FF Bruce on Acts 21 - not so much a question as a cautionary tail

Not open for further replies.


Puritan Board Senior
Studies in Non-Pauline Christianity p 108
Did James and the elders forsee the danger Paul would run and deliberately expose him to it? Did they in fact lure him into a trap? Was this their way of ensuring that with Paul out of the way, there would be no serious obstacle to their plan to bring all the churches under their control?

The question has not only been asked: but answered with a decided Yes.

I have puzzled over this passage particularly the strength of the assertion (red). It has stuck with me since reading it years ago. The suspicion of complicity has always been at the back of my mind.

Now that I go back to the passage having come to Acts 21 in the course of this weeks study I am having to re-evaluate my assessment of Bruce. (I should explain that my practice is to read when I can, even if it only be a couple of pages at a time. It is probably significant)

At the foot of p109 we read...
If the Jerusalem leaders are exhonerated (as, indeed, they must be)....

I apologise to FF Bruce (postumously) for not noticing he was covering the arguments rather than expressing his own.

It is a cautionary tail which I hope to learn from
Last edited:
Not open for further replies.