a very broad one.  We find it used in both the opening and closing verses of the Acts and in each case the context must be kept in view.  When our Lord, before His ascension, taught the eleven 'the things pertaining to the kingdom of God'' (Acts 1:3) He dealt with the earthly establishment of that kingdom, which the apostles hoped for and which Peter was soon to offer to Israel (Acts 3:19-21).  But when Paul, in bondage in Rome, preached the kingdom of God (Acts 28:31) he would, of course, tell what had become of the offer of its establishment on earth, and explain  how this was now being held in abeyance (Cf. Rom 11:25-27).  Above all let us observe carefully that 'the ministry' which Paul had 'received of the Lord Jesus,' was the proclamation of 'the gospel of the grace of God' (Ver. 24).  It was by preaching this message that he hoped to finish the course which he had begun so long ago." (Stam)

constrained by the Spirit - "Paul was being led by the Holy Spirit to go to Jerusalem, knowing that capture awaited him there (v.23). Those who later tried to disuade him (Acts 21:4) did so because they knew through the Spirit what was ahead for him." (Ryrie)

"That is 'bound in my spirit', so as to be unable to act otherwise.  Some understand it to mean 'bound as a prisoner in the spirit, though not yet in body with chains'.  It may, however, be taken to mean 'constrained by the Holy Spirit' (cf. Acts 20:23).  The divine Spirit acts on the human spirit, and so the two main interpretations are not far removed from each other. (Cf. Rom 15:30-31)." (Walker)

"This term is an idiom meaning to feel one's self responsible.  The 'spirit' here, as we have shown, is his own, not the Holy Spirit, which is distinguished from Paul's spirit in the next verse by the addition of the word 'Holy' and (in the original) by the familiar repetition of the definite article: 'the Spirit, the Holy.'" (Stam)   [interesting that the ESV capitalizes the letter "s" in spirit]

from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things - "In the case of the Ephesian church, whose elders Paul was now addressing, we are given ample confirmation of the truth of his warning.  It was not long before Hymenaeus and Alexander ha 'made shipwreck' of the faith and had become blasphemers (1 Tim 1:19,20).  And this Hymeanaeus, along with another, Philetus, succeeded in 'overthrowing the faith of some' (2 Tim 2:17,18).  Indeed, in his last letter the apostle had to write to Timothy: 'This thou knowest, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me' (2 Tim 1:15)." (Stam)

now I commend you to God and to the word of his grace - "There is no thought of apostolic succession.  The apostle does not commit them to Timothy but 'to God and the word of His grace.' ... The word of His grace' was, of course, the particular message which Paul had been commissioned to proclaim.  It was the message for the dispensation now dawning, and it was this message that God would use to establish them in the faith, especially as its glories were further reviewed to Paul and through him in his epistles.  How similar is this benediction to that found in a letter the apostle had so recently written: 'Now to Him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began' (Rom 16:25)." (Stam)

those who are sanctified - "positionally" (Ryrie)

remember the words of the Lord Jesus - "This saying is not recorded in the Gospels." (Ryrie)