Acts 21 - The Hermeneutical Key: Either a Good Paul, a Madman, or a Liar!

Greetings and grace to you in the matchless name of Messiah,

In the journey to understanding why one should continue to observe the Mosaic Law even after faith in the Messiah, one has to start somewhere. Oftentimes, Messianic Jews and pronomian Christians rightly point directly to Messiah’s words in Matthew 5:17. Christ says, “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.”

Now, that passage can wait for another post, as the word for “fulfill” (Greek plerosai) needs to be accounted for. However, since the plain reading of the text definitely indicates that Messiah did not abolish the Law or the Prophets, we can take that at face value for now.

Because much of the theology which reckons that the Law of Moses is no longer applicable for contemporary orthopraxy (right practice) comes from the Pauline Epistles and Acts, I find it is best to start there.

Acts 21 and Acts 15, together, form the basis of initial instructions for the influx of new Gentile converts. As Acts 21 references Acts 15, they need to be treated together, which we will do in another post. For now, let’s begin with Acts 21.

The Setting

Acts 21, beginning at verse 15, shows that Paul has traveled back to Jerusalem, and began to tell James of all the good that has been accomplished by God among the Gentiles in Asia minor (v. 19). James and the brethren in Jerusalem begin to praise God for that (v. 20).

James says, “You see brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed, and they are all zealous for the Law; (21) and they have been told about you, that you are teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs.” (22) What, then is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come. (23) Therefore do this that we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow; (24) take them and purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads; and all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly keeping the Law. (25) But concerning the Gentiles who have believed, we wrote, having decided that they should abstain from meat sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from fornication.”

James and the Fact-finding Mission

What can we determine from what the text actually says?

1) Both Jews and Gentiles were coming to faith in Messiah in large numbers. When James says “many thousands," the Greek word used there is myrias. Which typically means ten-thousand or more, up to an innumerable multitude. The typical interpretation about the Jews of the 1st century is that they en masse rejected Messiah. While a large number, perhaps even a majority, did reject Messiah, we see from the events in Acts 2 and here in Acts 21 that there were many, many thousands within Jerusalem itself who believed! Population estimates of Jerusalem about 70AD indicate a population between 80,000 - 400,000. It would indicate a significant number of believers in Messiah per capita.

2) These brethren in Jerusalem were told that Paul was telling the Jews in Asia Minor to “forsake Moses.” We will investigate this phrase in another upcoming post. But for now, the word “forsake” is translated from the Greek word apostasia. That word is used only one other time in the New Testament, found in 2 Thess. 2:3.

3) In terms of historical timeline, it is highly likely that the events recorded in Acts 21 comes after the writing of both Galatians and Romans. This is monumental because those two books are the primary source for those claiming that the abolition of Moses comes from these two books!

Have Been Told

After praising God for the work among both Jew and Greek, James moves the narrative to the possible news of what Paul has been speaking in the synagogues in Asia Minor. He is seeking to find out the truth of exactly what is going on. In Galatians 2, we find that when Paul met with James, Peter, and John, they “added nothing" to his gospel. What this means is that James is actually trying to determine whether or not his message has changed since their last time together. Knowing that Acts 21 takes place after the writing of Galatians sets the context. If Paul has changed what he was preaching, then it is of utmost importance that James, Peter, and John know about it.

Paul and the Nazarite Vow

In order to show that Paul IS NOT forsaking Moses, James tells Paul to commit himself to perform a Nazarite vow (see Numbers 6) and also pay the expenses of 4 others. (Stop here and read Numbers 6, and think about how expensive it would have been to pay for 5 people).

Remember verse 24, “take them and purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads; and all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly keeping the Law”

Logic and Hermeneutics: Is Paul a madman, a liar, or is he telling the truth?

There are only two options for Paul’s actions in the diaspora.

1) He is preaching the forsaking of Moses

2) He is not preaching the forsaking of Moses

The text at hand does not record Paul’s words, but simply James’ insistence that Paul IS NOT preaching the forsaking of Moses to the Jews in the Diaspora.

Given this fact there are only three options for the reader to interpret this text.

1) Paul lied to James

2) Paul is a madman

3) Paul is telling the truth.

Paul Lied to James?

Could it be possible that Paul lied to James? This would mean that Paul was preaching the forsaking of Moses but told James he was not. Not only that, Paul makes the lie so convincing as to pay for and participate in a sacred ceremony, one of the holiest available to a non-Levite, designed to show one’s commitment to the Most High!

If Paul is a liar, his books should be burned with prejudice! He would have to be a false apostle. Of course, this is not tenable for the Christian faith. Not only that, considering Peter’s words in 2 Pet. 3:16, we find that Peter would have been so duped by the lie, that he considered the lying Paul as an equal to the “rest of the Scriptures.” If Peter was duped, we cannot really trust him either.

Surely, this option is unthinkable for Christian faith. It rightly should be rejected because it makes James and Peter suspect, as well, and makes most of the New Testament untrustworthy!

Paul the Madman?

Ok! So Paul is not a liar. But perhaps Paul was saying one thing, then told James another because he was insane! Maybe his mental faculties were in such disorder that he actually could not tell the difference between truth and lies. Perhaps schizophrenia is a good diagnosis.

That diagnosis could bring some actual clarity to Paul’s apparent contradictions about the Law within the book of Romans. Saying both “we establish the Law” (Rom. 3:31) and Christ is the “end of the law” (Rom. 10:4) But, didn’t we say at the beginning of this post that Christ said He did not bring about the end of the Law? So what gives? Perhaps Paul is simply an insane theologian and philosopher, confused by the contradictory truth claims swirling around in his mind. Being tossed to and fro by every wave.

We could in fact forgive Paul. He did not choose to have a mental illness! But, If this is the case, his writings should not be read for doctrinal application! Instead, he should be read like one would read Nietzsche at the end of his life, as the mad mutterings of an insane philosopher!

Certainly this too is untenable for the Christian faith. The consequences are of such a magnitude that it could destroy all of Christianity. As for what Paul meant by Christ being the “end of the Law,” that will have to be saved for another post. However, if Paul is telling the truth here in Acts 21, then perhaps it will open a clue for us when we interpret Rom. 10:4.

Paul is Telling the Truth!

Ok, Paul is not a liar, and he is definitely not a madman. This leaves only one hermeneutical option for the reader.

That Paul was telling the truth!

What does this mean?

1) That Paul never preached the forsaking of Moses to the Jews in the diaspora.

2) That Paul (after the writing of the Book of Galatians and Romans and over 30 years after the death and resurrection of Christ) performed ceremonial purity and sacrificial laws, thus demonstrating his “walking orderly, keeping the Law” (Acts 21:24).

3) That the ceremonial laws contained within the Torah were still in force and mandatory for orthopraxy and that preaching against them was understood by the Apostles to be apostasia! (Acts 21:21).

4) That Paul agreed that forsaking Moses was wrong and to prove it, he performs a Nazarite Vow! Again, go and read Numbers 6, if you haven’t yet.

Acts 21 and the Hermeneutical Key

If Paul was telling the truth (and he MUST be, for Christianity to be legitimate), then there is only one way to honestly read Paul’s letters: PAUL NEVER PREACHED THE FORSAKING OF MOSES to the Jews in the Diaspora.

Since Acts 21 took place after the writing of the book of Galatians and Romans, we must interpret those texts with Paul’s actions here in Acts 21. To read them any other way is to make Paul either a liar or a madman. Both are untenable and illogical.

Adonai bless you and keep you

Adonai make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you

Adonai lift up his countenance upon you and give you Shalom.

-Scott McKenzie