“Under Arrest”
Acts 21:17-36
July 13, 2008
Could Paul have been wrong? Certainly, as I’ve repeated, he was a man, a man of flesh-and-blood, and he was not above sin! There are two points in today’s passage at which different commentators believe that Paul made an error. There are some who believe that Paul made a mistake, a sinful, obstinate display, in going to Jerusalem in the first place. Ray Stedman, a Bible teacher whom I respect greatly, is convinced that this is the case. There are others who believe that what we read in today’s text is evidence that Paul spoke one way but perhaps, in a moment of weakness, acted another. I’m not so sure at all, though, for I believe that there is Scriptural justification, quite likely, for Paul’s actions in both cases. At any rate, what was prophesied to take place when Paul reached Jerusalem indeed does in today’s text.
We really, today, begin the final section of our Unleashed study on the book of Acts, because as we’ll see today, Paul is arrested, and for the remainder of the book, Paul is under arrest until he finally reaches Rome. But we begin on a happy note.
I. A Glad Reunion - :17-20a
We’ve got some old friends from Pennsylvania whom we’re hoping will be in attendance at Red Oak next Sunday; it’s always great to see them, and it was no different for Paul as he reconnected with old friends. James, the brother of Jesus (not of “James and John” fame) was the leader of the church in Jerusalem, and it was appropriate that Paul seek him out first. This was at least their fourth meeting, these two men who represented the twin streams of Christian faith; James the Jewish strain, and Paul the Gentile. The elders of the church joined the meeting as well. Finally, Paul is able to present the offering that has been collected for the poor believers in Jerusalem (his reason for going to Jerusalem in the first place! See I Corinthians 16:1-4; Romans 15:25-27.) and to fill in the leaders of the “mother church” on the events of his missionary journeys. Paul actually feared the possibility of a rejection of the gift by the Jewish Christians (Romans 15:30-31). Why would that be the case? The Jerusalem church was caught, in some ways, between its devotion to the Gentile mission, on the one hand, and its national heritage on the other. What would the willing acceptance of such a gift mean? It could drive a further wedge between the Jewish Christians and their Jewish countrymen. And in a time of rising Jewish patriotism, this might not be a good thing. Thus, understanding the situation, Paul had some concern! But his fears, while well-founded, proved to be no problem.
Paul had argued that the Gentile believers owed a debt of gratitude to the Jews, sharing in their spiritual blessings, and thus they ought to give generously. There is a grace to giving, and there is a grace to receiving as well. But while Luke makes no mention here of the gift, it’s obvious that the church leaders received it, along with news of Paul’s successes in promoting the gospel, with real joy; note that the Hero of the story isn’t Paul, though, but God Whom they glorified.
But there is a problem that will need to be addressed; in reality, it’s
II. A False Charge - :20b-22
Before we get there, take a moment and answer this question:
Table Talk
What’s the most unusual practice you’ve ever seen take place in a church?
• Can you imagine praying with your eyes open?
• Can you imagine praying when everyone is speaking out loud, all together, at one time?
• Can you imagine a church service beginning, not five minutes late, but an hour or more?
• Can you imagine it lasting 5-6 hours?
• Can you imagine a prayer meeting that lasts, not a half-hour or 45 minutes, but all night long?
• Can you imagine all the men sitting on one side and all the women on the other?
Fact is that I’ve just scratched the surface of some of the differences between our cultural approach to Christian faith and that of other cultures. Because there are great Christian folks around the world who don’t understand praying with eyes closed, or prayer led by only one person at a time, or the American obsession with a one-hour church service (an obsession we will not have at Red Oak, by the way!). Cultural differences cause us to worship in different ways—and humility ought to certainly cause us as American Christians not to assume all of our cultural norms are right, while others’ are wrong!
Think about the position that the Jerusalem Jewish converts were in. All their lives, they’d been taught to keep the Law of Moses; now they’d come to follow Christ as their Messiah. So what to do with the Law? What about the ritual of circumcision, so central to their identity? What about the religious feasts they’d grown up keeping? These are the things that had been part of their worshipping God. Now, as Christ-followers, what should their attitudes be? What was being said—slanderously—about Paul, this false charge, was that he was teaching Jews to throw away all of their heritage and customs. This was not the case; the true gospel of Jesus Christ does not demand cultural obliteration, and only demands cultural change when the prevailing cultural norms and practices are contrary to the Bible’s teaching.
It is one thing to teach the Gentiles that adherence to the law of Moses was not mandatory for them—it of course was not. There was no need to undergo the rite of circumcision or to keep other Jewish laws. At the same time, that’s not the same thing at all as encouraging Jews to dispense with their heritage and customs, which Paul did not do. Paul was not telling Jewish people to abandon their culture; he was pointing them to the promised Messiah, and to the fact that the Law that the Jews held so dearly was never given as a means to achieve life eternal.
But here’s the truth: there were some Jewish believers in Christ who were being swayed; certain prejudices were being instilled in the minds of these believers by ne’er-do-wells intent on the destruction of Christian faith, such that Paul and his mission were viewed with suspicion by some of them. We are by no means, as believers, immune to the prejudices of the day in which we live; one need look no further than our nation’s past history of civil rights, and the fact that many professing Christians were on the wrong side of the equation, to know that this is true. And so there were some who believed these nefarious Jews, apparently, and undoubtedly some Christians who spread the rumor to other Jewish Christians—how many fires have been kindled needlessly by followers of Christ who were unwilling to control their tongues, to determine truth before spreading their words?
Further, there were likely some in the Jerusalem church who, though understanding that they were saved by the grace of God, may have lapsed into the belief that they were kept saved by keeping the law of Moses. And there are folks today who believe similar things, that our good works, while not playing a role in obtaining our salvation, nonetheless play a role into our “hanging on to” our salvation. Now let’s walk the right line here; I believe that the Bible teaches that:
• We are saved by God’s grace through faith, apart from our good works (good works are not the basis of salvation);
• Real faith is such that it changes us, and good works are the proof of real faith (James: “show me faith by works”);
• We are kept by the grace of God, and not our good works;
• We do not lose, then, our salvation by sinning or failing to do good works (because good works aren’t its basis);
• Our salvation is sealed by God on the basis of His grace and power (it’s a good thing it doesn’t depend on me!).
And so we come back to the question: what should Paul do to allay the fears of some in the Jerusalem church? We note what I see as
III. A Reasonable Plan - :23-26
To get into a detailed explanation of Jewish law and Paul’s strict following of it might be more than you as a congregation can take on a sunny summer Sunday, but just a few brief points about what’s happening:
• After such close contact with Gentiles, according to Jewish law, Paul would have to undergo a ceremony of purification.
• Paul would have to report regularly to the priest for appropriate rites, according to Jewish law.
• Further, Paul paid for the offerings of four poor Jewish Christian men who had taken what was known as a Nazirite vow. This vow was an act of dedication to God, and involved abstaining from alcohol and meat, as well as growing the hair longer than normal, among other things. The final week was to be spent in the courts of the Temple.
• Paying these offerings was considered a good deed and a display of solidarity with the Jewish people. There were apparently four Jewish believers who, still living as Jews, had taken this vow at some point in the past, but were unable to afford to be released from the vow, as they desired to do, for the payment for release was several animals to be sacrificed, as well as certain other offerings; it could be expensive!
• If Paul were to tell them to disregard normal procedure, to treat the Jewish law with no respect, then he’d confirm the suspicions of some; if he were to pay for these poor men to be able to follow Jewish tradition, so that they could shave their heads and be released from their vow, then he’d demonstrate that he did not disrespect the Law at all.
Table Talk
Read Acts 15:1-5. How do we square Paul’s willingness to submit to these observances of Jewish law with his belief that keeping the Law was not essential to salvation? (Put up Scripture)
Here’s what’s going on: the church leaders were effectively saying to Paul, “we can accept this gift and identify with the Gentile believers; can you undergo ceremonial purification and thus identify with your fellow countrymen?” It was a little touchy, calling for decorum and clear communication, but that’s exactly what these men did: they assured Paul that they had no desire to force legalism on Gentile believers, using their previous actions as evidence. They suggested that by this tangible, visible act on Paul’s part, he would allay any fears that Jewish Christians might have had that he was teaching Jews to abandon their heritage and customs.
F.F. Bruce said, “A truly emancipated spirit such as Paul’s is not in bondage to its own emancipation”. Paul willingly did all of these things, not for the purpose of reverting to some legalism, but to identify with the Jews, his people, and not allow his freedom in Christ to be a stumblingblock to others. Paul could see and understand in the Jewish rituals their real significance, as they pointed forward to Christ.
Not that it worked, for next we see
IV. A Violent Outbreak - :27-30
There was a balustrade, a small wall, that blocked access of Gentiles into the Holy Place, and there were placed all along this wall warnings in Greek and Latin to the effect of “No Trespassing” by Gentiles. The pretense that the Jews used to stir up the crowd was that Paul had brought a Gentile beyond the Court of the Gentiles in the temple, and into places reserved for Jews alone. This hadn’t happened, but as with so many things, the facts didn’t really matter. It would have been absurd for Paul on the one hand to go to meticulous lengths to achieve ceremonial purity, and on the other flout such an obvious Jewish regulation! But for a Gentile to be brought into this area of the Temple was a capital offense, one with which even the Roman authorities went along, and there was no shortage of folks ready to see Paul executed for what they considered his blasphemy.
Paul was undoubtedly thinking of this wall that separated Jews and Gentiles when he wrote, in Ephesians 2, “remember that at one time you Gentiles…were…separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility…that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, 16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.”
It had been 20+ years since Paul had lived in Jerusalem, and he’d only visited there occasionally, and so the average Jew on the street, though likely well aware of the “treasonous blasphemer” known as Paul, would hardly have recognized the man. But this was the feast of Pentecost, and Jews from all over Asia would make the pilgrimage back to the holy city, and many of these Jews would easily recognize the man whose preaching had turned the world upside down. It’s likely that some of the instigators were Jews from Ephesus, men who had hassled Paul during his ministry there. They had bided their time until an opportunity arose, and arise it did; as Paul made his way into the temple to pay for the fulfillment of the final Nazirite vow, they saw him, and seized this opportunity with a well-calculated cry (a combination of “treason” and “blasphemer”) designed to arouse both the patriotic and religious sympathies of their fellow Jews. Imagine a Muslim shouting “Allah akbar” and attempting to burn a flag on July 4th and you get something of the picture.
We can thus imagine the anger that must have burned in the hearts of pious Jews who viewed Paul in this way, and the lynch mob that formed would have taken Paul’s life then and there had it not been for Roman soldiers nearby who intervened.
V. A Turbulent Arrest - :31-36
This “tribune” was a commander of Roman troops, and as you’ve probably learned by now, the main operative marching order for Romans was “keep the peace at all costs!” And so to quell the uprising, and assuming that Paul must be a criminal, the order was given to arrest Paul at once, and to bind him with not one chain but two, with a Roman soldier bound to each arm. As usual when we see mobs in action, there was little coherence to their speech about Paul; their words contradicted one another, or at least proved so confusing that the tribune could make neither hide nor hair of what it was that was the matter. And so Paul was spirited away by the Roman soldiers, with the screams of the mob for his blood echoing in their ears, reminiscent of a mob scene in Jerusalem some 27 or so years earlier...
Points to Ponder
We see in this text several of Paul’s attitudes. Note
• Paul’s attitude toward evangelism
For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. (I Cor. 9). The issue for Paul was that the gospel go forward, not that we get caught up in the trivialities of preferences and cultural differences. And his attitude is that of a servant. We serve others that we may point them to Christ!
• Paul’s attitude toward trivial matters
Paul wasn’t concerned with changing customs and denying heritage; he was concerned with proclaiming the gospel. And we, if we’re not careful, can concern ourselves with outward appearances and the like and miss the grace of God. Romans 14:5, in speaking of differences among Christians, says that “each one should be convinced in his own mind”, and this principle ought to apply, not to those cardinal doctrines of the faith, of course, but to the secondary and tertiary ones, some of the ones that people often want to make such a big deal out of! One of the best things about the EFCA is that we are a “big picture” movement. We concern ourselves tremendously with the essentials and leave room for differences on secondary matters. That fits me!
• Paul’s attitude toward unity
Paul was willing and eager to take the suggestions of the Jerusalem church leaders that would make for peace. As we talked about in our recent series on “Keeping the Peace”, Paul tells us how critical it is that we keep the unity of the Spirit. In this individualistic age in which we live, we need to be reminded of the importance of unity. Paul did some above-and-beyond things, submitting to others for the sake of the entire church. Further, Paul had a kingdom perspective; it was about more than his work in the Gentile world, but about the gospel spreading among the Jews as well (Romans 9-11).
• Paul’s attitude toward Christ
We won’t take the time to do it right now, but an interesting study for another time/on your own would be to notice the many parallels between the crucifixion of Christ and the imprisonment and abuse of the apostle Paul. Though Paul’s attitude toward Jesus would undoubtedly have been much like John Baptist’s—“I’m not worthy to tie His shoes”—it still is interesting how Paul’s treatment mirrors that dished out to Christ.
Not surprising, though; Paul said, “To me, to live is Christ” (Philippians 1:21). Here’s what Jesus said: “A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master. 25 It is enough for the disciple to be like his teacher, and the servant like his master.” And though as a flesh-and-blood man Paul would not have chosen to suffer, nonetheless his desire for all of his life to be a reflection of Jesus Christ caused him, ultimately, to lay down his life for His Savior. “To me, to live is Christ”, whether that meant for him persecution, ridicule, imprisonment, or death. Christian, how would you fill in the blank at the end of that statement? “To me, to live is ________.” There is one right answer: Jesus Christ.
