A Tour of Regions Beyond
Acts 20:1-2
In these verses, Luke's record of events suddenly becomes extremely concise. He compresses many hundreds of miles and many months amounting to well over a year (see Appendix 1) into a few words. In First Corinthians, Paul says that he will remain in Ephesus until Pentecost (1 Cor. 16:8), probably Pentecost of 56, yet he probably did not arrive in Greece—specifically, Corinth—until the autumn of 57.
We should therefore be careful not to infer from verse 1 that Paul departed from Ephesus immediately after he escaped from the crisis in the city's amphitheater. It is doubtful that when the city clerk sent everyone home, all of Paul's enemies set aside their hatred of Paul and ceased agitating against him. Often in other cities when he became a special target of men opposed to the gospel, Paul had quickly departed lest his continuing presence provoke attacks that might victimize new converts or even put an end to his ministry. But in Ephesus, he had gained the respect of important leaders, even some Asiarchs. Remaining in the city for a while enabled him to use his influence with these men for the good of the whole church. Thus, "after the uproar [or, 'turmoil'1] was ceased" may refer not to the next day after mass insanity in the theater, but to a few months later when the whole environment of Christian witness had become relatively peaceful again. His appraisal of conditions when he wrote First Corinthians was that although strong opposition persisted in the background, unusually good opportunities for witness stood before him. He said, "For a great door and effectual is opened unto me, and there are many adversaries" (1 Cor. 16:9).
How he pursued these opportunities is missing from surviving records. All we know is that sometime in mid-56, he felt that he had finished his work in Ephesus. He therefore implemented his plan to leave the city and embark on ministry elsewhere. After gathering the disciples, he gave them his blessing and his embrace, and he departed for Macedonia. In Luke's highly abbreviated account, we read that "when he had gone over those parts, . . . he came into Greece."
We uncover a fuller story of events by consulting Paul’s epistles, especially Second Corinthians and Romans, for Second Corinthians was written at the beginning of this period, probably when Paul was in the Macedonian city of Philippi, and Romans was written at the end, when Paul was in the Grecian city of Corinth.
From Second Corinthians, we learn that after Paul left Ephesus, he traveled north to Troas, where he hoped to meet Titus as he was coming back from delivering First Corinthians to the Corinthian church (2 Cor. 2:12–13). But in Troas, Titus was nowhere to be found. Deprived of news from a possible scene of trouble, Paul suffered growing anxiety. He feared that a once healthy church might be crumbling under internal stresses. His soul was so grievously troubled that he declined opportunities to minister in Troas and hurried across the sea in the hope of finding Titus in Macedonia, but he was not there either.
Paul then decided to stop and wait rather than march on in ministry. Inner peace eluded him. The unfruitful lingering in one place brought fightings without and fears within (2 Cor. 7:5). But soon Titus came—according to tradition, the meeting place was Philippi2—and gave Paul a comforting report (2 Cor. 7:6–16). The Corinthian church or at least one faction of it was remaining faithful to Paul and striving to follow all of his instructions. Titus could say of these believers that they had refreshed his spirit.
Yet as Paul contemplated visiting Corinth a third time (2 Cor. 12:14; 13:1), he remembered his last trip to Corinth. It was not at all pleasant. He describes it as full of grief (2 Cor. 2:1). Although Titus had just brought him a good report of morale now prevalent in the church there, Paul could not forget the nasty treatment he endured during his previous visit, and he sought to prevent it from recurring. Therefore, he issued a strong rebuke to past troublemakers. These evidently belonged to a disagreeable faction that questioned his apostleship and rejected his authority (2 Cor. 12:11–13, 20). Perhaps their chief motive was an unwillingness to comply with his demand for moral purity (2 Cor. 12:21). To warn this rebellious faction of coming discipline and also to bestow his blessing on the loyal faction seem to be the main purposes of Second Corinthians. We may suppose that in Philippi or elsewhere in the same region, he composed and dispatched the letter soon after conferring with Titus.3 The approximate date was either late summer or autumn of 56.
Delving Still Deeper
Timothy's whereabouts
In the salutation at the beginning of Second Corinthians, Paul includes Timothy's name (2 Cor. 1:1). A reader might infer that Timothy was close at hand and perhaps even serving as coauthor. Yet this inference finds no support in the remainder of the epistle. Throughout, Paul uses the first person, informing us that he alone is responsible for what is being said, and he never speaks of Timothy as a present companion. In our reconstruction of events, Timothy was in Ephesus at the time the epistle was written.
Why then does he appear in the salutation? Before terminating his long stay in Ephesus, Paul had sent Timothy into Macedonia to prepare its churches for a visit by their founder (Acts 19:22). We may surmise that Timothy went to the Corinthian church also (1 Cor. 16:10–11) and returned to Ephesus before Paul departed. Timothy's name appears in the salutation probably because the young man, in discussion with Paul before they recently separated, had asked the apostle to pass on his greeting to the people of Corinth should an opportunity arise. Yet Paul's mention of Timothy may have had another reason also. It was perhaps intended to reaffirm that Timothy came to them as Paul’s representative and bore Paul’s authority.
At about the same time, probably while he was still in Macedonia, Paul wrote his first epistle to Timothy.6 When Paul had terminated his lengthy ministry in Ephesus and moved on, he left Timothy behind, evidently for the purpose of overseeing a citywide body of believers which by now probably included several house churches. It seems likely that Paul, the former overseer, publicly installed Timothy as his replacement.
Setting First Timothy shortly after Paul's last visit to Ephesus is mandated by his opening words, "As I besought thee to abide still in Ephesus when I went into Macedonia" (1 Tim. 1:3). Its purpose is to detail the young man’s responsibilities in his new role.
Delving Deeper
Date of First Timothy
Many scholars have argued that the epistle must come from a much later time. One common placement is after Paul's hypothetical "first" imprisonment in Rome. Yet all the reasons they offer against placing the epistle earlier simply underestimate two factors: first, the variable style and vocabulary of Paul's language (perhaps to some extent reflecting peculiar usages in the heterogeneous cultural centers where he ministered) and, second, the complexity of real life. Their main reason is that the epistle and Acts 20 seem to give us different pictures of the Ephesian church. Whereas in the epistle Paul charges Timothy to stand firm against false teachers, in Acts 20 we find no hint of doctrinal controversy. Yet the case brought forward by these scholars is hugely overdrawn. There is no reason why perverted versions of the gospel could not have flared up in the city soon after Paul's introduction of the true gospel.
We will survey the principal reasons in favor of the date we are assigning to First Timothy. According to our chronology (see Appendix 1), Paul brought Timothy onto his missionary team probably in 49, he left Ephesus in 56, and he could not have been released from Roman imprisonment before 63. Therefore, the date that many scholars prefer for the epistle falls at least seven years after the date we are proposing. If Timothy joined Paul’s team when he was eighteen or twenty, he was in his middle twenties in 56, but in his middle thirties in 63. The epistle contains an abundance of clues pointing to the earlier of these two periods in Timothy’s life.
- Paul says, "Let no man despise [καταφρονειτω7] thy youth" (1 Tim. 4:12). It would have been a normal expression of human nature if some believers in Ephesus balked at accepting a leader who was only in his twenties, but a man in his thirties, with maybe fifteen years of experience in ministry, would not have been despised as too young.
- The admonition just quoted parallels one of Paul’s comments in First Corinthians,: "Now if Timotheus come, see that he may be with you without fear . . . . Let no man therefore despise [εξουθενηση8] him" (1 Cor. 16:10–11). This epistle was, by our reckoning, written just a few months before First Timothy. Their matching perspectives on the young man, both seeing him as struggling for respect, support our decision to separate them by a few months rather than by at least seven years.
- In First Timothy, Paul cautions his son in the faith against distractions that would have been a threat especially to a man in his twenties: young women (1 Tim. 5:2) and bodily exercise (1 Tim. 4:8). Also, since more money would be entrusted to him than ever before, Paul warned him against love of money (1 Tim. 6:10).
- The epistle is a thorough guidebook on serving as church leader. It seems designed for someone lacking previous experience, not for an older Timothy who had already been exercising leadership under challenging circumstances for some time.
- Paul says, "Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses" (1 Tim. 6:12). We cannot imagine how a single public testimony could have held such importance for an older Timothy. It sounds more like the testimony that a younger Timothy would have given before he was publicly installed as leader of the Ephesian church. What he said was crucial for gaining acceptance because many listeners regarded him not only as very young, but also as a man whose credentials, spiritual discernment, and ability as a preacher and public speaker were rather uncertain. More than seven years later, public perception of his qualifications would have rested hardly at all on a single public appearance.
In Macedonia, after sending off letters attending to the needs of God's work in Corinth and Ephesus, Paul could refocus his energies on active ministry. He no doubt started by revisiting all the Macedonian churches that he had founded on his previous missionary journey. He must have felt that further teaching on the things of God would provide a critical shield for their newfound faith. But as he looked westward, he could see only spiritual darkness. The whole western side of the Balkan Peninsula as well as all regions northward along the Adriatic Sea remained untouched by lifesaving truth. Doubtless it was at this time that, according to a reminiscence in Romans (Rom. 15:19), he made his foray into Illyricum (encompassing the region now occupied by a series of small states including, from south to north, Albania, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Croatia, the last three formerly part of Yugoslavia). Perhaps he crossed the mountains obstructing the way to his new mission field by following the same Via Egnatia that we described earlier.9 Once he descended into the plains beyond, he probably toured all the major cities near the seacoast. A walking tour of the whole region, including the approach from Philippi and the final leg to Corinth, easily covered well over 700 miles (1127 km.).10 It is for this reason that some scholars view verses 1 and 2 as a radical condensation of time. What seems to be a brief interval might have stretched over a year.11 We will assume that evangelism and church planting at key stops along the way occupied Paul from the autumn of 56 until the autumn of 57 (see Appendix 1).
Luke gives no clue as to Paul’s companions during this major work of evangelism. Luke himself must have been elsewhere, because whenever he was an eyewitness of Paul’s ministry, he gives us a somewhat fuller record of what happened.
After touring Macedonia and regions beyond, Paul proceeded to Greece, probably continuing directly to Corinth, the normal place to catch ship for Syria.
From Greece to Troas
Acts 20:36
The term of his sojourn in Greece, three months, may refer to the winter season when no ship attempted to sail on the stormy Mediterranean. If so, they spanned late 57 and early 58. By going back to Corinth, Paul fulfilled his promise in Second Corinthians that he would come to the believers there a third time (2 Cor. 12:14). His preceding letter to the same church, First Corinthians, had already disclosed that one of his purposes would be to collect contributions for the church in Jerusalem, which was full of needy brethren (1 Cor. 16:1–8).
Paul’s most memorable achievement in Corinth was composition of the Epistle to the Romans.12 Phebe, the godly woman who delivered the letter, attended the church in Cenchrea just outside Corinth (Rom. 16:1). The letter seems designed to serve three main purposes.
- He wanted to encourage the believers in Rome. To prove how much he loved them, he would make the long, demanding journey necessary to see them, and he would come at first opportunity—that is, as soon as he had fulfilled a pressing obligation (Rom. 15:22–24).
- He wanted to persuade Jewish believers to lay aside all disdain for gentile believers. Yes, gentile society was plunging downward to the depths of corruption—a trend they could see readily enough in the Roman world, where life was cheap and vice of every imaginable kind was rampant (Rom. 1:21–32). But Paul cautioned them that God judged a man not by his heritage but by his heart—a truth he stated most succinctly and eloquently in Romans 2:24–29. Paul revealed also that God’s program for mankind was designed to bestow blessing on gentiles as well as Jews. For the sake of gentiles, the gospel would now go to the whole world (Rom. 3:21–30). But the Jews would not lose their special standing. Someday God would turn His attention back to His chosen people and grant salvation to all alive at Christ’s return (Rom. 11:25–26).
- He wanted to be sure that the Roman church was well-grounded in the fundamentals of Christian doctrine. The book reads much like a college text. No doubt it contains material that he had often used when instructing other churches. Down through history, the book has been rightly admired as the definitive treatment of law vs. grace and a host of other questions that we must answer properly if we wish to preserve the faith of our fathers. Luther’s lectures on Romans were one spark that touched off the Protestant Reformation.13
Probably while Paul was in Corinth, Paul was joined by men from several of the principal cities that he had evangelized during his missionary journeys. Evidently by prior arrangement they all came together at the same place and the same time. The place of assembly was Corinth, probably chosen because they could sail from there directly to Syria. Who were these men? Earlier, when Paul instructed the churches to collect funds for the needy in Jerusalem (1 Cor. 16:1–4), he told them to set trusted men apart for the task of delivering the money. These were doubtless the group who gathered around Paul in Corinth (Rom. 15:25–27). Each was a church delegate carrying money that had been raised in compliance with Paul’s direction. The seven who are named include, besides Timothy, three from Macedonia (Sopater of Berea, Aristarchus and Secundus of Thessalonica), one from Lycaonia (Gaius of Derbe), and two from Asia (Tychicus and Trophimus, perhaps representing all cities in the province including Ephesus).
Getting Practical
Appropriate measures
Notice that some churches sent two delegates. If their purpose was to enhance security and assure accountability, they were taking proper steps that serve as an example for all churches when they handle money. Never should tabulation or dispersal of funds be done by a single individual deprived of protection or free from oversight.
We are not told what city or province Timothy represented. The reason may be that his purpose in coming was not to travel as a church delegate. It is more likely that after a year of consolidating gains in Ephesus, he decided that the Lord was calling him to spend more time with Paul. Perhaps he felt that he should help Paul make arrangements for his last journey to Jerusalem. Perhaps also he felt it wise to consult Paul concerning future outreach in a portion of the world that Paul did not plan to revisit. Yet the strongest motive bringing him to Paul's side may have been a sense that he would never see Paul again.
Aristarchus has appeared earlier in the story of Paul's missionary toils (Acts 19:29), and he will appear later as well (Acts 27:2; Col. 4:10; Phlm 24). In the group assembled at Corinth were two others who would attain a long history of helping Paul: Tychicus (Titus 3:12; Eph. 6:21; Col. 4:7; 2 Tim. 4:12) and Trophimus (Acts 21:29; 2 Tim. 4:20).
Paul’s intent was to sail directly from Corinth to Syria, a stopping place on the route to Jerusalem. Perhaps he would have set sail in one of the pilgrim ships that picked up Jews from Mediterranean ports and carried them toward Jerusalem for celebration of Passover.14 But his testimony for Christ had again aroused hatred among the Jews who despised followers of the crucified One, and they plotted to kill Paul. Somehow they learned of Paul’s plans, which were probably no secret but common knowledge, and they went to lie in wait for him. Apparently they set up their ambush along his route to the harbor. The danger coming to his attention through unnamed informants, Paul changed his itinerary. Instead of going to Cenchrea, the eastern port of Corinth, and catching a boat bound for Syria, he turned inland and headed for Macedonia.
In the spring of 58, Paul journeyed northward in a sizable company of men including Timothy, all the the church delegates, and perhaps others as well. Not only were they protecting the money; they were protecting Paul. It was a demanding walk northward of about 450 miles (725 km.),15 which must have required the better part of March and April. When Paul reached Philippi, yet another man became his companion. He is not named, but the appearance of "us" in verse 5 and "we" in verse 6 signals that Luke had joined the party, perhaps serving as a delegate from the church in Philippi.
Delving Still Deeper
Omission
CT omits "into Asia" (v. 4), actually three words in the Greek.16 Unless inclusion or omission of a questionable word or phrase clearly points to editorializing, its inclusion more likely preserves the original text. The rule is that noise in transmission reduces information content. Here, however, the amount of text at issue is three words, a sum less likely to be lost just by accident. We must therefore suspect that editorializing is responsible for the variants. Why an ancient transmitter of the text would have invented the phrase defies explanation, but he might have dropped it because he thought that "into Asia" introduces a contradiction. It suggests that Paul was a member of the party when the delegates entered Asia, whereas in fact he stayed behind in Philippi. Yet a more precise translation—"as far as Asia"—perhaps explains Luke’s purpose in using it. If he had left it out, we would naturally deduce that the whole group "accompanied him" (that is, Paul) all the way to Jerusalem, whereas not all of them made the whole journey. We will take the position that Timothy, who was not a bearer of money, returned to Ephesus.
Now the same seven who came north with Paul separated from him and sailed across the Aegean Sea to the port city of Troas in Asia. There they waited. Paul and Luke remained in Philippi until after the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which Paul evidently wanted to observe. As always, he felt bound to uphold the traditions he had inherited. He hoped that by not forsaking his Jewishness he would cement better relations between Jewish believers and the gentile believers won by his ministry. Perhaps on this occasion one of his purposes in staying behind was to teach the Jewish believers in Philippi an encouraging lesson—that becoming a Christian did not require them to renounce their Jewish identity.
Luke was not Jewish, so far as we know. We may therefore assume that what kept him from sailing off with the other seven was not the feast, but Paul’s welfare. He knew that Paul should have a companion when he traveled to Troas. After the feast, which in 58 probably concluded on 3 May,17 the two men immediately moved on, reaching Troas within five days. An earlier voyage in the reverse direction (Acts 16:11) had only taken two days to traverse the 125 miles (201 km.), so on this crossing the ship must have struggled against adverse conditions.
Now the whole company was reunited, but they postponed further travel for another seven days.
A Life Restored
Acts 20:7-12
A body of believers existed at Troas, showing that by now the gospel had probably spread to every significant city and town in western Asia Minor. Paul and his company joined these believers when they gathered on the evening of the first day of the week; that is, on Sunday evening.18
Delving Deeper
A critical anchor for chronology
Paul’s last journey to Jerusalem was often in days past assigned to the year AD 58,19 but many modern scholars have chosen AD 57 instead.20 Here in Acts 20, Luke provides some details leaving no doubt that the correct year is 58. Paul left Philippi in Macedonia right after the Feast of Unleavened Bread (v. 6). We will assume that sometime after the feast terminated at sundown, he walked ten miles to Neapolis, Philippi’s seaport, and boarded ship the next day. Crossing the Aegean Sea to Troas required five days (v. 6). Then in Troas he spent seven days (v. 6). When speaking of the day when Eutychus was raised from the dead, Luke identifies it in two ways: first, as the day right before the day when they departed (that is, on the sixth day of their visit) and, second, as the first day of the week (that is, a Sunday).
In 57, the Feast of Unleavened Bread concluded on 15 April,21 which was a Friday.22 In 58, it concluded on 3 May, which was a Wednesday.23 By our reconstruction of events, the sixth day in Troas was a Sunday (14 May) if Paul traveled in 58, a Tuesday if Paul traveled in 57. If we insert any delay before his departure from Macedonia (although any actual delay may have been included in the count of five days), the timetable emerging from 57 goes even more askew.
The first suggestion in the New Testament that believers regularly met on Sunday is in First Corinthians (1 Cor. 16:2). The second is here in Acts 21:7. We infer that to come together on that day was the practice of Christians in all the churches derived from Paul’s ministry, and perhaps in other churches as well.
The precise order of service when believers gathered in Troas appears incidentally in verse 11.24
First, they broke bread together, just as Jesus and His disciples had done on the night before His death. In reenacting the Lord’s Supper, they were obeying the Lord’s command. He had told the church that they should never cease to share bread and wine as a memorial of His body and blood, given as a sacrifice for their sins (Matt. 26:26–28; Mark 14:22–24; Luke 22:19–20).
Then they shared a meal. This communal partaking of food at the weekly meeting of a local church was later called the Love Feast or Agape. Perhaps the name was already in general use when the Epistle of Jude was written (Jude 12).25
Last, they listened to Paul as he preached.
Getting Practical
Eating as a spiritual exercise
Christians have always liked to share a meal. A church potluck is a continuation of an old tradition going back to New Testament times. Food is so integral to Christian fellowship that it is hard to imagine a thriving church without a good kitchen.
Getting Practical
Upholding the Sunday evening service
The account suggests another way we should be faithful to the example set by early Christians. If one of the believers in Troas visited a modern fundamentalist church, he would be amazed to see more people attending on Sunday morning than on Sunday evening. He would be even more amazed to find that in many other churches, the Sunday evening service has become extinct.
We do not know how long the Love Feast in Troas continued into the evening. But after everyone was done eating and perhaps after others had spoken, Paul took the floor and began to preach. The word for preach, the same used to describe Paul's lectures at the school of Tyrannus, is the source of our English word "dialogue."26 We infer that Paul's presentation was far from a formal sermon. It was rather an informal talk, conversational in style. And in contrast to modern preachers, Paul did not feel bound to stop after forty minutes or so. He went on preaching until midnight. If we surmise that he started at about eight o'clock, he was still going strong four hours later. Perhaps he retold his triumphant missionary tours, or perhaps he offered an in-depth discussion of salvation by faith, as we find in Romans. Whatever his central topics were, the congregation as a whole was undoubtedly delighted to have the great apostle as their guest speaker. No doubt they hung on every word.
Yet there was a young man present, by the name of Eutychus, who failed to pay attention.
Pondering a Question
How old was Eutychus?
"Young man" (v. 9)—in Greek, neanias27)—suggests a man at the height of physical maturity, after adolescence and before attaining his full place in society. One standard lexicon links the word to an age range from 24 to 40.28 Philo, however, specifies 22 to 28,29 a definition more consistent with the word's usage elsewhere in Acts. Luke chooses it to describe Saul when the clothes of Stephen's killers were laid at his feet (Acts 7:58) and also to describe Paul's nephew who entered the prison to inform him of the plot against his life (Acts 23:17).30
Yet in verse 12 Luke uses a different word for Eutychus. Although again translated "young man," the Greek word is pais,31 which normally refers to a very young boy.32 Philo gives the implied age range as 8 to 14.33 The contradiction vanishes in light of the word's variable meaning. It was often used to describe a son or slave of any age.34 In this instance, the context suggests that "son" is the intended meaning, since the word identifies the one that "they" brought to Paul before his departure. It appears that the people called "they" had come back with him to express their gratitude, for they were "not a little comforted." A reasonable interpretation is that Luke is referring to the man's larger family, probably including his parents.
Picturing Eutychus as a man in his prime makes Luke's story far more realistic. It is difficult to imagine that a group of responsible adults including some apostles would let a little boy sit in a dangerous place at any time, much less late at night.
Perhaps Eutychus was like many young men in our world who find the Epistle to the Romans rather heavy reading. Or maybe he had come from a day's exhausting labor. Or maybe midnight was way past his bedtime. Or maybe the lamps had created a stuffy atmosphere short of enough oxygen to keep him alert. For whatever reason, he fell asleep. And his place for sleeping could not have been more ill-chosen, for the gathering took place in a large third-story room, and he was sitting in the window. No one saw his peril while there was still time to save him. Suddenly, he toppled out of the window and plummeted to the ground perhaps thirty feet below. In horror, many rushed outside to his aid, but it was too late. He "was taken up dead." The wording leaves no doubt that in the professional judgment of Luke, a physician present at the scene, the boy was indeed dead.35 Shock and dismay swept over the crowd, completely erasing from their thoughts all of Paul's edifying words. A time of joyful fellowship instantly turned into a time of grief. Not only had a believer died, but the believer was a young man. A moment's mistake had erased all the potential of a full life dedicated to God.
Paul himself was deeply moved by the tragedy, and, after the examples of Elijah and Elisha at similar moments (1 Kings 17:21; 2 Kings 4:34–35), he embraced Eutychus, urgently pleading for his life before the throne of God. In so doing, he exercised his privilege as a believer guided by the Spirit of God to do works as great as Christ had done (John 14:12). God heard his plea and miraculously restored the young man to life. Then Paul, looking around at the anxious and distressed congregation, including the young man's friends and likely his family as well, gave them all the glad news that life had returned to his body. But he had not yet regained consciousness.
Pondering a Question
Why was Eutychus still unconscious?
Perhaps the Lord simply restored him to his state when he fell out of the window. Although he received life again, he did not wake up. We must remember that his accident occurred late at night. In view of this fact, the Lord, who is the most tenderhearted of fathers, gave the young man what he really needed, a good night’s sleep.
Getting Practical
Danger in nodding off
The application is so obvious that I am almost ashamed to make it, yet no self-respecting preacher would miss the chance. I will make the application with a quiet voice lest anyone think I am preaching at them. It is this. You see what might happen to people who fall asleep during a sermon. They might fall over and kill themselves.
The interruption did not put an end to the meeting. Paul returned to the upper chamber and, after taking an invigorating snack, resumed conversing with the saints. They all knew that he was leaving the next day and that they would never see him again. So, they wanted to glean as much precious truth from him as possible before he departed, even if it meant getting no sleep. As it turned out, no one went to bed. Paul kept talking until the break of day.
Getting Practical
Setting ourselves apart from a partying world
All-night carousing was common among pagans in the ancient world, just as it is today. The Christians who stayed up until morning so they could hear Paul were making a dramatic statement to an onlooking world that God was no less important to them than wine was to their neighbors.
A long tradition in modern churches until fairly recently was to hold a service on New Year’s Eve that continued past midnight. The New Year was greeted with a time of prayer. The purpose of the gathering was to give testimony to a partying world that for Christians, life centers on a satisfying relationship with God, not on frantic and futile attempts to find joy apart from God.
Then, although none in Paul's audience had taken any sleep, they all remained together to see him depart in the morning. Just before he left, "they," probably the family of Eutychus, brought him to the gathering. When everyone saw that the young man was alive and uninjured, they must have rejoiced at his recovery, and with grateful hearts they must have lifted their voices to God and thanked Him for the miracle.
Pondering a Question
How many before Eutychus had been raised from the dead to live again in this world?
In Bible history, Eutychus was the tenth and last. Three were raised from the dead in Old Testament times. The son of the widow of Zarephath was raised by Elijah (1 Kings 17:17-24). The son of the Shunammite woman was raised by Elisha (2 Kings 4:18-37). A dead man revived when he was hastily cast into the sepulchre of Elisha and his corpse touched the prophet’s bones (2 Kings 13:20-21).
Three were raised by Jesus. These were the son of the widow of Nain (Luke 7:11-17), the daughter of Jairus (Luke 8:40-56), and Lazarus (John 11).
The seventh who returned from the grave was Jesus Himself. It is appropriate that His place in the order corresponds to the number of perfection, for indeed His return to life was perfect. All six previous restorations to life were merely resuscitations. The dead person was revived in a normal body capable of aging that would lead to death a second time, whereas Jesus was raised in an incorruptible, immortal body. He would never die again. Therefore, His return to life was the first true resurrection. That is why Christ in 1 Corinthians 15:20 is called "the firstfruits of them that slept." His second life in this world was limited to forty days, but He departed not by death but by ascension to heaven, and He will come again.
The Book of Acts records that after the resurrection of Jesus, there were three more who came back to life: Dorcas, raised by Peter (Acts 9:39-41), Paul himself, raised by the direct intervention of God (Acts 14:19-20), and Eutychus.
The tally of ten raised from the dead is the sum of three, three, one, and three. This pattern could hardly be an accident. It shows the power of God, and God's love for His people, to be the same before, during, and after the coming of Christ. We might even view it as a demonstration of the old saying that our God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
Getting Practical
Children as a precious resource
Of the nine besides Christ that God raised from the dead, most were children or young adults. Why? Because they had a long remaining life that they might use to serve God.
The lesson for us is that a young life is a resource too precious to be wasted. It is important that in all our decisions, we keep a close eye on what is good for our children. In every important decision I have made, the welfare of my children has been one of my chief considerations. The same should be true of the decisions a church makes. They hold the lives of their children in their hands, and how well they fulfill the great trust God has given them will be a major question when they stand before Him in judgment.
Progress toward Jerusalem
Acts 20:13-16
The next few verses relate Paul's journey from Troas to his next place of ministry, the city of Miletus. The many exact details are characteristic of those portions of Acts where we find first person pronouns; in other words, of those portions speaking of events that the author himself observed firsthand. The reason Luke's eyewitness accounts are always rich in information is that he could rely on his own memory. Although we find no obvious spiritual lessons in the record of Paul's exact movements, the Holy Spirit inspired Luke to include it because it has been invaluable for proving the authenticity of Acts. Modern authorities have established that all the references to places and sailing routes are perfectly accurate.36
Sea travel in those days was seldom direct. A ship normally stopped at many ports on the way to its destination in order to renew water and other supplies, as well as to exchange passengers. From Troas, Luke and certain companions, including all the church delegates, sailed without Paul to Assos, the next major city when traveling south along the coast of Asia Minor. There they met Paul, who had come by foot. The phrase "went before to ship" suggests that they left Troas before he did.37 Walking was a good option for Paul because the overland route to Assos was somewhat shorter and perhaps quicker.38
Luke does not reveal why Paul preferred to walk, but commentators have suggested several possible reasons. Because of his compelling desire for souls, perhaps he wished to preach along the way, yet the path was thinly populated. Or perhaps he wanted to focus his mind on prayer, seeking guidance on the right course of action when he reached Jerusalem, a place of danger. Most likely, however, he did not walk alone, but took his sons in the faith, Titus (Titus 1:4) and Timothy (1 Tim. 1:2), so that he could have uninterrupted face-to-face conversation with them.
The evidence we have suggests that when Paul reached Miletus and boarded a ship bound for Syria, Titus did not continue in his company but moved onward to Crete. When Paul later wrote to Titus, "left I thee in Crete" (Titus 1:5), he did not mean that he himself went there on his way to Syria, but that Crete was where he directed Titus to go after they separated.
It is probable that he separated from Timothy at the same time—that when he set sail, Timothy did not go along but returned to Ephesus with the group of Ephesian elders who had come to Miletus for a last conference with Paul. Timothy's purpose in going back was doubtless to resume oversight of Christian work in that place of critical outreach to a highly populated province in the middle of the empire.
The walk to Assos was therefore a precious time of fellowship for the older man and his younger companions. They all understood that after Paul stepped aboard ship in Miletus, they might never see each other again.
Pondering a Question
Was this in fact the last time that Paul saw either young man?
The simple answer is, no. We know that Timothy was with Paul for a while when the apostle was imprisoned in Caesarea (Phil. 1:1; 2:19—later, we will present our case that Caesarea is where Philippians was composed). Also, we know from Second Timothy, an epistle that Paul wrote late during his imprisonment in Rome, that he summoned Timothy to come quickly to his side (2 Tim. 4:9). We may assume that Timothy complied with this urgent request from his father in the Lord. Apparently as a result of going to Rome, Timothy himself ended up in jail. The single reference to this imprisonment appears in the Epistle to the Hebrews, written in Italy (Heb. 13:24). It is our position that the author was Barnabas (see Appendix 2).
The only information we have about later encounters between Paul and Titus is a single note also in Second Timothy. Paul says that Titus has departed for Dalmatia (2 Tim. 4:10). Titus had evidently traveled to Rome so that he might provide assistance and comfort to the apostle in his time of great need.
Pondering a Question
Why throughout the Book of Acts does Luke fail to mention Titus even once?
This question has long perplexed students of the Bible, and many answers have been proposed. But the right answer may be very simple. Perhaps Titus was a man of such humility that he implored Luke not to mention him. With a true servant’s heart, he shrank from any notice that might lead readers to view him as a man of heroic accomplishments.
He might have taken as his example the apostle John, who never in his writings referred to himself by name. We should not accuse the other writers of vanity, however. The Spirit guided them to identify themselves rather than deprive us of information valuable both for validating their testimony and drawing practical lessons from their lives.
At Assos, Paul's friends picked him up, and they all sailed further down the coast of Asia Minor to Mitylene. Then as they continued, they passed in succession the islands of Chios and Samos before coming finally to Miletus, an important city about thirty miles (48 km.) south of Ephesus.39 Paul had resolved not to visit the church at Ephesus, lest the delay prevent him from reaching Jerusalem before the Feast of Pentecost. While in Corinth, he had doubtless wanted to reach there before the Feast of Unleavened Bread, but the plot against his life had set back his schedule fifty days. It was now in mid-May. The feast of Pentecost in 58 fell on 16 June.40
Delving Deeper
Details of the journey
Many commentators have expanded Luke's brief account to help readers unfamiliar with the geography of the Aegean Sea.41 To make passage from Troas to Assos, a ship had to veer westward around a peninsula known in those days as Cape Lectum. Whereas the overland route went almost straight south about twenty miles (32 km.), the distance by ship was about twice as far.
The next stop was Mitylene, chief city on Lesbos, the largest island west of the mainland. Going from Assos to Mitylene, twelve miles (19 km.) from the coastline, required a run of thirty miles (48 km.) to the south.
It is probable that the ship carrying Paul and his companions normally sought harbor at night. Besides the practical reasons mentioned earlier (commentary on chap. 16), the chief perhaps was sailing conditions. The north wind that prevailed on the Aegean during summer months subsided at dusk. Yet after the stop at Mitylene, the remainder of the trip to Miletus seems to have been accomplished without coming to land. The journey took three days.
On the first day, the ship sailed fifty-five miles (89 km.) or so beyond Mitylene—well within the maximum attainable progress for one day, which was about eighty miles (129 km.)42—and drew up next to Chios, another large island. The phrase "came . . . over against" is, literally, "arrived opposite."43 It is doubtful that the ship came to port, instead lingering becalmed out in the waters between two rims of land.
Another island, Samos, about seventy miles (113 km.) further along, was the next day's goal, although again they apparently did not seek anchorage but halted at sea close to Trogyllium, a coastal finger reaching out and falling only a mile (1.6 km.) short of the island. There they "tarried" overnight.
On the last day, they pressed ahead another twenty miles (32 km.) to Miletus, a coastal city about thirty miles south of Ephesus. This was the distance as the crow flies, but along the fastest route joining the cities it was about thirty-seven miles.
Delving Still Deeper
Another victory for TR
CT omits "and tarried at Trogyllium"; literally, "and having remained at Trogyllium." It is a phrase included in many ancient sources including the writings of Chrysostom, but missing in the Alexandrian text.44 At question are four words—"και μειναντες εν Τρωγυλλιω"—including two that are fairly long, one of which would have been unfamiliar to most readers especially in Egypt, where the Alexandrian text originated. It is therefore unlikely that such an eye-stopping combination would have been accidentally skipped over by some transmitter of the text. The question then is what possible editorial motivation might have led to its invention on the one hand or its omission on the other.
Invention is inconceivable. A solitary individual with a desire to promote Trogyllium could never have shaped the text carried down through history. It is equally absurd to suppose that an individual or church body discovered the phrase floating in the realm of pure fancy and willy-nilly threw it into Luke's account for some obscure literary reason. Any other reason—doctrinal, ethnocentric, political—defies imagination.
Yet it is not hard to think of historically plausible reasons why the phrase was omitted.
- A casual reader, as well as an audience listening to the text being read from the pulpit, might think that the phrase voices a contradiction undermining the authority of Scripture. In the same sentence, Luke says that the party of travelers stayed in one place and yet arrived at another. That, of course, is a superficial reading, but a reading that could bother doubters and please skeptics.
- Public readings were an exercise of the church with likely a strong influence on the evolution of the Alexandrian text. In these, references to things totally unfamiliar were probably avoided. The unfamiliarity of Trogyllium is attested in some texts by misspelling of its name.45
- There are so many possible real-world reasons for the phrase being omitted that we cannot begin to list them all. Perhaps the unfamiliar word "Trogyllium" sounded like a familiar word that evoked laughter from an unlettered congregation.
Farewell to Ephesus
Acts 20:17
Paul resolved to tarry briefly at Miletus so that the church leaders in Ephesus might come and bid him farewell. So, after he and the others in his party had disembarked, he sent a message summoning the Ephesian elders. Not only did they come, but because they knew Paul’s desire to move on quickly to Jerusalem, they undoubtedly came as quickly as possible. Yet for Paul, it was nevertheless a delay in his plans.
Pondering a Question
Why did Paul bypass Ephesus?
Miletus lay on the southern coast of the Latmian Gulf. The quickest trip to Ephesus went twelve miles (19 km.) by boat across the gulf and then twenty-five miles (40 km.) by road.46 Therefore, the journey of Paul’s messenger to Ephesus, the summoning and gathering of elders, the return journey by the whole group, and the time of fellowship preceding Paul’s departure must have occupied several days. Five is a reasonable estimate.47
Paul would have spared these other men from time-consuming travel if he had visited Ephesus himself. Yet he had sailed right past it. Why? He understood perfectly well that a personal visit would have brought a flood of people expecting individual attention and that refusal to satisfy any of them might have left bitter feelings. So, to see just the elders was a better solution, for it would actually allow him to depart sooner.
After the elders arrived, Paul delivered a speech designed to protect them from dangers that would certainly arise in the future. The chief danger he foresaw was that false teachers would seek to draw believers away from the truth they had received from Paul. Paul therefore spent much of his speech urging them to maintain their respect and love for Paul himself, the apostle God used to bring them the gospel of the Kingdom.
A Needful Reminder of Their Debt to Paul
Acts 20:18-21
He started off by reviewing the many proofs of his love for them. He compiled an impressive list of all the sacrifices and sufferings he had endured for their sake.
- During the whole period of his stay in the city, he had given his time entirely to ministry, remaining with them "at all seasons." He had not abandoned them for any vacation or any time of seclusion or any personal quest. He had fully devoted himself to serving their welfare.
- He had served them with all humility of mind. Despite the high rank he could have attained in the world if he had pursued a career within the circles of Jewish government, and despite the high rank he did attain in the work of God, he never demanded to be treated as their superior. He dealt with them as close friends. His purpose in refusing to stand aloof was to show them the meekness of Christ.
- in order to help them, he was willing to shed many tears. He made himself vulnerable to grief, whether the grief of disappointment when men turned against the truth, or the grief of pain when men abused him.
- As a pioneer missionary, he exposed himself to soul-endangering temptations that he might have avoided if he had taken a safer course in life—if, for example, he had remained sheltered within the strong church at Antioch. On the front lines of evangelism he was continually tempted to shirk his duty. The easy choice always beckoning to him in the midst of battle was deliverance by compromise, or by keeping silent, or by running away. But he always stood firm in doing right.
- He met continual opposition from the Jews, whose hatred carried them to the point of conspiring against his life.
- He "kept back nothing." That is, he did not spare himself from hard work, but was diligent in using every available method to win souls. He taught in the synagogue. He gave public lectures. He went from house to house.
- The message he preached to both Jews and Greeks was by its very nature unpopular. He gave them the true gospel, which set two requirements for salvation: repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
The hard part for Greeks was the call to repentance. The Greeks were a proud people who indulged themselves in sensual excess with hardly any sense of shame. For them, the call to repentance made no sense, because chronic sin had worn away their conscience. We find the same indifference to sin in the contemporary world, especially in Europe, America, and other places where there was once a respect for the Bible.
The hard part of the gospel for Jews was the call to acknowledge Jesus as Lord and Christ. The Jews had heard through grapevines rooted in Jerusalem that Jesus was a man with strange powers. But they decided He was a sorcerer, and, since He could not save Himself from a disgraceful death on a cross, they viewed Him with contempt. The Jews did not want a Messiah who made a public spectacle of His failure to challenge and overcome their Roman rulers.
Getting Practical
Guidelines for every man of God
Nowhere in Scripture do we find a better description of the right philosophy of ministry. A man of God fails in his role if he does not take Paul as his example.
- Like Paul, he must give all his time to God's work, except for needed rest.
- He must make himself nobody, so that he might get close to all the nobodies who need Christ.
- He must never draw back from ministry to save his own feelings from depths of sorrow.
- To rescue the lost, he must if necessary go into places fraught with perilous temptation.
- He must always work hard, not complaining about the cost to self.
- He must risk the wrath of evil men.
- He must uphold truth whether or not it provokes a backlash of enraged unbelief.
These seven requirements light the sure way to great reward. Basically, a servant of God must decide whether he wants untroubled happiness now, in this world, or higher standing later, in the world to come (Luke 6:20-26).
Future Afflictions
Acts 20:22-24
Yet after offering this recital of all he had endured in Ephesus, Paul was not done recommending himself to the Ephesian elders. He knew that enemies of the truth would try to subvert the believers in Ephesus by attacking Paul. They would chisel away at his reputation in an attempt to discredit his doctrine. Perhaps the mudslinging had already begun. Therefore, as a tactic for defending the spiritual welfare of the believers in Ephesus, Paul did not hesitate to exalt himself in their eyes.
He told them next that his sufferings for Christ were not over. He would soon go to Jerusalem, where he expected to find trouble. In every city he visited recently, the Holy Spirit had shown him that he would fall into "bonds and afflictions." In other words, he would be persecuted and thrown into jail. The testimony of the Spirit had perhaps come to him personally, as he waited upon the mind of God, or perhaps had come to him through prophets in the church. In apostolic days, the Lord gifted certain believers with the ability to make predictions.
Getting Practical
Foretelling the future
With a completed Bible in its possession, the modern church no longer has individuals with the gift of prophecy in this sense, yet under special circumstances, when there is a compelling reason, the Holy Spirit may still give a believer or body of believers some hint of what lies ahead. For example, America, in its growing fascination with terrible vice, seems to be taking irreversible steps down a path that will surely lead someday to divine judgment.
Yet to say so requires great caution, for we do not want any unstable person to think that God has appointed him to stand in a prophet's shoes and call down suffering upon sinners. No, God wants His people to embody nourishing love, not bloody hatred. Jesus said, "Love your enemies" (Matt. 5:44), an obligation we can hardly fulfill if we are preoccupied with loudly condemning them.
The only person with enough wisdom to perform judgment in a way that sets merciful limits and protects the innocent is God Himself.
Yet Paul was not deterred by all the glimpses of future sufferings. He intended to push on to Jerusalem, for two reasons.
- He was "bound in the spirit." Like the similar expressions we have already discussed or will discuss later (Acts 18:25 ; 19:21; 21:4), this one must refer to the Holy Spirit rather than to man’s spirit. From the Holy Spirit, Paul derived a clear sense that God wanted him to make another trip to Jerusalem. After all, to deliver the substantial gift that he and his companions were carrying for the poor in that city was surely God’s will. Likewise, it was surely God’s will for Paul himself to present the gift. Since everybody knew that he was the apostle to the gentiles, no one receiving money from his hands could deny that gentiles must have been the chief contributors. The gift when finally distributed to the needy would therefore strengthen the bond between Jewish and gentile believers.
- He attached no value to his own life. From his perspective, the overriding objective was to finish his "course with joy"—that is, with the satisfaction that at every step along his path he had not veered from the work that God had given him to do.
Pondering a Question
Why did the Spirit warn Paul of the trouble he would create for himself by going to Jerusalem?
It has been much debated whether Paul's return to Jerusalem was obedient to God's will. As we will see as the story develops, the Holy Spirit continued to warn him that he was on a course bound for trouble. We will see also that Paul insisted on misinterpreting the warnings he was receiving. Yes, God wanted him to lead the party taking a gift for the poor in Jerusalem but, once inside the city, to take reasonable precautions against backlash from his enemies. Later, we will explain why Paul thought himself justified in proceeding without concern for his safety.
Formal Transfer of Responsibility
Acts 20:25-27
In his speech to the elders, Paul proceeded to reveal that he would never see them again. The news surely brought them deep sadness of heart. No doubt their great respect for him was coupled with great love. He was, after all, their spiritual father. We can imagine that although Paul’s tone throughout his speech was never harsh but tender, it was tender especially here, when he speaks of his departure as irreversible, for he loved them even more than they loved him in return.
Then Paul declared to the Ephesian elders that he had fully met his responsibility toward them. No man in Ephesus could blame Paul for failing to bring him the gospel. Therefore, the blood of no lost man stained Paul's hands. Paul summarized his obligation to the believers in momentous words, full of instruction for church leaders ever since. He said that he had "not shunned to declare . . . all the counsel of God."
Getting Practical
A right balance in teaching
Paul's understanding of his obligation as an evangelist and teacher reflects the command of Christ that the church should teach men "all things whatsoever I have commanded you" (Matt. 28:20). Any Christian leader who is selective in what he presents, including only his favorite topics and omitting others, will give an unbalanced picture of the truth. An unbalanced picture is often a false picture, because no portion of Scripture can be properly interpreted apart from consideration of all Scripture. In other words, imbalance easily strays into heresy.
We could cite many examples. Too much focus on divine sovereignty loses sight of human responsibility and becomes hypercalvinism. Neglect of divine sovereignty exaggerates man's role in salvation and leads to Arminianism. Strong teaching on salvation by faith, if not balanced with strong teaching on works as evidence of faith, slides into easy believism. An emphasis on works, on the other hand, quickly sours into Pharisaism. Leaving prophecy out of the pulpit creates unrealistic hopes for the future, such as expecting the whole world to be converted to Christ before He returns. Preaching nothing but prophecy distracts believers from practical Christian work. And so on.
Balance is the key to fruitfulness. The best way for a church to grow is to fulfill its responsibility to teach the whole counsel of God. The Lord is certain to entrust spiritual babes to any church that will provide them with the care and feeding He desires.
The Coming of Grievous Wolves
Acts 20:28-31
Now Paul turned to his greatest concern. The reason he had been exhorting the Ephesian elders never to forsake his leadership is that he knew false teachers would try to seize leadership in the future. He called them "grievous wolves," an allusion to the Sermon on the Mount, where Jesus characterizes false prophets as wolves in sheep's clothing (Matt. 7:15). Their purpose, Paul said, would be to devour the flock. In other words, they would seek to prey upon believers, extinguishing their spiritual life in order to feed their own appetites, whether greed or lust or love of power.
Paul said these predators would arise from two sources. Some would "enter in among you." That is, they would come into the church for the express purpose of feeding their own vile hunger. Even when they first associated with believers and joined the church, they would be hypocrites with evil designs. Other predators would arise "of your own selves." Paul meant that they would start off in the church with a sincere profession of faith, but would eventually prove their faith defective by turning aside from the truth and taking others with them.
How should the church defend itself from wolves? Paul said that responsibility for guarding the flock fell primarily on the shepherds, such as the elders he was addressing. They held the office of overseer by appointment of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit gave them their position mainly for one purpose—that they might guard the flock from error by feeding them truth. Theirs was a solemn responsibility, for the safety of the flock was dear to the heart of God. Jesus had purchased His people at the price of His own blood. It was obvious that any shepherd whose carelessness allowed wolves to decimate the flock would face an angry Judge.
To assure their success in protecting the flock, Paul advised two measures: to watch and to remember. By "watch," he meant that they should keep a sharp lookout for wolves, just as a conscientious shepherd always keeps one eye on the shadowy margin of the flock. By "remember," he meant that they should never forget his warnings. For three years he had warned them with tears. Upon hearing these words in the context of Paul's whole speech, the elders no doubt understood that he was particularly concerned about three distinct perils: (1) that they might become evil workers themselves, or (2) that they might tolerate evil workers, or (3) that they might fail to give the flock of God adequate feeding by means of teaching and personal example.
Further Defense of His Ministry
Acts 20:32-35
Paul concluded his speech by bestowing a final blessing and a final exhortation. The blessing was a prayer on their behalf. After serving as their spiritual father for many years, he relinquished his role and gave them instead to the care of God and God's Word. Commending them to God was a blessing because he knew that they were safe in God's hands. As the fountainhead of all grace, God could be trusted to bring them to perfection. Through the Scriptures, which Paul called "the word of his grace," God would build them up and prepare them for an eternal inheritance.
Paul's final exhortation is a bit surprising. He might have dealt with many other issues, but he focused on the importance of working hard at a mundane occupation. He did not want the Ephesian elders to become so spiritual that they lapsed into laziness. Only by pursuing a livelihood could they acquire resources to support the weak. By "the weak," he was referring to children and poor widows and others who were unable to support themselves. He reminded them that when he ministered in Ephesus, he himself did not forsake his trade as a leatherworker. He kept laboring with his hands so that he would not need to take anyone else's money.
The principle underlying his unselfish diligence in earning his own bread was expressed by Jesus: "It is more blessed to give than to receive." We are indebted to the Book of Acts for transmitting this wonderful saying to us, for we do not find it in the Gospels.
Getting Practical
A wonderful prospect
The New Testament has transmitted to us everything we need to know about Jesus’ earthly ministry, but think what joy will come to us in heaven as we learn all that He said and did!
Paul urged the men standing about him to make Jesus' words the motto of their lives. He wanted them to pursue godliness, and the essence of godliness is not to please self, but to please others.
Delving Deeper
The Pauline style
There can be no question as to the authenticity of Paul’s farewell speech to the Ephesians. It cannot be a fictional passage concocted by the writer of Acts. Scholars have shown that it teems with language and concepts characteristic of the Pauline epistles.48 Rather than list all the parallels here, we will encourage any interested reader to consult the sources we have referenced, all of which are readily available.
A Tearful Parting
Acts 20:36-38
After Paul finished speaking, he knelt down with the others and prayed. We are probably correct if we picture him fervently asking God to surround them with protection and encourage them with blessing. Then the moment that they all wished to avoid finally came. Paul was ready to leave. Here were grown men capable of stern self-control, but when faced with the departure of their spiritual mentor and father, they wept sorely, with deep and genuine grief. They fell on Paul's neck, kissed him, and said goodbye. They treated him as their dearest loved one, and indeed he was, for at great personal cost he brought them the way to eternal life. They owed him everything, and they knew it. The chief cause of their pain was Paul's revelation that they would never see him again. He spoke truly, for he never returned to Asia Minor or Greece, the fields where he labored for so many years. In their reluctance to let him go, the elders undoubtedly followed him step by step to the ship and kept him in sight until he sailed away.
The Greek word translated "accompanied" suggests a larger helpful role than merely walking beside him; specifically, an effort to make sure that he had all the food and other provisions needed for the journey.49
It was a hard moment for Paul. Still, he was not a friendless passenger. As he waved goodbye to the men on shore, Luke and all the church delegates and perhaps others as well remained by his side.
Getting Practical
Fatherly love as the basis of good ministry
When we read Paul's letters, we may gain an entirely wrong impression of Paul. Some passages have a severe tone, suggesting that in face-to-face dealings with people he may have been rather forbidding. Other passages are built on an intricate train of thought that escapes many readers. These suggest that he may have been a detached intellectual rather than an outgoing person with an easy and winsome manner. But we see the true Paul in his farewell to the Ephesians. He brought them to tears and received their embraces and kisses. Some of this emotional display was a reflection of common practice among ancient Mediterranean peoples, who were far more demonstrative than many people today. But Luke would not have commented on the farewell if it was merely customary. It required comment precisely because the emotion exceeded what was customary. The writer wanted to show that the Ephesians loved Paul with a great love. The deeply moving scene of Paul's departure shows us that Paul in reality was not cold or cerebral, but exceedingly warm and affectionate, like any good father.
There is an obvious application to pastors and Christian leaders today. Many enter the pastorate with the idea that whether they succeed depends on their ability to sermonize, or create programs that will attract interest in the church, or manage a building program, or challenge the saints to soulwinning, or raise the bar of spirituality. Really, far more important than all these things is the ability to love people. A pastor may be deficient in many ways, but if he loves the flock with all his heart, they will love him in return and give him their loyalty. If he sets an example of loving them despite their failings, they will love him despite his failings and support his ministry, provided his failings do not go so far as actual wickedness.
Delving Deeper
The unnamed brothers
The letter was carried to its destination by Titus (2 Cor. 8:16–17, 23–24)4 in the company of an unnamed brother well-regarded by all the churches (2 Cor. 8:18–19) and a second unnamed brother (2 Cor. 8:22–23). Tradition says that one of these brothers that Scripture leaves anonymous was Luke.5