Excellent Point Brother Jim

Now the big question. Why did Paul in Acts 21 take what was probably a Nazarite vow? There were four men present and, although believers, were zealous of the law and had taken this vow. Paul was not commanded to do it, but advised to. Many feel this was a mistake. Remember what Paul said about dealing with one who is weak in faith? Thats what was going on here. If he refused, the faith of these jews may have been shipwrecked. This study of the transition period has been very interesting so far, and I'm going to continue it as far as I can.

Brother David, I want to thank you for your valuable insights into this matter, you are a great help to me!

One more thing about the issue of Peter and James. I think Peter had good intentions, he just chose the wrong way to deal with it. I think Peter wanted to avoid unecessary strife between brothers in Christ which his eating with the gentile believers may have caused. He could have took the leadership role and caused all jew and gentile to mix together. Or at least went over to James and say "Look, I normally eat with our gentile brothers, so please dont take offense that I eat with them now, I mean no offense to you." He took the easy and cowardly way out(again). Hence Paul's rebuke. So the motivation was good, it was the execution that was bad.