- A political solution proposed. A scheme is devised to have Paul act as described. We are not privy to all of the factors at work here that persuade Paul to go along with this. He went along with it likely to avoid unnecessary offence and not out of a sense of duty. Often, human rationale plays into such decisions—the desire to avoid a split in the church, intimidation by other leaders in the work. Although Paul had displayed nothing of this before, he was not immune to human failings! The idea was to prove Paul to be as described v24. There were other ways to do this! Opportunity could have been given to Paul to preach on the matter and deal with the issue but that would have invariably led to fierce opposition.
- The Lord did not permit the plan to succeed, v27. Before Paul could be associated with offering a sacrifice in the Temple, the Lord stepped in. Such a step would have been one too far. How often we need the Lord to preserve us from our own folly.
III OPPOSITION FROM MILITANT JEWS.
Cp v27-30.
- False allegations. The crowd is whipped into a frenzy by false suggestions as to Paul’s behaviour and ministry. Cp 24:11-13, 18-21. This is not new as Paul has experienced this kind of opposition before and has been well informed by the Spirit of God that this is what lay ahead.
- The spirit some desired to appease/compromise with is fatal to the welfare of Paul’s ministry. There is a strange connection between the views of those believers zealous for the law and these militants. They simply exemplified the natural end of that misplaced zeal. It is always so! Cp 1Cor 15:33. When error is condoned and pandered to it comes back with a vengeance to bite! What seems an innocuous concession may become a fatal weakness. These events were a lesson to Paul and the other apostles. They were a lesson to those saints who held to erroneous views! What company they were in!