Bible Study series: Acts 21:15-40 The team did not provoke the riot, nor did Paul. Some Jews from the provinces identified him and stirred up the crowd. In this chapter, we see Paul completing his third missionary journey.
Friendly greetings and a warm welcome to this Bible study! I write to learn. Let’s learn together and apply these truths to our lives.
I also translate to learn, so the translations are mine, unless otherwise noted. If you would like to see many others, please click on this link:
At the link to the original post, next, I write more commentary and dig a little deeper into the Greek. I also offer a section titled Observations for Discipleship at the end. Check it out!
In this post, links are provided in the commentary section for further study.
Let’s begin.
Scripture: Acts 21:15-40
15 After those days, we packed up and went up to Jerusalem. 16 Some of the disciples from Caesarea went with us and brought us to the house of Mnason, of Cyprus, a long-standing disciple, with whom we were to lodge.
17 When we arrived in Jerusalem, the brothers and sisters gladly welcomed us. 18 The next day, Paul took us and went to James, and all the elders were present. 19 After he greeted them, he narrated every single thing that God did among the Gentiles through his ministry. 20 They listened and glorified God and said to him: “You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews among us have believed, and all of them are zealous for the law. 21 But they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who live among the Gentiles a departure from Moses. You say they are not to circumcise their sons, nor live by the customs. 22 What about this? They shall certainly hear that you have come. 23 Do this which we tell you. There are four of our men who have taken a vow. 24 Take them along and be purified with them, and pay for their expenses, so they may shave their heads; and everyone shall learn that there is nothing to the things they have been informed about you, but you yourself also follow and keep the law. 25 Concerning the believing Gentiles, we have written and decided that they should abstain from things sacrificed to idols, blood, and strangled, undrained meat, and sexual immorality.”
26 Then Paul took the men along, and the next day he purified himself with them and went into the temple, giving notice of the completion of the days of purification until the offering was offered for each one of them. 27 When the seven days were about to be completed, Jews from Asia saw him in the temple and stirred up the whole crowd and seized him with hands, 28 shouting, “Israelites! Help! This is the man who teaches everyone everywhere against the people and the law and this place! Furthermore, he has even brought Greeks into the temple and profaned this holy place! 29 (For they had seen previously Trophimus of Ephesus in the city with him, whom they were thinking Paul brought into the temple.) 30 The entire city was whipped up and scrambled together to form a mob. After seizing Paul, they dragged him outside the temple, and immediately the gates were shut.
31 As they were trying to kill him, a report that all of Jerusalem was stirred up went up to the military commander of the cohort. 32 At that instant, he took along soldiers and officers and ran down with them. When they saw the commander and soldiers, they stopped beating Paul. 33 Then the commander approached and grabbed him and ordered him to be bound with two chains, and he asked who he was and what he had done. 34 Some in the crowd were shouting one thing, others another. When he was unable to find out accurately the reason for the uproar, he ordered him to be led into the barracks. 35 When he came to the stairs, he met and was carried by the soldiers because of the violence of the crowd, 36 for the crowd of people kept following him, shouting, “Away with him!”
37 When they were about to take him into the barracks, Paul said to the commander, “May I be permitted to say something to you?” He said, “Do you know Greek? 38 Then you are not the Egyptian who ignited a revolt and led four thousand men of the Assassins into the desert some time ago?” 39 Paul said, “I am a Jewish man, from Tarsus of Cilicia, a citizen of no insignificant city. I beg you: allow me to speak to the people.” 40 He allowed it. Paul stood on the steps and motioned with his hand to the people. When a great hush took place, he spoke in the Aramaic language, saying …. (Acts 21:15-40)
Comments:
This long section can be divided into smaller sections, as follows:
1.. Paul meets with James and the elders (vv. 15-25)
2.. Riot in the temple precincts (vv. 26-30)
3.. Romans rescue Paul (vv. 31-36)
4. Paul is permitted to address the crown (vv. 37-40)
Before we begin, here is commentator Schnabel’s excellent table, to give us the bigger picture:
| Year | Occasion for Visit to Jerusalem |
| 31/32 | Conversion of Saul |
| 32-34 | Missionary work in Arabia and in Damascus |
| 33/34 | First visit (Acts 9:26-20), three years after Paul’s conversion |
| 34-44 | Missionary work in Syria and Cilicia (eleven years) |
| 44 | Second visit (Acts 11:27-30): taking gifts to the poor, eleven years after the first visit |
| 45-47 | Missionary work on Cyprus and in Galatia |
| 48 | Third visit (Acts 15:1-29): Apostles’ Council, three years after the second visit |
| 49-51 | Missionary work in Macedonia and Achaia |
| 51 | Fourth visit (Acts 18:22): three years after the third visit |
| 52-56 | Missionary work in the Province of Asia and visit to Achaia |
| 57 | Fifth visit (Acts 21:15-17): collection visit, six years after the fourth visit |
| 57-61 | Arrest in Jerusalem and imprisonment in Caesarea and in Rome |
| Schnabel, p. 455 | |
The fifth visit is relevant here.
15-16:
They packed up, indicating they may have had mules or horses, though horses were much more expensive. On the other hand, maybe they just carried their supplies on their backs.
Now the crew or team or posse got bigger. They must have had a good time of fellowship. Always go in teams on your ministry / missionary journeys. There is safety in numbers.
We don’t know who Mnason was, other than the little appositive words Luke mentions. He was from Cyprus, but when did he come over to Israel, so that he could be called a long-time disciple? Since he came from Barnabas’s home island, was he related to the Son of Encouragement (Barnabas)? No doubt he at least knew Barnabas. Was he familiar with the baptism of John, as the certain disciples were, whom Paul met in Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7), but then got the fulness of the Spirit later? Was he with Jesus from the beginning of his ministry, like the twelve were? Jesus had many followers who were not part of the twelve, some of whom were women (Luke 8:1-3). Was he one of the unnamed seventy-two whom Jesus sent out (Luke 10:1-24)? Probably. Was he one of the 120 in the upper room when the Spirit came down in great power and fire (Acts 2:1-4)? Was he a recent convert from Peter’s ministry, when Peter traveled along the seacoast (Acts 9:32-11:1)? The most likely option. He must have had some wealth to host this large team of missionaries, because his house had to be big enough to lodge them. In comparison, Barnabas and John Mark and Mary (John Mark’s mother) were related, and Mary had a big enough house to have a gate and host a church in Jerusalem, where property values were high.
Some scholars speculate that Luke heard about Peter’s miracles for Aeneas and Dorcas (Acts 9:12-43) from Mnason.
In the next section, Paul and his team will reach Jerusalem. It makes me wonder whether Paul and his team did not go to Mary and John Mark’s house because of the rift (Acts 15:36-39). They may have visited there, but the text is silent. We will never know for sure.
Always, always leave behind old grudges and former conflicts!
Once again, here is Bock’s table of the cities and regions during Paul’s third missionary journey:
|
Paul’s Third Missionary Journey |
|
| City | Region |
| Unnamed cities | Galatia |
| Unnamed cities | Phrygia |
| Ephesus | Lydia |
| Unnamed cities | Macedonia and Greece |
| Philippi | Macedonia |
| Troas | Mysia |
| Assos | Mysia |
| Mitylene | Lesbos |
| Unnamed cities | Chios |
| Unnamed cities | Samos |
| Miletus | Ionia |
| Cos | Cos |
| Rhodes | Rhodes |
| Patara | Lycia |
| Tyre | Phoenicia |
| Ptolemais | Phoenicia |
| Caesarea | Judea |
| Jerusalem (probably) | Judea |
| Bock, p. 640 | |
17:
The Greek is “brothers,” but it is big enough to include “sisters,” much like our word mankind includes women. I like to imagine that Mary, mother of John Mark, was one of the sisters who gladly welcomed him. And where were Barnabas and John Mark? Were they in Jerusalem or out in the field, ministering? I say they were on a missionary journey.
18:
James must have been a president over a “Messianic Sanhedrin” of sorts. They come across as very august and politically powerful. Don’t mess with James and the Elders! Bruce points out that if James’s house could hold meetings of this size, it must have been huge (comment on v. 18).
What is so interesting is the absence of the apostles. It is impossible to believe that if the twelve (or even some of the twelve) were there, Luke would have omitted this important detail. Luke omits details, but not something that was historically and ecclesiastically significant. Where were the twelve? No doubt they, like Barnabas and John Mark, had already been going outside of Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria, and even leaving Israel, as Jesus told them—commanded them—to do (Acts 1:8).
And why was James (the half-brother of Jesus) still there? It is good to have a permanent Messianic-Jewish presence in Jerusalem, but did they keep too closely to the old law of Moses? Let’s see.
This verse marks the end of the “we passages” until Acts 27:1 to 28:16, where Luke was included and was an eyewitness. But he was in Jerusalem, and he must have seen the events when they happened. He certainly got instant reporting if he did not see them with his own eyes. Luke is probably interviewing Christians to learn about Jesus and their own stories with him.
19:
Was Luke in the room? Or was a (probable) Gentile not allowed into the presence of these Messianic Jews who were in the holy city of Jerusalem, where the law of Moses was carried out even to the point of animal sacrifices? Recall that the “we section” ended in v. 17. But surely he was there. These high-flying leaders would not exclude a (probable) Gentile like Luke! We will never know for sure.
It must have been great to hear Paul narrate those details, but Luke won’t allow us to hear them because he has already written about some of them. He expects us to fill in those missing details with what we already know: the power and fullness of the Spirit, with signs and wonders.
It was imperative that Paul discuss the Gentile outreach, to remind these Messianic Jews headquartered in Jerusalem that God loved Gentiles too.
“ministry”: it is the Greek noun diakonia (pronounced dee-ah-koh-nee-ah), and it means, depending on the context, “service,” “office,” “ministry,” or “aid, support, distribution.” Yes, we get our word deacon from it (1 Tim. 3:10, 13). It evolved into a position at church for a man (or woman) who did practical service, to help the pastor, so he (or she) could focus on the Word of God. But this does not limit the deacons’ service away from the Word, as we have observed with Philip and Stephen, who preached the gospel. Paul meant the term more broadly than practical service, though it meant that too for him. It was his entire apostolic ministry.
Luke does not include the offering (1 Cor 16:1-4; Rom. 16:25-33). Why? Longenecker speculates that Luke may not have known how to explain it to a Gentile audience, other than this is Paul’s attempt to curry favor with the Jerusalem church (a sort of low-grade bribe to buy favor); or Paul was fearful that the Jerusalem church may not accept it (comments on v. 19). Schnabel offers a better explanation: when Luke finally wrote down his account the offering was insignificant, compared to Paul’s arrest and calling to Rome (comment on v. 18). Bock is also sensible: the word ministry may include the offering (Comment on vv. 17-19). Other than those reasons, I don’t know, though I prefer Schnabel’s and Bock’s reasons. But Longenecker is right to go on to say that Paul was motivated by unity. He wanted to show the unity between the Gentile Christians and the headquarters of the Way (Christianity) in Jerusalem, the mother-church.
20:
“believed”: Here it is connected to “saved.” But these Jews were still steeped in Judaism, However, let’s not question their salvation. They were on a journey towards God and complete trust in Christ.
Word Study on Faith and Faithfulness
Yes, James and the elders listened and glorified God because of God working through Paul’s ministry, but it seems they could not wait to advise Paul on how to show the Messianic zealous law-keepers that Paul honored the temple and the law.
“zealous for the law”: this phrase does not refer to a political party of the Zealots, which hit the cultural scenes later, closer to the destruction of Jerusalem. Instead, they were enthusiastic and devoted adherence to the old customs embedded in the law of Moses. Paul himself says that he used to be zealous for the law (Acts 22:3; cf. Phil. 3:4-6).
It was great that thousands of Jews of Jerusalem and Judea believed in the Messiah, but how much of the law did they keep? They probably kept the moral law and some of the rituals, like the feasts and festivals, but we will never know for sure how deeply they kept the law—though we learn about a vow in v. 23-24. It is a sure thing that Jerusalem and the temple in plain sight and with easy access held these Messianic Jews’ minds down (and back) to the ancient religion of Judaism.
21:
“departure”: it is the noun apostasia (pronounced ah-poh-stah-see-ah), and we get our word apostasy from it. It means to “stand away” or “fall away,” and also “defection,” “revolt,” “interval,” or “distance.” Paul did teach that the new temple was the church, not the structure of stones in Jerusalem (1 Cor. 3:16-17; Eph. 2:21), and Peter taught the same thing, so he made a break from the temple worship (1 Pet. 2:5).
The key word is “customs.” Some of the customs can be kept by Messianic Jews, like the Sabbath and the festivals and feasts, or the (later) Seder meal, but New-Testament educated Messianic Jews know that salvation does not come through them. They honor them, if they do, voluntarily, not by command or force, baked into the law of Moses. However, if a Messianic Jew wishes voluntarily to move on past them, then he is free to do that, as well.
Paul is about to take the middle ground, and honor a custom, the Nazarite vow (Num. 6:2-21), just for the sake of cultural peace, not as a necessary act to prove that he loved God or to enhance or improve his salvation, which is by grace and faith alone (Eph. 2:8).
What Paul opposed vehemently is the Sinai Covenant (Ex. 19), and all the curses and wrath and destruction guaranteed for those who could not keep it (Deut. 28:15-68 ≠ Gal. 3:10-14). Moral law was absorbed into his writings and the rest of the New Covenant Scriptures, but not rituals (Sabbath keeping is a ritual), ceremonies, sacrifices, and even feasts and festivals, which are also rituals, particularly circumcision as a sign of salvation. But as noted, if Messianic Jews wish voluntarily to keep the feasts and festivals and even the Sabbath, they are certainly free to do so. But if they voluntarily choose not to do any of it or only some of it, then are equally free, even circumcising sons.
Paul speaks with clarity:
17 Nevertheless, each person should live as a believer in whatever situation the Lord has assigned to them, just as God has called them. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches. 18 Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised. 19 Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God’s commands is what counts. 20 Each person should remain in the situation they were in when God called them. (1 Cor 7:17-20, NIV)
And here he speaks about his personal liberty, which involves his cultural flexibility, in order to win some for the gospel:
19 Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20 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. 21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some. 23 I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings. (1 Cor 9:20-23, NIV)
As usual, Bruce is excellent here, so I quote him in full:
Paul’s position in such matters [of following the customs of Moses] is fairly clear from his letters. The circumcising of Gentile converts as a kind of insurance policy, lest faith in Christ should be insufficient in itself, he denounced as a departure from the purity of the gospel (Gal. 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. He 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. (Comments on vv. 19-21)
But what practice did he adopt when in the company of Jews and Gentiles a mixed company? Bruce continues:
The answer probably is that he acted as he thought each situation required: any Jews who were content to participate in such missed society had doubtless learned some measure of adaptation already. For anyone who stayed by the letter and spirit of the law, Paul’s regarding some of its requirements as matter of indifference, his treating as optional things that the law laid down as obligatory, must in itself have constituted “apostasy against Moses”; but in practice he avoided giving offense to those in whose company he was from time to time. (comment on vv. 19-21)
I add that Paul would figure out who had the weakest (i.e. most restrictive) conscience and honor him in public (Rom. 14:13-23). In light of those verses in Rom. 14, James and the Jewish elders were weak, but who can blame them? They lived in Jerusalem and in the temple. Yet, there is no getting away from that fact that they were restricted in their outlook, when measured against God’s global outreach.
22-24:
“also follow and keep the law”: James is speaking imprecisely here, and apparently Paul latched on to the vow that these four men had taken. Paul’s decision to go along with James’s advice was an outward show just to keep the peace among the legalistic Jews and the Messianic Jews, and even Paul led a team of more liberated Messianic Jews than the legalistic Messianic Jews whom James led. Paul said he would become all things to all men, so he could win some (1 Cor. 9:19-23).
For the customs of the Nazarite vow, please go to Numbers 6, which discusses shaving of the hair (v. 8) and offering it to God.
Let’s not forget that James and the elders received money from Paul, and they did not want to jeopardize their outreach to their fellow Jews with money which they might perceive as tainted. “Ha! How can you get money from an apostate like Paul! It’s defiled! So enough of your outreach to us!” they could easily say. In Rom. 15:31-32, Paul was concerned that his offering from the Gentiles would be acceptable to the Jerusalem church.
So where did Paul get the money? From the offering or from the Jerusalem church’s funds? Probably from the Jerusalem church itself (Schnabel and Bock, on v. 24). Either way, it does not really matter because Paul’s offering replenished the Jerusalem church’s funds.
When Paul paid the expenses, he was doing an act of charity. It is not likely he was totally immersed in the details of the Nazarite vow. Marshall is right: “There was no theological compromise for Paul in so doing [participating in this vow], especially since the offering involved would not seem to him to clash with the self-offering of Jesus as a sacrifice for sin” (p. 361).
Keener: “Paul purifies himself as well (Acts 21:26; 24:18), although for temple purity reasons and not part of their vow” (p. 518). So he did not sacrifice animals or such like, but he may have paid for the other four men to sacrifice, in his liberty. “The plan was a noble one, marred only by an outcome that could not be foreseen. Paul’s accusers might have denounced him in the temple whether or not he had gone there for sacrifice” (pp. 518-19).
25:
See Acts 15 for the details of these requirements brought about by the Jerusalem Council, which has nothing to do with salvation, but keeping the peace between Messianic Jews and Gentile believers out in the provinces, so they could fellowship together.
“believing”: it could be translated as “Gentiles who believed.” See v. 20 for more comments on the verb believe and the noun faith.
What Does the New Covenant Retain from the Old?
Do Christians Have to ‘Keep’ the Ten Commandments?
Ten Commandments: God’s Great Compromise with Humanity’s Big Failure
In the end, James could not keep the unity of old Judaism and the new Way together. The old law and Christianity separate. Polhill reports James’s demise.
In the aftermath of the Jewish War with Rome and the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, Jewish Christianity was declared heretical by official Judaism; and it was no longer possible for a Christian Jew to remain in the Jewish community. James had seen the problem well and sought to present himself as a strict, Torah-abiding Jew, doubtless to strengthen the credibility of his witness to his fellow Jews. Ultimately, he gave his life for his Christian witness, being put to death at the order of the high priest Ananus in A.D. 62. (comment on v. 25)
26:
Paul is simply fulfilling the terms of the vow. Repeat: he followed this custom not to prove his love for God or to enhance or add on to his salvation by grace and faith alone, but to keep the peace between Messianic Jews and the unconverted Jews. It was a cross-cultural outreach. Hudson Taylor (1832-1905), the missionary to China, dressed like a standard Chinese man. These are shallow issues in the bigger call to salvation.
“purified himself”: he dipped in one of the many and large immersion pools around Jerusalem, perhaps the pool of Siloam or the pool of Bethesda near the sheep gate (Schnabel, comment on v. 26). Sounds reasonable to me.
Bruce points out that Paul himself may not have been “sanguine” about joining the four men, but he was prepared to conform for the sake of unity.
Further, it is probably true that the extra-devout unconverted Jews would not like it when the Messianic Jewish community received money from unclean Gentiles. Who knows what the ultimate source of the money was? From temple prostitution? No money (Deut. 23:18)! It would have hurt the Messianic Jewish testimony to their fellow Jews. So they urged Paul to fall in line.
Bock is on target:
Liberty is a great thing, but sometimes the expression of liberty can be counterproductive. Paul sensed that James’s request made sense, so he willingly restricted his freedom. Paul taught this in other areas as well, as Rom. 14-15 also indicates. Both men show a generous spirit in interacting with each other, which is always an indication of a healthy relationship. Neither is making a power play against the other. (comment on v. 26)
James and Paul were disciples who surrendered to Jesus.
27-30:
As to the purification being completed, Num. 19:2 says that purification was to be done on the third and seventh days. Paul must have gone to the temple on the seventh day.
Now for the accusations. All of their words were false or gross distortions, as we can read from Paul’s epistles, particularly Rom. 9-11. Paul said God still had a purpose for the Jews, even though a temporary blindness has covered and is covering their eyes. And Paul did not bring a Gentile into the temple (v. 29).
A notice was fixed to the barrier separating the court of the Gentiles and the inner courts. The notice warned that any Gentile that trespassed into the forbidden areas brought death. The warnings were found in 1871 and 1935. They were in Greek. They read:
No foreigner may enter within the barricade which surrounds the temple and enclosure. Any one who is caught trespassing will bear personal responsibility for his ensuing death. (Bruce, comments on vv. 27-29)
With that being said, however, Paul believed that the temple in Jerusalem was unnecessary for proper worship (1 Cor. 3:16-17; Eph. 2:21). Keeping the law of Moses was unnecessary and puts people in bondage (Gal. 4:21-31). The law of Moses had a certain inferior level of glory, but it was fading and giving way to the gospel (2 Cor. 3). Circumcision, the sign of the Old Covenant, is no longer valid or necessary (Rom. 2:25-29; Gal. 5:22-23).
So he was a threat to old Judaism, because he preached that Jesus was the Messiah and a new order, a new kingdom, had come.
I like how Bruce points out that when the temple doors were shut, this act symbolized the temple was shut from the new ways of God and the New Covenant. Luke himself may have accepted the act of shutting as symbolic, for Jesus predicted its judgment and destruction many years before (Luke 21:6) (Bruce’s comment on v. 30). In fact, Luke will demonstrate from here on that it is the Romans who take care of Paul, and it is his fellow-Jews who turn into his relentless persecutors and enemies (HT: Polhill, comment on p. 442).
Today, Messianic Jews are the fulfillment of the Old Judaism, so many of the old laws are unnecessary. However, if they want to keep some of the interesting, harmless parts of the Old Law, like feasts, a kosher diet, or the Sabbath, then they are certainly free to do that. After all, Paul had Timothy circumcised, but only for ministry, not for salvation or as a sign of the New Covenant (Acts 16:3). They now live in the law of liberty and love of Christ. The thing Paul objected to was the Old Sinai Covenant and law keeping to prove his salvation; now it is about faith in Jesus. He also objected to the curses and wrath and punishment that were the consequences to failing to keep those laws.
For more discussion, click on this link and read the final Observations for Discipleship section, below.
31-36:
This is exciting writing! Did Luke see the events from a distance? Or did he hear about them shortly later on.
Paul had chains put on him, thus fulfilling Agabus’s words (vv. 10-14) because the two chains bound Paul’s hands and feet.
We learn in Acts 23:26 and 24:22 that the commander’s name is Claudius Lysias. A commander of a thousand (on paper) means he was high up in the Roman military, being a leader of a thousand. Marshall says Claudius was equivalent to a major or colonel (comment on vv. 31-32). He is the first in a line of Roman officials to learn about Paul and his message (Acts 21-23). As noted, Luke will portray the Romans as protecting Paul, in contrast to his fellow Jews who opposed him vehemently.
Paul was actually getting beaten and getting pelted with rocks. He was a man of great stamina. Here are Paul’s own words about his suffering:
23 I have worked much harder, in prison more often, more severe floggings, facing death often. 24 Five times I have received forty lashes minus one by Jews, 25 three beatings with rods, once hit with stones, three times shipwrecked; a day and a night I have spent in the deep; 26 traveling on foot often; in danger from rivers, in danger from robbers, in danger from fellow-Jews, in danger from Gentiles, in danger in cities, in danger in the wilderness, in danger at sea, in danger from false brothers; 27 in toil and hardship, in sleeplessness often, in hunger and thirst, often without food, in cold and nakedness …. (2 Cor. 11:23-27)
He regarded persecution as a sign of an apostle (2 Cor. 12:12). Any persecution suffered for Christ is a sign of God’s favor and the promise of an earnest reward (Matt. 5:11; Rom. 8:17; 2 Tim. 2:12).
Could I put myself in that position? Only by God’s grace.
“away with him”: They shouted these exact words against Jesus about twenty-seven years before (Luke 23:18; John 19:15). It means, “Kill him!”
37-40:
They were named after the dagger sica in Latin, so they were called sicarii or “dagger men.” They arose during the governorship of Felix, who will appear later in Acts. Times were tense in Jerusalem and Judea. You can read about the Egyptian man online.
In v. 37, that is close to a literal translation. Other translations just say, “May I say something to you?”
Paul was bold in his speaking, even from the top of the steps. He was fearless. You know when the Spirit inspires you when you speak with boldness—though that is not the only criterion. But it is a sure thing that God did not give you a spirit of fear, as Paul reminded Timothy (2 Tim. 1:7).
“The bulk of Jerusalem has reacted now against Jesus, Peter, John, Stephen, and Paul. For Acts, this is the final, key rejection of the gospel” (Bock, comments on vv. 31-33). Jerusalem will be left behind and go unmentioned after Paul is hustled away to protect him (Acts 23:23-24).
“Tarsus”: Bock says that Paul’s home city of Tarsus had several hundred thousand of inhabitants in it. Wow. It was a cultural center of Hellenism (Greek culture), rhetoric, and Stoic philosophy, which you can look up online.
Aramaic was a common Semitic language throughout greater Palestine and beyond, and it may have been used in the temple precincts. However, since these are religious Jews, the language may have been Hebrew.
In 1205, Stephen Langton inserted chapters into the Bible missed it here, because we have to turn to the next chapter to find out what Paul said. It’s a page turner! (Robertus Estienne or Robert Stephanus inserted the verse numbers in his edition of 1551.)
Paul secured their silence with a characteristic gesture of his hand, which “is probably intended by Luke to bear witness to the power of his personality” (Bruce, comment on vv. 39-40).
GrowApp for Acts 21:15-40
1. Recount everything God did through him and his team. How do you tell your story of God’s workings in your life, without being boastful? What has God done for you?
2. Paul is now in Jerusalem. Study 1 Cor. 9:19-23. Paul was flexible enough to fit into various cultures, yet without sinning against the gospel. How flexible are you in various settings?
3. Read 2 Tim. 4:2. We are supposed to be ready in season and out—prepared at any time, as Paul was in this life-threatening situation. How is your preparation before you hit hard times in your own life? How do you prepare?
RELATED
The Historical Reliability of the Book of Acts
Book of Acts and Paul’s Epistles: Match Made in Heaven?
SOURCES
For the bibliography, please click on this link and scroll down to the very bottom:
Dr. Jim's Essential Bible Teaching 