Acts “A New Beginning”

Acts“A New Beginning” Lesson 18, Part 1 The First Compromise Acts 21:1 - 22:30

The First Compromise(Acts 21:1- 22:30) • Trace Paul’s journey in chapters 20 and 21 on a map. • Chapter 20 -- Ephesus, Macedonia, Greece [where he was threatened by a plot], Troas, Assos, Mitylene, Miletus [where he spoke to the Ephesian elders]. • Chapter 21 -- Cos, Rhodes, Patara, Tyre, Ptelomais, Caesarea, Jerusalem.

3rd Missionary Journey

The First Compromise(Acts 21:1- 22:30) • Paul “found” [“to seek for, to search”] disciples at Tyre where he tarried for seven days. He had also remained at Troas to worship with the saints there as he now did at Tyre (21:3,4). How unlike many travelers who choose to ignore worshiping with the saints in places they visit. Instead, they seek out everything else they can do on their trips. • Another sad farewell occurred at Tyre (vs. 5). This is the first mention of children in any connection with the church. These children, of course, were not members of the church at Tyre.

The First Compromise(Acts 21:1- 22:30) • Paul lodged with Philip in Caesarea (vs. 8). Philip had come to Caesarea some time earlier (Acts 8:40). Now, he and his four daughters made a total of five prophets in one family (vs. 9)! This was a godly household! The prophesying of these women was in fulfillment of Joel’s prophesy in Joel 2:28.

The First Compromise(Acts 21:1- 22:30) • (Continued) Paul and his companions stayed “many days” with Philip. There must have been much to talk about. These men had been spiritual enemies at their last known contact [See Acts 8:1-4.]. Then, they had good reason to fear each other. Now, some twenty years later, they were brethren working in a common cause! Both could now see God’s providence in the great persecution in which they had participated on opposite sides.

The First Compromise(Acts 21:1- 22:30) • Agabus [See Acts 11:28.] gave a prophecy about Paul’s impending imprisonment in Jerusalem (vs. 11). • All the disciples [“we” included Luke and Paul’s other companions; “those of that place” were the saints of Caesarea] sought to deter Paul’s purpose to go to Jerusalem. This was doubtless the result of their human opinion, and they were unsuccessful in their efforts (vs. 13). Finally, all concurred that “the Lord’s will be done” (vs. 14).

The Proposal For A Compromise (Acts 21:17-25) • A “Compromise” is “a settlement reached by mutual concession.” A “concession” is “a thing yielded” (Webster). • Paul was received warmly in Jerusalem by the brethren there (vs. 17). • James and the elders were briefed on Paul’s success among the Gentiles; they rejoiced at the good news (vs. 19,20).

The Proposal For A Compromise (Acts 21:17-25) • A problem was introduced to Paul and the others: • Many Jews had been converted to Christ, but “all” [the Jewish nation and perhaps even some of the converted Jews] were still “zealous for the law” (vs. 20); • The Jews had been led to believe that Paul, in his role as an apostle, expected converted Jews to “forsake Moses” and to discontinue all observances of the “customs” they had practiced while living under the Law (vs. 21).

The Proposal For A Compromise (Acts 21:17-25) • A problem was introduced to Paul and the others: • Circumcision of Jewish children was an especially sensitive subject with the Jews. • Obviously, publicity about Paul’s supposed position on the relationship of Jewish converts to the Law would greatly diminish the opportunities for continuing to teach them and for bringing them to Christ.

The Proposal For A Compromise (Acts 21:17-25) • A problem was introduced to Paul and the others: • Paul had never forbidden Jews to “circumcise their children.” He was himself responsible for Timothy’s circumcision (Acts 16:3). He insisted, of course, that circumcision could only be performed as a Jewish custom and not as an act related in any way to salvation under the new covenant. The curtain had come down forever on the role played by circumcision as something essential under the Law (Acts 15:5,11,24).

The Proposal For A Compromise (Acts 21:17-25) • There was concern among the Christians in Jerusalem that the assembly [council] of the Jewish leadership would use Paul’s arrival as an occasion to spread false claims against him and his teaching. That might seriously and negatively impact his effectiveness as an apostle while he was in the city. It might prove harmful to all his efforts to spread the truth among unconverted Jews and to bridge the gap between converted Jews and their Gentile brothers whose love offering he was bearing. [See 2Corinthians 9:12-14.]

The Proposal For A Compromise (Acts 21:17-25) • A compromise was proposed for Paul’s consideration (vs. 23-25). Compromise is permissible for Christians only in matters of opinion, never in matters of faith! The apostle Peter declared, “If anyone speaks, let him speak as the oracles of God” (1Peter 4:11). Paul’s position was clear, “But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed” (Galatians 1:8). The practice of Jewish customs might be negotiable within the category of opinion. It had been removed from discussion as essential to salvation by faith (Galatians 2:16).

The Proposal For A Compromise (Acts 21:17-25) • The proposal for compromise called for Paul to associate himself personally and financially with four Jews in the city who were seeking to purify themselves through some ceremonial rite of cleansing [perhaps a Nazarite vow -- Numbers 6:1-21] practiced under the Law.

The Proposal For A Compromise (Acts 21:17-25) • Paul would do two things to prove to unconverted Jews that he had not assumed an unbending position against their religious instincts to continue doing some of the things that particularly defined their Jewishness and that separated them as Jews from other men: • He would pay the expenses incurred by these four Jews as they sought to satisfy the terms of their vow;

The Proposal For A Compromise (Acts 21:17-25) • He would also at least “go through the motions” of some form of Jewish purification to demonstrate that his objection to “walking orderly and keeping the law” (vs. 24) was not in the realm of allowance [as custom] but in the province of requirement. It may be difficult for us to understand everything involved in this compromise, but it is certain that Paul’s motivations centered in his becoming “all things to all men” that he might “by all means save some” (1Corinthians 9:22).

The Proposal For A Compromise (Acts 21:17-25) • By this compromise between a bending and an unbending stance toward the Law, Paul could set the record straight with unbelieving Jews and thereby influence some of them to give a fair hearing to the truths of the gospel (vs. 24).

The Proposal For A Compromise (Acts 21:17-25) • This episode illustrates a difference between Jews and Gentiles regarding the Law after they had become Christians: • Jewish converts were permitted to observe the ceremonies if they chose to do so; • Gentile converts should not be involved in any matter of the Law; • Neither Jews nor Gentiles were required to do anything outside the specific requirements of the gospel (Acts 15:24).

End of Lesson 18, Part 1

Acts“A New Beginning” Lesson 18, Part 2 The Attempt at Compromise Acts 21:26 - 22:30

The Attempt At Compromise Acts 21:26-36 • The compromise almost worked (vs. 26,27)! But Jewish agitators from Asia stirred up the people about Trophimus, a Greek with whom Paul had been seen in the city. Moved either by misapprehension or by a wicked determination to misrepresent the truth about Paul, these Jews charged that he was an avowed enemy of everything Jewish and that he had even dared to take a Gentile into their holy temple (vs. 28).

The Attempt At Compromise Acts 21:26-36 • Roman law reputedly allowed the punishment of anyone who was convicted of violating the temple or other “holy” places within the empire (vs. 28). Under such supportive conditions, the opponents of Paul’s gospel would be emboldened to resort to violence to stop his work. They would not hesitate to kill him if given the opportunity (vs. 31). • The Roman military commander heard about the uproar against Paul, and his arrival on the scene of conflict quickly put an end to the threat against Paul’s life (vs. 31,32).

The Attempt At Compromise Acts 21:26-36 • Paul was carried away to the barracks in chains when the commander was unable to ascertain from the mob who Paul was or why he was being so badly treated by the crowd (vs. 33,34). • The persistent anger of the mob toward Paul cut off any further possibility of a compromise that might quiet the fears of Jewish prospects that the gospel posed a sinister threat to the entire fabric of their national culture and tradition (vs. 35,36).

The Price of Compromise Acts 21:37-40 • The price of compromise of the truth is damnation (Revelation 22:18,19). • The price of compromise of an opinion varies -- it may be helpful, or it may not. • Paul paid the price of physical freedom for his effort to make a compromise with the prejudices of the unbelieving Jews. It may be that this price was in God’s plan for Paul, or God may have used this outcome to further the progress of the gospel.

The Defense of Compromise Acts 22:1-21 • Paul was allowed to speak for himself. He did not seek to defend himself personally, but he was anxious to defend God’s plan and purpose for His people (vs. 1).

The Defense of Compromise Acts 22:1-21 • He called attention to himself only as an instrument of God’s will. • He recounted the details of his conversion so as to increase the Jews’ understanding of who he really was and why he had done things that had been reported as raw anti-Jewish behavior. • This was the second inspired account of Paul’s conversion to the Lord. [See Acts 9 for the first account.]

The Defense of Compromise Acts 22:1-21 • Truths of the gospel are essential; expedients are unessential. This explained Paul’s behavior relative to the Law. His message had been: “Yes, you Jews can keep the Law [as custom], but No, you can’t require any part of the Law for anyone because God doesn’t.

The Defense of Compromise Acts 22:1-21 • Paul used a conciliatory approach as a means of trying to explain himself without giving undue offense to his audience. He sought to establish common ground with his Jewish listeners: • He used the Hebrew language in addressing them (vs. 2); • He claimed Jewish nationality for himself (vs. 3); • He recalled his upbringing in Jerusalem, the seat of the Law (vs. 3); • He had been taught by Gamaliel, an eminent expert in the Law (vs. 3);

The Defense of Compromise Acts 22:1-21 • He had been taught a strict interpretation of the Law, including the traditions (vs.3); • He had shown respect for the Law followed by “our fathers” (vs. 3); • He had been as zealous for the Law as the fathers had been (vs. 3); • He had persecuted [those of] the Way [Christ] unto death (vs. 4); • He had imprisoned both men and women because of their faith in Jesus (vs. 4);

The Defense of Compromise Acts 22:1-21 • He had been endorsed as a persecutor by the high priest and the elders (vs. 5); • He had official documents to extradite Christians to Jerusalem (vs. 5); • He had pursued Christ’s disciples even to distant places (vs. 5); • He had been taught a different law of God by a devout Law-keeper, Ananias (vs. 12); • He had been taught about Jesus by a man of good report among the Jews (vs. 12);

The Defense of Compromise Acts 22:1-21 • He had been appointed by God to “know His will” and to see “the Righteous One” [See Habakkuk 2:14.] (vs. 14); • He had prayed in the templeafter his conversion (vs. 17); • His persecution of saints a was well-documented (vs. 19); • He had taken an active role in Stephen’s death and in the great persecution (vs. 20).

The Defense of Compromise Acts 22:1-21 • Paul also used a plain approach in his speech to the Jews: • He had experienced a miracle and had seen a vision of the Lord, who was alive (vs. 8, 14); • His opposition to Christ’s disciples was considered by God as “persecution” of Christ (vs. 8); • The Lord had imposed a duty on him (vs. 10); • He had been given clear instructions about what his duty to God was (vs. 16);

The Defense of Compromise Acts 22:1-21 • Paul also used a plain approach in his speech to the Jews: • A new role had been specified for Paul as a servant of Jehovah (vs. 15). Now he was constrained to be “for” Jesus and not “against” Him! [See Matthew 12:30.] • The Lord had directed Paul from the Jews [primarily] to the Gentiles (vs. 18,21).

The Outcome of the Compromise Acts 22:22-30 • The Jews were in a frenzy; they wanted Paul’s life (vs. 22,23). • A quick resolution by scourging was sought by the commander (vs. 25).

The Outcome of the Compromise Acts 22:22-30 • Paul appealed to his Roman citizenship in an effort to protect himself from physical harm (vs. 25-29). [See Romans 13:4 for Paul’s attitude toward the use of civil government.] • The chief captain arranged a hearing for Paul before the chief priests and all the council, supposing that he could thereby learn the particulars of this unusual situation involving Paul and his Jewish adversaries (vs. 30).

Acts “A New Beginning”