Part Two – The Testimonies of Stephen, James and the Elders In Part One we saw how the words of Jesus are in stark opposition to the doctrine that “the law is not for modern believers.” Do New Testament accounts of the apostles’ actions support that Jesus taught them a “pro-law” doctrine? Or do their actions support a “no-law” doctrine?
Acts 6:9-14 (Emphasis Mine) Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen. And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake. hen they suborned men, which said, We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses, and against God. And they stirred up the people, and the elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and caught him, and brought him to the council, And set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place, and the law: For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us.
Stephen was falsely accused of speaking against the temple and the law. What was his blasphemy against the law? Jesus would change the customs of Moses! This was the false accusation! Jesus never changed the customs of Moses! Or did the writer of Acts lie?
Acts 21:18-26 (Emphasis Mine) And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present. And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry. And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law: And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs. 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. As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication. Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them.
There are several points in this passage that strengthen the argument that Jesus’ doctrine is “pro-law.” The Jews who were zealous for the law had been told that Paul was teaching the dispersed Jews to forsake the law of Moses, not to circumcise the children and to go away from the customs of Moses. The latter half of verse 24 tells us that the information was false (nothing). It is plainly stated that Paul walked orderly and kept the law. But there is something of even greater significance going on in this passage, and that is what James and the elders told Paul to do. There were four men who were under a vow, and Paul was to purify himself with them, and pay for the expenses associated with the completion of the vow.
It is recorded that Paul began his vow while in Cenchrea:
Acts 18:18 And Paul after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila; having shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow.
There is only one vow that appears in the law that involves shaving the head, days of separation, the temple, offerings and expenses: the Nazarite vow. Because we are not familiar with the law, New Testament believers don’t fully understand the significance of what Paul was told to do.
Let’s look at the laws concerning the completion of the Nazarite vow given in Numbers:
Numbers 6:13-21 And this is the law of the Nazarite, when the days of his separation are fulfilled: he shall be brought unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation: And he shall offer his offering unto the LORD, one he lamb of the first year without blemish for a burnt offering, and one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish for a sin offering, and one ram without blemish for peace offerings, And a basket of unleavened bread, cakes of fine flour mingled with oil, and wafers of unleavened bread anointed with oil, and their meat offering, and their drink offerings. And the priest shall bring them before the LORD, and shall offer his sin offering, and his burnt offering: And he shall offer the ram for a sacrifice of peace offerings unto the LORD, with the basket of unleavened bread: the priest shall offer also his meat offering, and his drink offering. And the Nazarite shall shave the head of his separation at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall take the hair of the head of his separation, and put it in the fire which is under the sacrifice of the peace offerings. And the priest shall take the sodden shoulder of the ram, and one unleavened cake out of the basket, and one unleavened wafer, and shall put them upon the hands of the Nazarite, after the hair of his separation is shaven: And the priest shall wave them for a wave offering before the LORD: this is holy for the priest, with the wave breast and heave shoulder: and after that the Nazarite may drink wine. This is the law of the Nazarite who hath vowed, and of his offering unto the LORD for his separation, beside that that his hand shall get: according to the vow which he vowed, so he must do after the law of his separation. The Nazarite vow has very specific laws, practices, offerings and burnt sacrifices that are commanded to be followed. When a person chooses to take the Nazarite vow, they are choosing to separate themselves unto the LORD. In order for all of the hair of their separation to be able to be sanctified to the LORD, participants are to start the vow with a shaved head, hence, the reference to Paul shaving his head in Cenchrea.
1. James and the elders knew that there was no other set of practices that could confirm and uphold Paul’s adherence to the law more dramatically than the completion of the Nazarite vow at the door of the temple in front of all the zealous believers.
2.In addition, the elders told Paul to “be at charges with them.” a.In order for the vow to be completed, the lamb, ewe, ram, unleavened bread and wine had to be purchased and made ready. i.The animals would have been prized, not any old animal from the herd.
1. The cost in today dollars could easily have been $1,000 - $2,000 per person.
2. Paul would have paid $5,000 - $10,000 for himself and the four others.
3.This is an act that would not have been easy to keep quiet. b.Some translations make this statement to be “pay to have their heads shaved.” i.This is ridiculous; the person under the vow is to shave their own head at the door of the temple. ii.A better reading would be: “pay their expenses so that they may complete the vow.”
1.History records that it was a common practice for the wealthy to pay for the sacrificial animals of the poor. a.It is recorded in the rabbinic writings that King Agrippa and his brother paid for the sacrificial animals of 300 poor men who were under the Nazarite vow, totaling 900 animals!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The accounts of real events solidify the assertion that Jesus’ doctrine is “pro-law.” The account in Acts 21:1-40 either delivers a devastating blow to the claim that Jesus “did away” with the law and ALL burnt sacrifices, or Stephen, Paul, James and the elders were deceivers and liars!
If you are to be intellectually honest, you must explore the possibility that the teachings of Jesus and the testimonies from Stephen, James and the elders bring the “no-law” doctrine into serious question!
