TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Commentary on Acts 21 verses 15–26
In these verses we have,
I. Paul's journey to Jerusalem from Caesarea, and the company that went along with him. 1. They took up their carriages, their bag and baggage, and as it should seem, like poor travellers or soldiers, were their own porters; so little had they of change of raiment. Omnia mea mecum porto - My property is all about me. Some think they had with them the money that was collected in the churches of Macedonia and Achaia for the poor saints at Jerusalem. If they could have persuaded Paul to go some other way, they would gladly have gone along with him; but if, notwithstanding their dissuasive, he will go to Jerusalem, they do no say, "Let him go by himself then;" but as Thomas, in a like case, when Christ would go into danger at Jerusalem, Let us go and die with him, Joh 11:16. Their resolution to cleave to Paul was like that of Ittai to cleave to David (Sa2 15:21): In what place my Lord the king shall be, whether in death or life, there also will thy servant be. Thus Paul's boldness emboldened them. 2. Certain of the disciples of Caesarea went along with them. Whether they designed to go however, and took this opportunity of going with so much good company, or whether they went on purpose to see if they could do Paul any service and if possible prevent his trouble, or at least minister to him in it, does not appear. The less while that Paul is likely to enjoy his liberty the more industrious they are to improve every opportunity of conversation with him. Elisha kept close to Elijah when he knew the time was at hand that he should be taken up. 3. They brought with them an honest old gentleman that had a house of his own at Jerusalem, in which he would gladly entertain Paul and his company, one Mnason of Cyprus (Act 21:16), with whom we should lodge. Such a great concourse of people there was to the feast that it was a hard matter to get lodgings; the public houses would be taken up by those of the better sort, and it was looked upon as a scandalous thing for those that had private houses to let their rooms out at those times, but they must freely accommodate strangers with them. Every one then would choose his friends to be his guests, and Mnason took Paul and his company to be his lodgers; though he had heard what trouble Paul was likely to come into, which might bring those that entertained him into trouble too, yet he shall be welcome to him, whatever comes of it. This Mnason is called an old disciple - a disciple from the beginning; some think, one of the seventy disciples of Christ, or one of the first converts after the pouring out of the Spirit, or one of the first that was converted by the preaching of the gospel in Cyprus, Act 13:4. However it was, it seems he had been long a Christian, and was now in years. Note, It is an honourable thing to be an old disciple of Jesus Christ, to have been enabled by the grace of God to continue long in a course of duty, stedfast in the faith, and growing more and more prudent and experienced to a good old age. And with these old disciples one would choose to lodge; for the multitude of their years will teach wisdom.
II. Paul's welcome at Jerusalem. 1. Many of the brethren there received him gladly, Act 21:17. As soon as they had notice that he was come to town, they went to his lodgings at Manson's house, and congratulated him on his safe arrival, and told him they were glad to see him, and invited him to their houses, accounting it an honour to be known to one that was such an eminent servant of Christ. Streso observes that the word here used concerning the welcome they gave to the apostles, asmenōs apodechein̂ is used concerning the welcome of the apostles' doctrine, Act 2:41. They gladly received his word. We think if we had Paul among us we should gladly receive him; but it is a question whether we should or no it, having his doctrine, we do not gladly receive that. 2. They paid a visit to James and the elders of the church, at a church-meeting (Act 21:18): "The day following, Paul went unto James, and took us with him, that were his companions, to introduce us into acquaintance with the church at Jerusalem." It should seem that James was now the only apostle that was resident at Jerusalem; the rest had dispersed themselves to preach the gospel in other places. But still they forecasted to have an apostle at Jerusalem, perhaps sometimes one and sometimes another, because there was a great resort thither from all parts. James was now upon the spot, and all the elders or presbyters that were the ordinary pastors of the church, both to preach and govern, were present. Paul saluted them all, paid his respects to them, enquired concerning their welfare, and gave them the right hand of fellowship. He saluted them, that is, he wished them all health and happiness, and prayed to God to bless them. The proper signification of salutation is, wishing salvation to you: salve, or salus tibi sit; like peace be unto you. And such mutual salutations, or good wishes, very well become Christians, in token of their love to each other and joint regard to God.
III. The account they had from him of his ministry among the Gentiles, and their satisfaction in it. 1. He gave them a narrative of the success of the gospel in those countries where he had been employed, knowing it would be very acceptable to them to hear of the enlarging of Christ's kingdom: He declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry, v. 19. Observe how modestly he speaks, not what things he had wrought (he was but the instrument), but what God had wrought by his ministry. It was not I, but the grace of God which was with me. He planted and watered, but God gave the increase. He declared it particularly, that the grace of God might appear the more illustrious in the circumstances of his success. Thus David will tell others what God has done for his soul (Psa 66:16), as Paul here what God has done by his hand, and both that their friends may help them to be thankful. 2. Hence they took occasion to give praise to God (v. 20): When they heart it, they glorified the Lord. Paul ascribed it all to God, and to God they gave the praise of it. They did not break out into high encomiums of Paul, but left it to his Master to say to him, Well done, good and faithful servant; but they gave glory to the grace of God, which was extended to the Gentiles. Note, The conversion of sinners ought to be the matter of our joy and praise as it is of the angels'. God had honoured Paul more than any of them, in making his usefulness more extensive, yet they did not envy him, nor were they jealous of his growing reputation, but, on the contrary, glorified the Lord. And they could not do more to encourage Paul to go on cheerfully in his work than to glorify God for his success in it; for, if God be praised, Paul is pleased.
IV. The request of James and the elders of the church at Jerusalem to Paul, or their advice rather, that he would gratify the believing Jews by showing some compliance with the ceremonial law, and appearing publicly in the temple to offer sacrifice, which was not a thing in itself sinful; for the ceremonial law, though it was by no means to be imposed upon the Gentile converts (as the false teachers would have it, and thereby endeavoured to subvert the gospel), yet it was not become unlawful as yet to those that had been bred up in the observance of it, but were far from expecting justification by it. It was dead, but not buried; dead, but not yet deadly. And, being not sinful, they thought it was a piece of prudence in Paul to conform thus far. Observe the counsel they give to Paul herein, not as having authority over him, but an affection for him.
1.They desired him to take notice of the great numbers there were of the Jewish converts: Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of the Jews there are who believe. They called him brother, for they looked upon him as a joint-commissioner with them in gospel-work. Though they were of the circumcision and he the apostle of the Gentiles, though they were conformists and he a nonconformist, yet they were brethren, and owned the relation. Thou hast been in some of our assemblies, and seest how numerous they are: how many myriads of Jews believe. The word signifies, not thousands, but ten thousands. Even among the Jews, who were most prejudiced against the gospel, yet there were great multitudes that received it; for the grace of God can break down the strongest holds of Satan. The number of the names at first was but one hundred and twenty, yet now many thousands. Let none therefore despise the day of small things; for, though the beginning be small, God can make the latter end greatly to increase. Hereby it appeared that God had not quite cast away his people the Jews, for among them there was a remnant, an election, that obtained (see Rom 11:1, Rom 11:5, Rom 11:7): many thousands that believed. And this account which they could give to Paul of the success of the gospel among the Jews was, no doubt, as grateful to Paul as the account which he gave them of the conversion of the Gentiles was to them; for his heart's desire and prayer to God for the Jews was that they might be saved.
2.They informed him of a prevailing infirmity these believing Jews laboured under, of which they could not yet be cured: They are all zealous of the law. They believe in Christ as the true Messiah, they rest upon his righteousness and submit to his government; but they know the law of Moses was of God, they have found spiritual benefit in their attendance on the institutions of it, and therefore they can by no means think of parting with it, no, nor of growing cold to it. And perhaps they urged Christ's being made under the law, and observing it (which was designed to be our deliverance from the law), as a reason for their continuance under it. This was a great weakness and mistake, to be so fond of the shadows when the substance was come, to keep their necks under a yoke of bondage when Christ had come to make them free. But see, (1.) The power of education and long usage, and especially of a ceremonial law. (2.) The charitable allowance that must be made in consideration of these. These Jews that believed were not therefore disowned and rejected as no Christians because they were for the law, nay, were zealous for it, while it was only in their own practice, and they did not impose it upon others. Their being zealous of the law was capable of a good construction, which charity would put upon it; and it was capable of a good excuse, considering what they were brought up in, and among whom they lived.
3.They gave him to understand that these Jews, who were so zealous of the law, were ill-affected to him, Act 21:21. Paul himself, though as faithful a servant as any Christ ever had, yet could not get the good word of all that belonged to Christ's family: "They are informed of thee (and form their opinion of thee accordingly) that thou not only dost not teach the Gentiles to observe the law, as some would have had thee (we have prevailed with them to drop that), but dost teach all the Jews who are dispersed among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, not to circumcise their children nor to walk after the customs of our nation, which were of divine appointment, so far as they might be observed even among the Gentiles, at a distance from the temple, - not to observe the fasts and feasts of the church, not to wear their phylacteries, nor abstain from unclean meats." Now, (1.) It was true that Paul preached the abrogation of the law of Moses, taught them that it was impossible to be justified by it, and therefore we are not bound up any longer to the observance of it. But, (2.) It was false that he taught them to forsake Moses; for the religion he preached tended not to destroy the law, but to fulfil it. He preached Christ (the end of the law for righteousness), and repentance and faith, in the exercise of which we are to make great use of the law. The Jews among the Gentiles whom Paul taught were so far from forsaking Moses that they never understood him better, nor ever embraced him so heartily as now when they were taught to make use of him as a schoolmaster to bring them to Christ. But even the believing Jews, having got this notion of Paul, that he was an enemy to Moses, and perhaps giving too much regard to the unbelieving Jews too, were much exasperated against him. Their ministers, the elders here present, loved and honoured him, and approved of what he did, and called him brother, but the people could hardly be induced to entertain a favourable thought of him; for it is certain the least judicious are the most censorious, the weak-headed are the hot-headed. They could not distinguish upon Paul's doctrine as they ought to have done, and therefore condemned it in the gross, through ignorance.
4.They therefore desired Paul that he would by some public act, now that he had come to Jerusalem, make it to appear that the charge against him was false, and that he did not teach people to forsake Moses and to break the customs of the Jewish church, for he himself retained the use of them.
(1.)They conclude that something of this kind must be done: "What is it therefore? What must be done? The multitude will hear that thou art come to town." This is an inconvenience that attends men of fame, that their coming and going are taken notice of more than other people's, and will be talked of, by some for good-will and by others for ill-will. "When they hear thou art come, they must needs come together, they will expect that we call them together, to advise with them whether we should admit thee to preach among us as a brother or no; or, they will come together of themselves expecting to hear thee." Now something must be done to satisfy them that Paul does not teach the people to forsake Moses, and they think it necessary, [1.] For Paul's sake, that his reputation should be cleared, and that so good a man may not lie under any blemish, nor so useful a man labour under any disadvantage which may obstruct his usefulness. [2.] For the people's sake, that they may not continue prejudiced against so good a man, nor lose the benefit of his ministry by those prejudices. [3.] For their own sake, that since they knew it was their duty to own Paul their doing it might not be turned to their reproach among those that were under their charge.
(2.)They produce a fair opportunity which Paul might take to clear himself: "Do this that we say unto thee, take our advice in this case. We have four men, Jews who believe, of our own churches, and they have a vow on them, a vow of Nazariteship for a certain time; their time has now expired (Act 21:23), and they are to offer their offering according to the law, when they shave the head of their separation, a he-lamb for a burnt-offering, a ewe-lamb for a sin-offering, and a ram for a peace-offering, with other offerings pertinent to them, Num 6:13-20. Many used to do this together, when their vow expired about the same time, either for the greater expedition or for the greater solemnity. Now Paul having so far of late complied with the law as to take upon him the vow of a Nazarite, and to signify the expiration of it by shaving his head at Cenchrea (Act 18:18), according to the custom of those who lived at a distance from the temple, they desire him but to go a little further, and to join with these four in offering the sacrifices of a Nazarite: 'Purify thyself with them according to the law; and be willing not only to take that trouble, but to be at charges with them, in buying sacrifices for this solemn occasion, and to join with them in the sacrifice." This, they think, will effectually stop the mouth of calumny, and every one will be convinced that the report was false, that Paul was not the man he was represented to be, did not teach the Jews to forsake Moses, but that he himself, being originally a Jew, walked orderly, and kept the law; and then all would be well.
5.They enter a protestation that this shall be no infringement at all of the decree lately made in favour of the Gentile converts, nor do they intend by this in the least to derogate from the liberty allowed them (Act 21:25): "As touching the Gentiles who believe, we have written and concluded, and resolve to abide by it, that they observe no such things; we would not have them to be bound up by the ceremonial law by any means, but only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication; but let not them be tied to the Jewish sacrifices or purifications, nor any of their rites and ceremonies." They knew how jealous Paul was for the preservation of the liberty of the converted Gentiles, and therefore expressly covenant to abide by that. Thus far is their proposal.
V. Here is Paul's compliance with it. He was willing to gratify them in this matter. Though he would not be persuaded not to go to Jerusalem, yet, when he was there, he was persuaded to do as they there did, Act 21:26. Then Paul took the men, as they advised, and the very next day, purifying himself with them, and not with multitude nor tumult, as he himself pleads (Act 24:18), he entered into the temple, as other devout Jews that came upon such errands did, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification to the priests; desiring the priest would appoint a time when the offering should be offered for every one of them, one for each. Ainsworth, on Num 6:18, quotes out of Maimonides a passage which gives some light to this: If a man say, Upon me behalf the oblations of a Nazarite, or, Upon me be half the shaving of a Nazarite, them he brings half the offerings by what Nazarite he will, and that Nazarite pays his offering out of that which is his. So Paul did here; he contributed what he vowed to the offerings of these Nazarites, and some think bound himself to the law of Nazariteship, and to an attendance at the temple with fastings and prayers for seven days, not designing that the offering should be offered till them, which was what he signified to the priest. Now it has been questioned whether James and the elders did well to give Paul this advice, and whether he did well to take it. 1. Some have blamed this occasional conformity of Paul's, as indulging the Jews too much in their adherence to the ceremonial law, and a discouragement of those who stood fast in the liberty wherewith Christ had made them free. Was it not enough for James and the elders of Jerusalem to connive at this mistake in the Jewish converts themselves, but must they wheedle Paul to countenance them in it? Had it not been better, when they had told Paul how zealous the believing Jews were for the law, if they had desired, whom God had endued with such excellent gifts, to take pains with their people to convince them of their error, and to show them that they were made free from the law by their marriage to Christ? Rom 7:4. To urge him to encourage them in it by his example seems to have more in it of fleshly wisdom than of the grace of God. Surely Paul knew what he had to do better than they could teach him. But, 2. Others think the advice was prudent and good, and Paul's following it was justifiable enough, as the case stood. It was Paul's avowed principle, To the Jews became I as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews, Co1 9:20. He had circumcised Timothy, to please the Jews; though he would not constantly observe the ceremonial law, yet, to gain an opportunity of doing good, and to show how far he could comply, he would occasionally go to the temple and join in the sacrifices there. Those that are weak in the faith are to be borne with, when those that undermine the faith must be opposed. It is true, this compliance of Paul's sped ill to him, for this very thing by which he hoped to pacify the Jews did but provoke them, and bring him into trouble; yet this is not a sufficient ground to go upon in condemning it: Paul might do well, and yet suffer for it. But perhaps the wise God overruled both their advice and Paul's compliance with it to serve a better purpose than was intended; for we have reason to think that when the believing Jews, who had endeavoured by their zeal for the law to recommend themselves to the good opinion of those who believed not, saw how barbarously they used Paul (who endeavoured to oblige them), they were by this more alienated from the ceremonial law than they could have been by the most argumentative or affecting discourses. They saw it was in vain to think of pleasing men that would be pleased with nothing else but the rooting out of Christianity. Integrity and uprightness will be more likely to preserve us than sneaking compliances. And when we consider what a great trouble it must needs be to James and the presbyters, in the reflection upon it, that they had by their advice brought Paul into trouble, it should be a warning to us not to press men to oblige us by doing any thing contrary to their own mind.
Then also a third cause is given: "And they all," it says, "have been informed of thee" - they say not, "have heard," but have been instructed, that is, so they have believed, and have been taught, "that thou teachest apostasy from Moses to all the Jews which are among the Gentiles, by telling them not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs."
Thus the apostles and the holy disciples of the Savior, in the beginning, allowed converts from Judaism to the life of the gospel to be circumcised according to the law of Moses in order that they would just believe in the Lord. Later, they themselves on their own, filled with worship in the Spirit and with evangelical perfection, rejected the small shadowy observances of the law.
But they have heard about you, that you teach the Jews among the Gentiles to depart from Moses, etc.; that is, they claim that you say that what was administered to the fathers by Moses should be condemned as sacrilegious and not commanded by God due to the doctrine of Christ. This had been alleged of Paul, not by those who understood with what mind these things should have been kept then by the faithful Jews to commend the divine authority and the prophetic sanctity of those sacraments, not to attain salvation, which was already being administered in Christ through the sacrament of baptism; but by those who had spread this about Paul, who wished these things to be observed as if salvation in the Gospel could not be obtained without them. For they considered him a most vehement preacher of grace, teaching contrary to their intent, that one is not justified by those things, but by the grace of Christ, for whom these shadows in the law were ordained to foretell. Therefore, seeking to stir up envy and persecution against him, they accused him as an enemy of the law and divine commandments. He could not more fittingly avoid the envy of this false accusation than by himself observing those things which he was thought to condemn as sacrilegious, thus showing that neither the Jews at that time should be prohibited from them as impious, nor the Gentiles compelled to them as necessary. For if he indeed rejected them as had been heard, and yet undertook to celebrate them to conceal his opinion with a simulated action, James would not have said:
Continue studying Acts 21:21 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
SUMMARY
Acts 21:21 records a serious accusation leveled against the Apostle Paul by zealous Jewish believers in Jerusalem: that he was teaching Jews living among Gentiles to abandon the Mosaic Law, specifically by forbidding circumcision for their children and adherence to traditional Jewish customs. This charge, though a misrepresentation of Paul's actual teaching on salvation by grace through faith, highlights the significant tension within the early church regarding the relationship between Christian liberty and Jewish identity, and the challenges of unity between Jewish and Gentile believers.
CONTEXT
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
Acts 21:21 is rich in Misrepresentation and Irony. The entire accusation against Paul is a gross misrepresentation of his actual theology and practice. While Paul indeed taught that salvation was by grace through faith in Christ, not by works of the Law (e.g., Ephesians 2:8-9), he never forbade Jewish believers from observing the Law or circumcising their children. In fact, he himself circumcised Timothy (as recorded in Acts 16:3) for the sake of ministry among Jews, demonstrating his flexibility and respect for cultural sensitivities when not compromising the Gospel. The irony lies in the fact that Paul, who consistently sought to bridge the gap between Jewish and Gentile believers and often accommodated Jewish customs when appropriate, was accused of the very opposite—of actively undermining Jewish heritage. This false accusation serves as a narrative device to heighten the dramatic tension and foreshadow Paul's impending arrest, illustrating the persistent opposition he faced not only from unbelieving Jews but also from zealous factions within the believing community. The verse also employs Accusation/Slander, as the elders report the specific, damaging rumors that have spread about Paul, highlighting the power of unsubstantiated claims to incite prejudice and division.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
Acts 21:21 powerfully illustrates the ongoing struggle within the early church to define the relationship between the old covenant and the new, particularly for Jewish believers. The accusation against Paul highlights the deep-seated conviction among many Jewish Christians that adherence to the Mosaic Law, including circumcision and traditional customs, remained essential for those of Jewish heritage, even after embracing Christ. This tension was not merely cultural but profoundly theological, touching on questions of identity, salvation, and the continuity of God's covenantal plan. Paul's consistent teaching, however, was that while the Law revealed sin and pointed to Christ, it could not save; salvation was by faith alone, a truth equally applicable to Jew and Gentile. The challenge was to articulate this truth without appearing to advocate for the abandonment of deeply cherished, God-given traditions, especially when those traditions were not presented as a means of salvation.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
The false accusation against Paul in Acts 21:21 serves as a potent reminder of the dangers of misinformation and the importance of discerning truth, even within religious communities. In our own contexts, we must be vigilant against the spread of rumors and assumptions about others, especially those in leadership or those with differing practices. It compels us to verify information, extend grace, and prioritize charitable interpretation over hasty judgment. Furthermore, this passage challenges us to navigate the delicate balance between upholding essential biblical truths and respecting diverse cultural expressions or traditions within the body of Christ. While the core tenets of the Gospel are non-negotiable, many practices and customs are matters of liberty, and we are called to unity in diversity, avoiding legalism on one hand and dismissiveness of heritage on the other. Our focus should always be on the unifying power of Christ and His finished work, allowing for freedom in non-essentials while standing firm on the essentials of faith.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Was Paul truly teaching Jews to forsake Moses and not circumcise their children?
Answer: No, Paul was not teaching Jews to "forsake Moses" in the sense of abandoning their heritage or the moral principles of the Law. The accusation in Acts 21:21 was a misrepresentation of his actual teaching. Paul consistently taught that salvation for both Jews and Gentiles came through faith in Jesus Christ, not through adherence to the Mosaic Law or circumcision (as seen in Romans 3:28 and Galatians 2:16). However, he never forbade Jewish believers from observing the Law or circumcising their children as a cultural practice, provided it was not seen as a means of salvation. In fact, Paul himself circumcised Timothy, whose mother was Jewish, to avoid offending Jewish audiences and to facilitate their ministry (as recorded in Acts 16:3). His principle was to become "all things to all people" to win them to Christ, which meant respecting Jewish customs when ministering to Jews, while firmly upholding the truth that these customs were not necessary for salvation.
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
Acts 21:21, though detailing a false accusation against Paul, profoundly points to the Christ-centered fulfillment of the Law and the establishment of a new covenant. The accusation that Paul taught Jews to "forsake Moses" highlights the tension between the old covenant, mediated by Moses, and the new covenant, inaugurated by Christ. Jesus himself declared that He came not to abolish the Law but to fulfill it (as stated in Matthew 5:17). Through His perfect life, atoning death, and glorious resurrection, Christ became the end of the Law for righteousness to everyone who believes (a truth powerfully articulated in Romans 10:4). The Mosaic Law, including circumcision and its customs, served as a tutor leading people to Christ (as Paul explains in Galatians 3:24). In Christ, the dividing wall between Jew and Gentile is broken down, creating one new humanity (as described in Ephesians 2:14-16). Therefore, while Jewish customs held historical and cultural significance, their salvific necessity was rendered obsolete by Christ's complete work. The "forsaking of Moses" that Paul was accused of, in its true spiritual sense, is not an abandonment of God's revelation but a progression from the shadow to the substance, from the Law to the grace and truth embodied in Jesus Christ (as revealed in John 1:17). This passage ultimately underscores that true identity and righteousness are found not in external adherence to rituals, but in union with Christ, the ultimate fulfillment of all God's promises.