151
Unless, therefore, we see Paul and his doctrine as a whole, we shall not be able to understand what is
recorded of him in Acts 21.
`A modern writer has said that he (Paul) could not do this without untruth; and that to suppose the author of the
epistles to the Romans and Galatians standing seven days, oil cakes in hand, in the temple vestibule, and
submitting himself to all the manifestations with which Rabbinic pettiness had multiplied the Mosaic
ceremonials which accompanied the completion of the Nazarite vow - to suppose that in the midst of the
unbelieving Priests and Levites, he should have patiently tolerated all the ritual nullities of the temple service of
that period, and so have brought the business to its tedious conclusion in the elaborate manner above described,
is just as credible as that Luther in his old age should have performed a pilgrimage to Emsieden with peas in his
shoes, and that Calvin on his death bed should have vowed a gold-embroidered gown to the Holy Mother of
God' (Farrar, ref. to Hausruth).
But in view of the apostle's avowed willingness to be made `all things to all men' already expressed in the
quotation from 1 Corinthians 9, we can see that for Christ's sake he would have endured, with pity and with prayer,
the tedious ceremonial attached to the liberation of a Nazarite vow, could he thus disarm those who misunderstood
and attacked his testimony of the grace of God to the Gentiles. We must remember, moreover, that the Temple still
stood at Jerusalem, that Israel, as Israel, were still a people before God, that, until the apostle reached Rome, the
hope of Israel was not deferred, and that while the law as a means of salvation had been set aside by the sacrifice of
Christ, yet the Jew, during the period of the Acts did not cease to be a Jew by becoming a Christian. He still
worshipped the God of his fathers, and continued to do so until the dispensation changed.
Paul had never taught the Jew to `forsake Moses' in the sense that his adversaries alleged; neither had he said
that they ought not to circumcise their children, but much of his teaching could easily be so misrepresented as to
convince the zealot of the law that he was a most dangerous heretic
`What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come. Do
therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them; them take, and purify thyself
with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things,
whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest
the law' (Acts 21:22-24).
Let us acquaint ourselves with the meaning of this proposition. The word agnizo, `purify thyself with them', is
the word used in the LXX for nazar in Numbers 6:3. We have already seen that Paul had `polled his head in
Cenchrea: for he had a vow' (Acts 18:18), but he still needed to complete that vow, for the word keiramenos, `to
poll the head', is not the same as xuresontai `shave the head' of Acts 21:24. The former word, used in Acts 18:18, is
never used by the LXX of the final Nazarite shaving of the head at the expiration of a vow. The fact that a vow had
been taken in Cenchrea which demanded fulfilment at Jerusalem, seemed to the leaders at Jerusalem a heaven-sent
opportunity which they immediately seized. Let the whole thing be done as publicly as possible, and let Paul
undertake the cost attaching to the ceremonial purification of these four men, as others had done before him; `be at
charges with them'. It was the custom for a wealthy Jew to assist his poorer brethren in this way. Lewin says:
`There was not a more charitable act in the estimate of the Jews, or one more calculated to acquire popularity, than
to assist the poor Nazarite by supplying the necessary funds'. Josephus records the return of Agrippa from Rome,
and how he `offered all the sacrifices that belonged to him, and omitted nothing which the law required; on which
account he ordered that many of the Nazarites should have their heads shorn' (Ant. xix. 6, 1).
What a wonderful exhibition this action of grace on Paul's part! A mere doctrinaire would have repudiated the
humiliating conditions suggested by the leaders at Jerusalem. He would also feel resentment at the very casual
acceptance of the gift, to gather which he had spent so much time and prayer. He could easily have hidden behind
the evident fact that he had stood for complete emancipation from all such dead ceremonial works. But Paul knew
better. He believed and taught that true grace was Christ-like, and this overcame all objections, leading him meekly
to submit where he might have waged war against, `those who seemed to be somewhat'.
`And when the seven days were almost ended' (Acts 21:27)