Paul in northern and southern Greece

 (Acts 20:2–6)

2 When he had gone through those regions and had given them much encouragement, he came to Greece. 3 There he spent three months, and when ra plot was made against him by the Jews1 as he was about to set sail for Syria, he decided to return through Macedonia. 4 Sopater the Berean, son of Pyrrhus, accompanied him; and of the Thessalonians, sAristarchus and Secundus; and sGaius of Derbe, and tTimothy; and the Asians, uTychicus and vTrophimus. 5 These went on ahead and were waiting for wus at xTroas, 6 but we sailed away from Philippi after ythe days of Unleavened Bread, and in five days we came to them at Troas, where we stayed for seven days.

Paul now travelled through that area (2a). He probably spent several months revisiting the Macedonian churches he had founded on his second missionary journey, namely Philippi, Thessalonica and Berea, and Luke characterized his ministry to them as speaking many words of encouragement to the people. The word is parakleœsis (the noun which is cognate with the verb parakaleoœ in verse 1), and it has a range of meanings from appeal and entreaty through exhortation and encouragement to comfort and consolation. It is a vital ministry in establishing Christian disciples, and the principal means of its exercise is, literally, ‘much word’. Nothing encourages and strengthens the people of God like the Word of God. It is likely also to have been during this period that Paul travelled further west along the Egnatian Way than he had previously gone, reaching even Illyricum on the Adriatic coast north of Macedonia.13
    After these Macedonian journeys Paul finally arrived in Greece (2b), Hellas being the popular name for Achaia. Here, almost certainly in Corinth, he stayed three months (3a). Much had happened in his relations with the Corinthian church since his first visit which Luke has described. He had written them four letters, and even [Acts, Page 317] paid them an interim visit (the so-called ‘painful visit’ of 2 Cor. 2:1, which Luke does not mention). So he will have had much to talk about with the church’s leaders, in the realms of both doctrine and ethics. We also know that he finalized arrangements for the Corinthians’ share in the collection for the Judean churches.14 In addition, it was during this visit to Corinth that Paul wrote his major manifesto of Christian faith and life, his Letter to the Romans. In Romans 15 he explained that he had now ‘from Jerusalem all the way around to Illyricum … fully proclaimed the gospel of Christ’ and that in consequence ‘in these regions’ there was ‘no more place’ for him to work. That was why he hoped soon to visit Rome and go on to Spain.15
    Paul’s three months in Corinth are likely to have been during the winter, while he waited for the spring weather to open up navigation on the high seas. His purpose was to sail for Syria direct, as he had done after his first visit (18:18). As he was about to embark, however, he heard that the Jews had made a plot against him. Ramsay imagines the situation: ‘Paul’s intention must have been to take a pilgrim ship carrying Achaian and Asian Jews to the Passover.… With a shipload of hostile Jews, it would be easy to find opportunity to murder Paul’16 and dump his body overboard. So Paul changed his plan at the last moment and decided to go back through Macedonia (3). The Bezan text adds that ‘the Spirit told him’ to do so. Yet it was his own decision; the two are not incompatible.
    At this point Luke interrupts his narrative in order to tell us who Paul’s travelling companions were. It is noteworthy that Paul hardly ever travelled alone, and that when he was alone, he expressed his longing for human companionship, for example in Athens17 and in his final Roman imprisonment.18 That he favoured team work is specially clear during his missionary journeys. On his first he was accompanied by Barnabas and John Mark (until the latter defected), on his second by Silas and later Timothy, then Luke, and now at the end of his third Luke supplies his readers with a list of Paul’s friends. He was accompanied by Sopater (perhaps the same as the Sosipater who in Romans 16:21 is called one of Paul’s ‘relatives’) son of Pyrrhus from Berea, Aristarchus (19:29; 27:2) and Secundus from Thessalonica, Gaius from Derbe (probably the same as in 19:29, where one reading makes only Aristarchus a Macedonian, not Gaius), Timothy also, and Tychicus and Trophimus from the province of Asia. Trophimus came from Ephesus;19 [Acts, Page 318] perhaps Tychicus did also.20 In most cases Luke supplies these men’s home as well as their name in order both to identify them clearly and also (probably) to indicate how they represented the different regions which were taking part in the collection. Thus, Macedonia was represented by Sopater (Berea), Aristarchus and Secundus (Thessalonica) and perhaps Luke himself (Philippi); Galatia by Gaius (Derbe) and Timothy (Lystra); and Asia by Tychicus and Trophimus (Ephesus). Achaia is missing, but could have been represented by Paul himself, and/or by Titus,21 who according to Ramsay’s conjecture was a relative of Luke’s.22 This would mean that Paul’s entourage consisted of at least nine men.
    Luke does not actually mention the offering in connection with them, although it must have been in his mind. In our minds, as we reflect on Paul’s associates, should be the threefold witness which they bear. The first is to the growth, unity, and even (one might say) ‘catholicity’ of the church. Already Christian leaders from inland and coastal Asia Minor, from both sides of the Aegean, and from the northern and southern halves of Greece, know that they belong to the same church and in consequence co-operate in the same cause. Secondly, they bear witness to the fruitfulness of Paul’s missionary expeditions, since Derbe and Lystra were evangelized during his first, Berea and Thessalonica during his second, and Ephesus during his third. All nine men must have been the fruits of mission. But they then became the agents of mission. For, thirdly, they give evidence of the missionary-mindedness of the young Christian communities, which already gave up some of their best local leadership to the wider work and witness of Christ’s church.
    Reading between the lines of Luke’s compressed narrative, it seems that Paul and his group of associates left Corinth together and reached Philippi together. Perhaps it was here, and not earlier, that Luke joined the party (since the previous ‘we-section’ left him there, 16:12, and the next ‘we-section’ begins now in 20:5). Here too the group apparently split into two. These men, at least seven or eight of them, went on ahead and waited for us at Troas (5). But we (just Paul and Luke?) sailed from Philippi, that is, from its port Neapolis (16:11), only after the Feast of Unleavened Bread. This is unlikely to be a purely chronological note. Nor is Luke clearly saying that, having been foiled in his desire to celebrate the Passover in Jerusalem, Paul celebrated it in Philippi instead. Are we sure that he continued to observe the Jewish feasts, even though for a particular purpose he intended to get to Jerusalem in time for [Acts, Page 319] Pentecost (20:16)? I prefer Professor Howard Marshall’s explanation: ‘It is probable that he was celebrating the Christian Passover, i.e. Easter, with the church at Philippi (1 Cor. 5:7f.).’23 At all events, it was not until after the festival that they left Philippi, and then it was five days later that they joined the others at Troas. They must have encountered strong head winds, for their voyage in the opposite direction had taken only two days (16:11). Once in Troas, however, they stayed seven days (6).