Referring to the thousands of Jews who believed and were zealous for the law, James went on to say to Paul, “And they have been instructed concerning you that you are teaching all the Jews throughout the nations apostasy from Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children, nor to walk according to the customs” (v. 21). To leave the law of Moses, not to circumcise, and not to walk according to the customs of dead letters are really according to God’s New Testament economy. But these were considered by the unbelieving Jews and even by the Jewish believers in Christ to be apostasy from God’s Old Testament dispensation. It certainly is not apostasy to put aside the Old Testament economy. Rather, that is part of the carrying out of the truth. Nevertheless, James and the other elders used the situation among the thousands of believing Jews in Jerusalem in order to persuade Paul.
Those believing Jews who had been instructed concerning Paul were correct as to the facts, but they were mistaken in accusing Paul of apostasy. In the Epistle to the Galatians Paul clearly says that the law has been put aside, and that he is dead to the law: “I through law have died to law that I might live to God” (Gal. 2:19). This means that Paul no longer had anything to do with the law. For him to have died to the law means that the obligation under the law, the relationship to the law, was terminated. Hence, before Paul came to Jerusalem the last time in Acts 21, he had clearly written to the Galatians that he was dead to the law and had nothing to do with it.
The Jews were right regarding the facts, but they twisted the facts by accusing Paul of teaching apostasy. Apostasy is a matter of heresy. Paul’s departure from the law was neither apostasy nor heresy; it was the practice of the truth of God’s New Testament economy. However, the opposers took the facts and twisted them. Our opposers do the same thing today.
According to 21:21, Paul taught apostasy from Moses, telling the Jews not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. I believe that Paul did teach that it was no longer necessary to practice circumcision. Yet, as we have pointed out, he had Timothy circumcised (16:1-3). The criticism of his opposers, therefore, was not fair.
The Jews also claimed that Paul taught the people not to walk according to the customs. In this matter they were accurate. Nevertheless, the report that went to Jerusalem concerning Paul’s ministry was only partially true. The situation is the same with us today.
In 21:22 and 23a James and the elders said to Paul, “What then is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come. Therefore do what we tell you.” Literally, the Greek word translated “what” mean “this that.” In verse 23 James and the elders did not propose something to Paul; rather, they required it of him, telling him to do what they said to him.
James and the elders went on to say, “Four men are with us who have a vow on themselves; take these and be purified with them, and pay their expenses that they may shave their heads; and all will know that there is nothing to the things of which they have been instructed concerning you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the law” (vv. 23b-24). The vow mentioned in verse 23 was the Nazarite vow (Num. 6:2-5). For Paul to be purified with the Nazarites was to become a Nazarite with them, joining them in their vow. The word “purely” is used in the Septuagint in Numbers 6:3, in describing the Nazarite’s duties. To take the Nazarite vow is a purification before God.
In addition to telling Paul to be purified with the four who had a vow on themselves, they told him to pay their expenses so that they might shave their heads. Paying their expenses refers to the cost of the offerings which a Nazarite had to pay for the completion of his purification (Num. 6:13-17). This was very expensive for the poor Nazarites. It was a custom among the Jews, and was considered a proof of great piety, that a rich person would pay the expenses of the offerings for the poor.
The shaving of the head was to be done at the completion of the Nazarite vow (Num. 6:18). This shaving differed from the shearing in Acts 18:18, which was for a private vow. We have emphasized the fact that the vow in 18:18 was a private vow in any place by the Jews for thanksgiving, with the shearing of hair. It differed from the Nazarite vow, which had to be carried out in Jerusalem with the shaving of the head. In Acts 18 Paul had a private vow, and it seems that God tolerated it, probably because it, being a private vow accomplished in a place other than Jerusalem, would not have had much effect on the believers.
Acts 21:26 says, “Then Paul took the men on the following day, and having been purified with them entered into the temple, giving notice of the completion of the days of the purification, until the offering was offered for each one of them.” Here we see that Paul participated in their Nazarite vow. In order to do this, Paul had to enter into the temple and remain there with the Nazarites until the completion of the seven days of the vow. Then the priests would offer the offerings for each one of them, including him. Paul surely was clear that such a practice was of the out-of-date dispensation, which, according to the principle of his teaching in the New Testament ministry, should be repudiated in God’s New Testament economy. Yet he went through with it, probably because of his Jewish background, which was also manifested in his earlier private vow in 18:18, and because he was practicing his word in 1 Corinthians 9:20. However, his toleration jeopardized God’s New Testament economy, which God would not tolerate. As we shall see, just at the time when their vow was to be concluded, God allowed an uproar to rise up (v. 27).
The mixture of Judaic practices with God’s New Testament economy was not only erroneous in God’s dispensation, but also abominable in the eyes of God. This gross mixture was terminated by Him a mere ten years or so later with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, the center of Judaism, through Titus and his Roman army. This rescued the church and absolutely separated it from the devastation of Judaism.
God might have tolerated the private vow Paul had in 18:18, but He would not allow Paul, His chosen vessel not only for the completion of His New Testament revelation (Col. 1:25) but also for the carrying out of His New Testament economy (Eph. 3:2, 7-8), to participate in the Nazarite vow, a serious Judaic practice. Paul might have intended in going to Jerusalem to clear up the Judaic influence on the church there, but God knew that it was incurable. Hence, in His sovereignty He allowed Paul to be arrested by the Jews and imprisoned by the Romans so that he might write his last eight Epistles, which completed the divine revelation (Col. 1:25) and gave the church a clearer and deeper view concerning God’s New Testament economy (Eph. 3:3-4). Thus, God left the Judaic-influenced church in Jerusalem to remain as it was until the devastating mixture was terminated with the destruction of Jerusalem. For Paul to write his last eight Epistles to complete God’s New Testament revelation was far more important and necessary than for him to accomplish some outward works for the church.