1. Paul has conquered his position in Corinth. He seemed to have acquired a right to remain there. And after tarrying “a good while” he “took his leave of the brethren.” This is a new tone. Paul has not often gone away from a city in this quiet, friendly manner. His going out has often been amidst tumult and battle. But now he must take leave of the brethren. He had “shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow.” The great liberalist in the Church was also addicted to Levitical obedience. Paul maintained a hard discipline over himself, and therefore could afford to be very liberal towards other people. The vow could only be completed in the metropolis. It was permitted by the Nazarite law for a man whose hair had grown long under the necessity of the vow to cut off his hair, but he must keep it and take it up to Jerusalem and burn it in the temple at the appointed hour in the appointed fire. Think of Paul doing that. We can trust that man. We feel that a man so honest in a matter so comparatively trifling is likely to be severely true in matters of larger breadth. It is thus we must judge one another. Men cannot, perhaps, understand the articles of our theological belief, but they can understand our temper, our honesty over the counter. If they find us faithful in little things they must reason that we are faithful also in greater things.
2. Paul came to Ephesus, and finding that he had a little margin of time said he would look into the synagogue and reason with the Jews. That is how Paul kept holiday. He does not want to look at anything in the city of Ephesus--famed in a country famous for great cities. But the woods around Ephesus are beautiful--why not drive through them? Imagine Paul driving through a pine wood for the purpose of sniffing the scented air! He lived in the synagogue; the Jews were the mountains he wanted to see, and the obstinacy of the unbelieving heart was the only field in which he cared to take holiday. At Ephesus he met with an unwonted reception (Act_18:20). We have seen how these Jews hated him, banishing him from their cities; but at Ephesus he meets with another reception. Is the devil playing a trick here? Was there an attempt here to keep him from Jerusalem, whither he must go to accomplish his vow? We cannot tell; but Paul bade them farewell, saying (Act_18:21). Did they want him to return? He will come back; for he has his greatest day yet before him!
3. In Act_18:22 are the saddest words in the Acts. Paul going back to Jerusalem for the fourth time! The Church will wait for him; will pray with him; will hold a great banqueting day after a spiritual fashion, for the noblest of her warriors has returned, and his speech will be a recital of battles fought and won. Paul went up to Jerusalem and “saluted the Church.” That is all! Paul went up to Jerusalem and made his bow. Paul was never greater than when he held his tongue, and left the dignitaries to perish in their own vanity. What a time they might have had had they gathered around the warrior and said, “Show us your wounds and scars, and tell us what news there is from the seat of war.” But no. Paul was a liberal thinker; Paul had protested against the Judaising teachers; Paul had committed a great offence by claiming liberty in Christ for Gentile believers; and some men cannot forgive. Do not blame them until you have blamed a flint for not bleeding. Did Paul change his faith or his policy because of this metropolitan coldness? No; having played the gentleman where he rather would have displayed the Christian, “he went down to Antioch; and after he had spent some time there,” etc. He was more at home among the Gentiles. Paul made short work of his visit to the Church in Jerusalem, for the door was shut and the key was lost; but when he came to Antioch he said, “this is home.” We cannot live on ceremony, on dignity: we cannot be happy where persons do but touch us with the tips of their fingers, intimating thereby that they would rather not touch us at all; but only live in love, in mutual trust, in mutual prayer. But at Jerusalem they were too orthodox to be Christians. (J. Parker, D. D.)
Apostolic earnestness
Paul constitutionally was an earnest man. Every chapter in his life before, and after, his conversion shows him to be a man whose purposes were made red hot with the passion of an ever-glowing nature. His earnestness is here seen--
I. In his noble defiance of danger. The Jews had “made insurrection with one accord” against him, and he must have felt, even after Gallio had refused to entertain their malignant purposes, their ire was still all aflame. Yet he quits not the scene of duty. “Paul tarried there yet a good while.” His sympathy with Christ and the Divine purpose raised him above the fear of all danger.
II. In his surrender of friendship.
1. His adieu to his brethren at Corinth. “He took his leave of the brethren.” He entered this Paris of the old world to fight the battles alone, and the antagonism was immense; and he left it with numerous converts and a prosperous Church. The members of that Church were “his brethren”: he loved them. The two letters which he afterwards wrote to them show the depth of his affection. Yet he leaves them at the call of duty.
2. His separation from his dearest companions at Ephesus--Priscilla and Aquila. It must have been not a little painful to a man of Paul’s tender sensibilities, to separate from those with whom he had been so closely and so lovingly connected.
3. His departure from Ephesus in opposition to the earnest request of his friends (verse 20). “Whosoever loveth father and mother more than Me, is not worthy of Me.” Paul proved himself worthy of Christ.
III. In his consecration to duty.
1. He felt that God’s will called him to Jerusalem now. “I must by all means keep this feast.” He had no doubt about the Divine will upon this point, and hence he was prepared to make any sacrifices to carry it out.
2. He was willing to return to Ephesus, if it were God’s will. Consecration to the Divine will, which was the very spirit of his life, was the philosophy of his greatness. Deo volente. This should always be the devout proviso in all our plans. Conclusion: The following remarks of Gerok are worth quoting:
“1. No hostile hatred restrains him where the Lord sends him (verse 19).
2. No brotherly love retains him when the Lord calls him away (verse 20).
3. No place is too distant to him; he hastens when the Spirit draws him thither (verse 21).
4. No place is too pleasant to him; he takes his leave when the Lord cannot use him there (verse 22). I must go to Jerusalem, the watchword of a pilgrim of God, by which he breaks through all the temptations of the world, in love and suffering, from friend and foe.” (D. Thomas, D. D.)
Apostolic principles
Theapostles had no elaborate inspired code drawn up for their guidance as, e.g., Moses had. In the latter case the minuteness of the instruction precluded the possibility of mistake; in the former they had to depend almost exclusively on the inscrutable guidance of the Holy Spirit. Our Lord had laid down as a general rule “Go ye into all the world”; for particular conformity to this rule in the multitudinous instances in which it had to be applied they had to depend upon the inspire d direction of their own common sense. And so in endeavouring to ascertain the principles of apostolic procedure for modern use we have to carefully study a typical tract of apostolic work. Such we have here. Here we see underlying apostolic procedure--
I. Perseverance where circumstances were propitious. The action of Gallio, whatever we may think of the man and his motives, were wholly favourable to Paul. The Jews mere silenced, and would give no further trouble; and the gospel, in the estimation of the populace, would have at least quasi proconsular sanction. Neither Jew nor heathen would venture to attack it after this. And so Paul tarried at Corinth “a good while,” founding the Church, and confirming the Thessalonians by two epistles. Where, as was the ease formerly at Philippi and afterwards at Ephesus, the circumstances were unpropitious, it was manifestly both the duty and the interest of the apostle to leave.
II. Fidelity to previously registered vow. Whether the making of the vow was wise may be open to question, but we are precluded from discussing this by ignorance of all the circumstances. Still it is hard to overlook the fact of Paul’s indifference to the ceremonial law, and the fact that Paul’s continuance in Corinth might have prevented the evils which necessitated the first Epistle to the Corinthians. But Paul being a man of one idea, it was necessary that that one idea should be carried out. And so the vow made at Corinth must be fulfilled at Jerusalem. But Ephesus lay on the route, the work at which eventually compensated for absence from Corinth.
III. Seizure of every opportunity of extending Christ’s kingdom. Accompanying his friends, whom business probably took to Ephesus, he embraced the opportunity of preaching Christ in the synagogue. He had well earned a period of leisure after his arduous and anxious toils at Corinth, and doubtless he regarded his journey to Jerusalem in the light of a holiday. But the recreations Of earnest Christian workers are utilised in the service of Christ. It was not much that Paul could do during his brief stay at Ephesus, but he was at least able to lay a foundation on which he afterwards built.
IV. Dependence upon Divine providence (verse 21). “If God will” was the one unfailing rule with the apostle, in both personal and ministerial matters. Hence his unfailing confidence, courage, and sense of security. “If God be for us, who can be against us?” If God open a path who can stand in the way? God did not will that he should go to Ephesus (Act_16:6); but He willed that remarkable series of circumstances which opened up Greece to Christianity. St. Paul on his way back from Jerusalem would find that God willed him to evangelise Ephesus, and directly or by deputies to found the seven Churches of Asia.
V. Profitable economy of time. There was scant opportunity for service at Jerusalem, so he wasted no time there. There was little sympathy with the great missionary at headquarters, so, having completed his vow and saluted the Church, he repaired to congenial Antioch, from which he received, seemingly, a similar missionary impulse to that which preceded his first journey.
VI. Following up of results (verse 23; cf. Act_16:6). (J. W. Burn.)
Ministerial labour
I.Where do they work? When the Lord shows a way and opens a door.
II. How do they work? With unwearied zeal, but with humble attention to the intimations of the Lord.
III. For what do they work? Not for their own glory and gain, but for the kingdom of God and the salvation of men. (K. Gerok.)
Having shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow.--
Paul’s vow
The grammatical structure of the Greek sentence makes it possible to refer the words to Aquila as well as Paul, but there is hardly the shadow of a doubt that the latter is meant.
1. If Aquila had taken the vow he too would have had to go to Jerusalem instead of remaining at Ephesus.
2. The language of James (Act_21:23-24) implies a conviction, as resting on past experience, that St. Paul would willingly connect himself with those who had such a vow. It remains to inquire as to--
I. The nature and conditions of the vow. There can be no doubt that the “vow” was that of the temporary Nazarite (Num_6:1-21). It implied a separation from the world and common life (this was the meaning of the word “Nazarite”), and while under the vow the man who had taken it was to drink no wine or strong drink, and to let no razor pass over his head or face. When the term was completed, he was to shave his head at the door of the tabernacle and burn the hair in the fire of the altar. It will be noted that the Nazarites in Act_21:24, who are completing their vow, shave their heads. Here a different word (“shorn”) is used, which is contrasted with “shaving” in 1Co_11:6. It was lawful for a man to have his hair cut or cropped during the continuance of the vow and this apparently was what St. Paul now did. But in this case also the hair so cut off was to be taken to the temple, and burnt there and this explains the apostle’s eagerness, “by all means” (verse 21) to keep the coming feast at Jerusalem.
II. Paul’s motives.
1. The strong feeling of thankfulness for deliverance from danger, following upon fear which, as in nearly all phases of the religious life, has been the chief impulse out of which vows have grown. We have seen the fear, and the promise, and the deliverance, in the record of St. Paul’s work at Corinth, and the vow of self-consecration, for a season, to a life of special devotion was the natural result. St. Paul had not learnt to despise or condemn such expressions of devout feeling.
2. His desire to be “all things to all men,” and, therefore, as a Jew to Jews (1Co_9:20). A Nazarite vow would testify to all his brethren by blood that he did not despise the law himself nor teach other Jews to despise it. Such a vow, involving, as it did for a time, a greater asceticism than that of common life, furnishes a link in the succession of thoughts in 1Co_9:22-25, between the apostle’s being made “all things to all men” and his keeping under his body, and bringing it into subjection.” (Dean Plumptre.)
