This explanatory comment is followed in the next verse by a note of triumph which might well be written across

the first four verses of Acts 20, viz, `Thanks be unto God, Which always causeth us to triumph in Christ' (2 Cor.

Leaving Troas, the apostle goes on into Macedonia, of which Philippi was the chief city. Although his heart was

warmed by the affection of the Philippians, he writes in 2 Corinthians 7:

`When we were come into Macedonia, our flesh had no rest (see "no rest", 2 Cor. 2:13) but we were troubled on

every side; without were fightings, within were fears' (2 Cor. 7:5).

During this three months' stay in Greece (Acts 20:3), the apostle wrote his wonderful epistle to the Romans, with

which his first series of inspired epistles closes. Towards the end of this epistle, we read:

`Whensoever I take my journey into Spain, I will come to you ... But now I go unto Jerusalem to minister unto

the saints. For it hath pleased them of Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain contribution for the poor saints

which are at Jerusalem' (Rom. 15:24-26).

In verses 30 and 31 of this same chapter of Romans, Paul manifests his apprehension concerning `them that do

not believe in Judæa'. This apprehension was only too well founded, for he was just on the point of embarking for

Cenchrea, the Corinthian sea-port, when a Jewish plot to waylay him was discovered. Lewin's remark here is worth

recording, even though Alford feels it to be inconsistent with what is said in Acts 20:4 :

`Paul eluded his adversaries by a change of route. He determined, instead of crossing the sea direct, to go round

by Macedonia (The reader would be well advised to consult the map here). The better to evade a watchful foe,

Paul and his friends divided themselves into two companies, and it was arranged that Timothy, Sopater of Berea,

Aristarchus, Secundus, Gaius of Derbe, Tychicus and Trophimus should sail to Troas, the common resting-place,

and there await the apostle's arrival, and that Paul himself, and Luke and Titus with Jason should make a forced

march by land up to and through Macedonia and rejoin the others at Troas'.

Speaking of these same events, Farrar writes:

`Of the seven converts who accompanied St. Paul, Sosipater son of Pyrrhus, a Berean, Aristarchus and Secundus

of Thessalonica, Gaius of Derbe, Timothy of Lystra, Tychicus and Trophimus of Ephesus and Luke - all except

the latter (i.e Luke) left him apparently at Philippi and went on to Troas to await him there'.

Farrar's view seems more in accord with all the facts that we possess, but the matter is not important enough to

debate. Whatever the truth may be, some arrived at Troas and `tarried for us' (says Luke) - `and we sailed away

from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread, and came unto them to Troas in five days' (Acts 20:6). We have

no information as to whether the apostle actually observed the feast of unleavened bread or not. Probably, being in

Philippi, he did not, although in another community, if the influence of Jewish upbringing had been strong, he would

have had no scruples in doing so.

The journey from Troas to Neapolis had only taken two days on a former occasion (Acts 16:11). It would seem,

therefore, that the wind must have been contrary in this case, as we read that it took five days to make the return

journey. It has been supposed that from Neapolis, or at least from Troas, to Patara, Paul chartered a vessel, for it not

only waited for him at Assos, but sailed by Ephesus, and waited for the elders at Miletus.

The famous letter written by Pliny the younger from Bithynia to the Emperor Trajan some 50 years after Paul's

visit to Troas, provides an interesting sidelight on Luke's inspired record. Concerning the early Christians, Pliny

writes :

`They were wont to meet together on a stated day before it was light, and sing among themselves alternately a

hymn to Christ as God, and bind themselves by an oath not to commit any wickedness, but on the contrary, not

to be guilty of theft, or robbery, or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor to deny a pledge committed to them:

and when these things were ended it was their custom to separate, and then to come together again to a meal

which they ate in common without any disorder'.