Gann's Commentary on the Bible

brought ... CEV, NASB, NCV, etc. = "taking us to"

Mnason of Cyprus -- Originally from the same island as Barnabas (Acts 4:36).

Mnason -- an old disciple -- Undoubtedly one of the earliest Christian. Some translate this to mean "An original disciple" "a charter member". Paul lodged with him in Jerusalem, and Luke was with this party. It is believed that Luke gathered information for his Gospel and Acts from this eye-witness Luke 1:2.

It is probable that during Paul’s two year imprisonment at Caesarea that Luke had all this time and opportunity to meet and interview the eye-witnesses of whom he speaks. Apparently among those interviewed were Mary the mother of Jesus Luke 2:19; Luke 2:33; Luke 2:51; and many others who were close to Jesus personally.

If Luke wrote his Gospel during this two year period (AD 56-58) we should date it about AD 58. It is probable that Luke then used the two year period (AD 59-61) during Paul’s Roman imprisonment Acts 28:30 to write his account of Acts about AD 61 before the the outcome of Paul’s trial could be revealed. (This has caused some to speculate that Luke wrote both volumes as a legal brief for Theophilus Luke 1:3 who was either Paul’s lawyer or the official who heard his case for Nero’s court.)

And when we had come to Jerusalem, -- Paul and the bearers of the offering made the journey from Caesarea to Jerusalem in about two days.

the brethren received us gladly. -- This was, perhaps and informal welcome, given in Mnason’s house (with whom they were to lodge) by those who came there to greet the expected guests.

The events of Acts 21:18-26 are most challenging to students of the New Testament. A number of questions comes to one’s mind:

1) Are James and the Jerusalem elders still insisting that Jewish Christians continue to hold to their Jewish customs and rites, such as circumcision and purification sacrifices?

2) Is Paul inconsistent with his own teaching and compromising his faith to accommodate the leaders of the church at Jerusalem?

Here are some replies to the questions: 1) The mission of the Jerusalem church was directed to Jews, and many thousands (Acts 21:20) were believing. It was therefore expedient to retain Jewish customs which did not violate the faith and teaching of forgiveness of sins through the blood of Christ. (Matthew 17:27; 1 Corinthians 9:22.)

2) It would be expedient for Paul not to offend the Jerusalem brethren and hold to the roots of his Jewish customs. He had already shown such consideration in Acts 18:19.

3) In the absence of more detailed information one should be very careful in charging either the Jerusalem brethren or Paul with doing wrong in this matter.

[For further study see The Acts of the Apostles, Wayne Jackson, pp. 286-291; and Acts Commentary by Gareth L. Reese, pp. 791-799.]

[See Galatians 2:12 for more comments on James and Jewish Christians keeping Jewish customs.]

the rest of us -- Luke includes himself in the company meeting with the Jerusalem elders. He was probably a part of the delegation bearing he gifts to the Jerusalem saints from the church in Macedonia and Achaia (Romans 15:26).

James -- James was a "pillar" in the church there in Jerusalem (Acts 15:13; Galatians 2:9), but he was not the "ruling elder" or "the bishop" over the eldership there as some would claim. Such a position did not develop until much later and was push by Ignatius (2nd century) and was met with some relection. The New Testament knows of no such position.

See Hardeman Nichols’ article, pp. 141-150, Difficult Texts of the New Testament Explained, edited by Wendell Winkler, (The Fourth Annual "Fort Worth" Lectures, the Brown Trail Church of Christ, Bedfort, TX) 1981.

Acts 21:19

And after he had greeted them, -- What is involved in such a "greeting" , Acts 18:22; Acts 21:7.

he began to relate one by one -- Paul is giving his report in detail, reporting about place after place, and the acceptance of the Gospel in each.

Paul’s rehearsal of the things which God had worked through his ministry probably went back no farther than the time of the Jerusalem conference (Acts 15) for at that time he had rehearsed to those present there all that preceded that date, Acts 15:4.

Some believe that Paul’s rehearsal included only the events of the third missionary journey, on the supposition that he had reported the second journey during the visit recorded at Acts 18:22.

the things which God had done among the Gentiles -- Notice Paul emphasized that God had done the work. God was working through Paul.

through his ministry. -- It is not difficult to imagine some of the things Paul would have said in his report. He would have told how many Gentiles had forsaken their idols and were living faithful to God, even to the point where attendance at idols’ temples had greatly fallen off.

He would have explained about how the gratitude of those Gentiles had led them to undertake a generous contribution for the brethren at Jerusalem. He would then have introduced the messengers of the churches who had carried the offering.

Perhaps he told about the individual congregations they represented as he introduced each man. We can imagine that Paul would make reference to the admonition he was given at the close of the Jerusalem conference, that should remember the poor (Gal 2.10). The offering, he would say, was just one example that he had made every effort to practice his care for others.

Perhaps as he spoke, Paul experienced some of the anxiety he had spoken about in the letter to the Romans, an anxiety about how the offering would be received (Romans 15:31). (cf Acts 20:4). Now he was at the moment of finding out! - Reese

Acts 21:20

And when they heard it they began glorifying God. -- The tense of the verb "glorifying" implies continued actions; and its meaning would be satisfied by assuming there were continued, heartfelt expressions of wonder and praise.

It is also probable that there were more formal thanksgiving to the messengers from the churches. Luke does not at this place speak of the offering (cf. acts 24.17) but we imply from their glorification of God that they gratefully received their gifts.

Their praises to God also show that they were in full accord with Paul and his teaching and practice among the Gentiles, and keeps us from putting a wrong connotation on the suggestion about to be made by James. - Reese

The reception of Paul by the leaders of the Jerusalem church flatly contradicts the liberals’ reconstruction of early church history wherein they have proposed there was a split in doctrine and practice between Paul and the leading Jewish Christians.

And they said to him, -- The offering Paul brought with him was an attempt by Paul to heal the breach between the Jewish and Gentile Christians. It seems to have been partly a unity measure as well as a means of relief.

You see brother -- Paul is recognized as a "brother"; the word will also help us to keep from putting a wrong connotation on the suggestion by James.

you see -- This implies that this fact of the large numbers of Jewish people who had become Christians was something Paul already was cognizant of from his own observations.

how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, -- i.e, tens of thousands. This might seem to be too large a total if we think of the population of Jerusalem only; but if there are crowds of Jews present from all over the world for the feast of Pentecost, then the statement is justifiable.

and they are all zealous for the law; -- Evidently we are to see that the majority of Jewish Christians continued to come to the feasts, and they continued keeping other regulations prescribe by Moses.

[See Reese, p. 794 for why these Jewish Christians would continue to observe the Mosaic rites since the Law was abolished, nailed to the cross, Colossians 2:14.]

teach all the Jews ... to forsake Moses, --

21:20b-22 However, the Jewish brethren were apprehensive. Word had traveled around that the Apostle Paul had preached and taught against Moses and the law. This could mean trouble in Jerusalem.

The specific charge being made against Paul was that he taught all the Jews in foreign lands to forsake Moses, by telling them not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the Jewish customs. Did Paul actually teach this or did he not?

He did teach that Christ was the end of the law for righteousness to those who believe. He did teach that once the Christian faith had come, believing Jews were no longer under the law. He taught that if a man received circumcision as a means of obtaining justification, then such a man cut himself off from salvation in Christ Jesus. He taught that to return to the types and shadows of the law, after Christ had come, was dishonoring to Christ. In view of this, it is not hard to see why the Jews should think of him as they did. - BBC

cont to see note on Acts 21:24

you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law. --

We do not know much about what this vow involved. The details are veiled in obscurity. But all we need to know is that it was a Jewish vow, and that if the Jews saw the apostle going through the ritual connected with it, they would know assuredly that he was not turning others away from the law of Moses. It would be an indication to the Jews that the apostle himself kept the law.

The action of the apostle in taking on himself this Jewish vow has been defended and criticized. In defense of Paul it has been argued that he was acting according to his own principle to be all things to all men, if by any means he might save some (1 Corinthians 9:19-23). On the other hand, Paul has been criticized for going too far in an effort to conciliate the Jews, and thus creating the impression that he was under the law. In other words, Paul has been charged with being inconsistent with his view that the believer is not under the law, either for justification or as a rule of life (Gal. 1 and 2). We tend to agree with this criticism, but we also feel that one should be careful in judging the apostle’s motives. - BBC