the motives and details of a journey, which he announced to the brethren of the church at Ephesus, as absolutely necessary for him to perform. This also may have been concealed for the same reason, which has been conjectured to have caused the visit to be so short, as would seem from the manner in which it is noticed. From Jerusalem he went down to Antioch, by what route is not specified,—but probably by way of Caesarea and the sea.
"xviii. 22. Caesarea. A town on the sea-coast. [See the note on p. 173.] [Greek: Anabas],
'and having gone up.' Whither? Some commentators, as Camerar., De Dieu,
Wolf, Calov., Heumann, Doddridge, Thaleman, Beck, and Kuinoel, refer it to
Caesarea. But this requires the confirmation of examples. And we must take for
granted that the city was built high above the port, (which is not likely,) or that the
church was so situated; which would be extremely frigid. Neither is it certain that
there was a church. Besides, how can the expression [Greek: katabainô] be proper, as used
of traveling from a seaport-town, like Caesarea, to Antioch? I therefore prefer the
mode of interpretation adopted by some ancient and many modern commentators,
as Beza, Grotius, Mor., Rosenmueller, Reichard, Schott, Heinrichs, and others, who
supply [Greek: eis Hierosolyma]. This may indeed seem somewhat harsh; yet it must be remembered
that not a few things are so in the New Testament; and [Greek: anabainô] is there
often used absolutely of going up to Jerusalem, and [Greek: katabainô] of going from thence.
Nor is this unexampled in the classical writers. Xenophon uses the word in the
very same sense, of those going from Greece to the capital of Persia. See Anab. 1,
1, 2. Hist. 2, 1. 9, 10. An. 1, 4, 12. Hist. 4, 1, 2. 1, 5, 1. 1, 4, 2. and many other
passages referred to by Sturz in his Lex. Xenoph. in voce. Besides, as the words
[Greek: eis Hierosolyma] have just preceded, it is not very harsh to repeat them. Kuinoel, indeed,
and some others, treat those words as not genuine; but their opinion rests on
mere suspicion, unsupported by any proof." (Bloomf. Annot. Vol. IV. p. 607.)
From the very brief and general manner in which the incidents
of this visit of Paul to the eastern continent are commemorated,
the apostolic historian is left to gather nothing but the
most naked circumstances, of the route pursued, and from the results,
it is but fair to conclude that nothing of consequence happened
to the apostle, as his duties consisted merely in a review
and completion of the work he had gone over before. Luke evidently
did not accompany Paul in this Asian journey, and he
therefore only states the general direction of the apostle's course,
without a single particular. He says that Paul, after making
some some stay in Antioch,—where, no doubt he greatly comforted
the hearts of the brethren, by the glad tidings of the triumphs
of Christ in Europe,—went in regular order over the regions of
Galatia, and Phrygia, everywhere confirming the disciples. Beyond
this, no incident whatever is preserved; yet here great
amplification of the sacred record might be made, from the
amusing narrative of that venerable monkish story-teller, who
assumes the name of Abdias Babylonius. But from the specimens
of his narrative already given, in the lives of Andrew and
