Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 18:22
And when he had landed at Caesarea, and gone up, and saluted the church, he went down to Antioch.
22. Cesarea ] (See Act 8:40.) This was the home of Philip the Evangelist, and we may suppose that St Paul would make the success of his distant mission known to his fellow-labourer. He made the house of Philip his home in Csarea on a later occasion (Act 21:8).
gone up ] i.e. from the coast town to the city of Jerusalem.
and saluted the church ] This is a very brief notice of a visit to the centre of all church life and action at this time. And we cannot but be surprised that there is no mention (as in Act 14:27) of a gathering of the church, and of the report of what the great missionary had been enabled to effect. Dr Farrar ( St Paul, ii. 5) suggests that St Paul met with a cold and ungracious reception, and that the position which he assumed towards the Law in his preaching to Gentile converts, raised him up adversaries among the Christians in Jerusalem, who were naturally zealous for the Law. It is certainly strange that even the name of the city is not mentioned, nor are we told a word about the fulfilment of the vow. For some reason or other, the Apostle hastened, as soon as his salutations were ended, to the more congenial society of the Christians at Antioch who had rejoiced over his success on a former visit.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
At Cesarea – See the notes on Act 8:40.
And gone up – From the ship.
And saluted the church – The church at Jerusalem. This was Pauls main design; and though it is not distinctly specified, yet the whole narrative implies that he went there before returning to Antioch. The word saluted implies that he expressed for them his tender affection and regard.
To Antioch – In Syria. See the notes on Act 11:19.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 22. Landed at Caesarea] This must have been Caesarea in Palestine.
Gone up] To Jerusalem, though the name is not mentioned: but this is a common form of speech in the evangelists, Jerusalem being always meant when this expression was used; for the word , to go up, is often used absolutely, to signify, to go to Jerusalem: e.g. GO ye UP unto this feast; I GO not UP yet, Joh 7:8. But when his brethren were GONE UP, then WENT he also UP unto the feast, Joh 7:10. There were certain Greeks-that CAME UP to worship, Joh 12:20. St. Paul himself uses a similar form of expression. There are yet but twelve days since I WENT UP to Jerusalem, for to worship, Ac 24:11. So all parts of England are spoken of as being below London: so we talk of going up to London; and people in London talk of going down to the country.
Saluted the Church] That is, the Church at Jerusalem, called emphatically THE CHURCH, because it was the FIRST Church-the MOTHER, or APOSTOLIC Church; and from it all other Christian Churches proceeded: those in Galatia, Philippi, Thessalonica, Corinth, Ephesus, Rome, &c. Therefore, even this last was only a daughter Church, when in its purest state.
Went down to Antioch.] That is, Antioch in Syria, as the word is generally to be understood when without addition, so Caesarea is always to be understood Caesarea in Palestine, when without the addition of Philippi.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Caesarea; not that Caesarea that was in Syria, but that which was in Palestine, called Caesarea Stratonis; and which was the safest way to Jerusalem; for the way by Joppa, though shorter, was accounted more dangerous. The church; either the church of Caesarea in his journey, or that at Jerusalem at his journeys end, which for its populousness might be called eminently, the church.
Antioch; that Antioch that was in Syria.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
22. And when he had landed atCsareawhere he left the vessel.
and gone upthat is, toJerusalem.
and saluted the churchInthese few words does the historian despatch the apostle’s FOURTHVISIT TO JERUSALEMafter his conversion. The expression “going up” isinvariably used of a journey to the metropolis; and thence henaturally “went down to Antioch.” Perhaps the vesselreached too late for the feast, as he seems to have done nothing inJerusalem beyond “saluting the Church,” and privatelyoffering the sacrifice with which his vow (Ac18:18) would conclude. It is left to be understood, as on hisarrival from his first missionary tour, that “when he was come,and had gathered the church together, he rehearsed all that God haddone with him” (Ac 14:27)on this his second missionary journey.
Ac18:23-21:16. PAUL’STHIRD AND LASTMISSIONARY JOURNEYHEVISITS THE CHURCHESOF GALATIA ANDPHRYGIA.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And when he had landed at Caesarea,…. This was Caesarea Stratonis, formerly called Strato’s tower: it would have been nearest for the apostle to have landed at Joppa, in order to go to Jerusalem, but that haven was a dangerous one; this was the safest, and which therefore Herod had repaired at a vast expense, and in honour of Caesar had called it by this name: of the port at Caesarea, and what a convenient and commodious one, as it was made by Herod, Josephus i gives a particular account, and who often calls this place Caesarea, , “Caesarea by the sea” k; and in other Jewish l writings mention is made of this place as a sea port, and of , “the shore of the sea of Caesarea”: Josephus m sometimes calls it the port Sebastus, or Augustus, it being, as before observed, made by Herod, and so called in honour of Augustus Caesar; and in another place n, Sebastus the port of Caesarea: according to Jerom o, or a writer under his name, this was neither Caesarea Philippi, which indeed it could not be, that being an inland town; nor Caesarea formerly called Strato’s tower, but a third Caesarea, the metropolis of Cappadocia: in which he must be mistaken, seeing that was no sea port, and the apostle could not be said to land there; nor did it lie in the way to Jerusalem from Ephesus; but this city was in Phenice, and lay between Joppa and Dora; which cities were maritime ones, but very disagreeable havens, because of the vehement strong winds from Africa: which rolling up the sand out of the sea upon the shore, would not admit of a quiet station p; wherefore the apostle chose to land here, and not at either of the said ports;
and gone up; not to Caesarea, but to Jerusalem, from thence, which lay higher; and going to and from these places, is signified by a going up and down, Ac 9:30. Moreover, the apostle had told the Ephesians, that he must go and keep the feast in Jerusalem, as he undoubtedly did: and yet if this does not refer to his going up thither, it will not be easy to observe that he went thither at all before his return to Ephesus; and besides, to suppose him to go from Caesarea to Antioch, was all one as to go back to Ephesus; and so to go, as one observes, by the same place to Jerusalem, into which he promised, in his return from Jerusalem, to come again, if God would:
and saluted the church; at Jerusalem, the mother church:
he went down to Antioch; in Syria, from whence he first set out.
i Antiqu. l. 15. c. 9. sect. 6. & de Bello Jud. l. 1. c. 21. sect. 5, 6, 7. k Ib. de Bello l. 1. c. 3. sect. 5. & l. 3. c. 8. sect. 1. & l. 7. c. 1. sect. 3. c. 2. sect. 1. l Midrash Kohelet, fol. 71. 4. & 82. 2. m Antiqu. l. 17. c. 5. sect. 1. n De Bello Jud. l. 1. c. 31. sect. 3. o De locis Hebraicis, fol. 96. A. p Joseph. Antiqu. l. 15. c. 9. sect. 6.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
He went up and saluted the church ( ). The language could refer to the church in Caesarea where Paul had just landed, except for several things. The going up (, second aorist active participle of ) is the common way of speaking of going to Jerusalem which was up from every direction save from Hebron. It was the capital of Palestine as people in England today speaking of going up to London. Besides “he went down to Antioch” ( , second aorist active indicative of ) which language suits better leaving Jerusalem than Caesarea. Moreover, there was no special reason for this trip to Caesarea, but to Jerusalem it was different. Here Paul saluted the church in the fourth of his five visits after his conversion (Acts 9:26; Acts 11:30; Acts 15:4; Acts 18:22; Acts 21:17). The apostles may or may not have been in the city, but Paul had friends in Jerusalem now. Apparently he did not tarry long, but returned to Antioch to make a report of his second mission tour as he had done at the close of the first when he and Barnabas came back (14:26-28). He had started on this tour with Silas and had picked up Timothy and Luke, but came back alone. He had a great story to tell.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “And when he had landed at Caesarea,” (kai katelthon eis Kaisareian) “And when they had come down into Caesarea,” by the seaside, from the highland of the coastline, at the harbor.
2) “And gone up and saluted the church,” (anabas kai aspasamenos ten ekklesian) “Going up and greeting the church,” or having greeted the church at Caesarea, where Cornelius and his saved household resided, and where Philip the evangelist and his daughters, who prophesied, also resided, Act 10:1-2; Act 21:8-9. It is also believed that he went up to Jerusalem before going to Antioch.
3) “He went down into Antioch.” (katebe eis Antiocheian) “He went down into Antioch, of Syria, from which he had been sent out on his two extended missionary tours. Act 13:1-4; Act 15:35-40. This concluded his second missionary tour.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
−
22. When he came down to Caesarea. Though Luke saith in a word that Paul saluted the Church at Jerusalem, yet is it certain that he was drawn thither with some great necessity. And yet we may gather by this text that he stayed not long at Jerusalem, peradventure because things fell not out as he would. Moreover, he declareth that his journey in his return was not idle or barren, in that he saith that he strengthened all the disciples, undoubtedly not without great pains-taking, because he was enforced to go hither and thither, and oft to turn out of his way; for this word [ καθεξης ] doth signify a continual course. Now, we have already declared ( Act 9:36) in what respect those be called disciples who had given their names to Christ, and professed the name of Christ; to wit, because there is no godliness without true instruction. They had, indeed, their pastors under whom they might profit. Yet the greater Paul’s authority was, and the more excellent spirit he had given him, so they were not a little strengthened by his by them, especially seeing he was the chief work-master in the founding of all these churches.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
19.
AT CAESAREA. Act. 18:22 a.
Act. 18:22 a And when he had landed at Caesarea, he went up and saluted the church,
Act. 18:22 a Landing at the seaport he went up to the church in Caesarea and saluted the brethren. He probably saw Philip the evangelist and his gifted daughters, Cornelius and many others.
20.
IN ANTIOCH. Act. 18:22 b.
Act. 18:22 b and went down to Antioch.
Act. 18:22 b Here he arrived after some three years absence and having traveled more than twenty-six hundred miles. Ah! What a report he had to give and what an experience of reunion it must have been. This concludes the second missionary journey.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(22) And when he had landed at Csarea.It is obvious that a great deal is covered by the short record of this verse. In the absence of any data in the Acts for settling the question, we may possibly refer to some casualty in this voyage, one of the three shipwrecks of 2Co. 11:25. At Csarea, we may believe, he would probably renew his intercourse with Philip the Evangelist. At Jerusalem there would be the usual gathering of the Church, the completion of his Nazarite vow in the Temple, a friendly welcome on the part of St. James and the elders of the Church. Peter was probably at Antioch (Gal. 2:11), or possibly at Babylon (1Pe. 5:13). To this visit to Antioch we may probably refer the scene which St. Paul narrates in Gal. 2:11-14. His long absence from Antioch had left the Judaising party time to gather strength and organise a new attack on the freedom of the Gentiles, and they brought a fresh pressure to bear upon the element of instability which still lingered in St. Peters character, and he had not been able to resist it. It is, however, possible that the incident may have occurred before Paul and Silas had left Antioch. (See Note on Act. 15:39-40.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
22. Cesarea (See notes on Act 8:40.) Gone up To the English reader it would appear that these words express Paul’s going from the port up into the city of Cesarea, instead of his going up from Cesarea to Jerusalem. So it appeared to earlier readers; for that construction is the probable reason with the ancient copyists for leaving out the first clause of Act 18:21. They recognised no actual visit to Jerusalem, and so blotted out Paul’s expressed intention to visit it. But the following phrase, went down to Antioch, would not be used of a journey from Cesarea to Antioch. As ancient capitals were built on high grounds for purposes of defence, the phrase go up to them became stereo-typed. (See Rev 20:9, and note on Act 11:2.) This assumes that the clause in Act 18:21 is genuine, and that Luke presupposes that this going up is the fulfilment of that promise.
Saluted the church We infer that nothing of consequence, to Paul personally or to the Church generally, took place when Paul made this visit to Jerusalem.
Went down to Antioch The end, as the beginning, of his second missionary tour of somewhat less than three years.
IV. PAUL’S THIRD MISSION from Antioch to and through Ephesus and Greece, thence back by Asian and Syrian coasts to Jerusalem, Act 18:23 to Act 21:17.
About autumn of A.D. 54, leaving Antioch, Paul commences revisitation of the country of Galatia and Phrygia, confirming the Churches. Thence, after spending a ministry of three years in Ephesus, he journeys through Macedonia into southern Greece, where he spends three winter months at his farthest point, the city of Corinth. Returning, he passes through Macedonia, and, embarking at Philippi, crosses over to Troas. Thence by sea he skirts by the coasts of Asia Minor, through the AEgean isles, and, crossing the Mediterranean, comes to Tyre, Ptolemais, and Cesarea, and thence by land to Jerusalem. It occupied a period not far, more or less, from four years.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And when he had landed at Caesarea, he went up and saluted the church, and went down to Antioch.’
Landing at Caesarea ‘he went up and saluted the church’. This almost certainly indicates that he went up to the mother church at Jerusalem where he would complete his vow, rather than just to the church of Caesarea. He would not be seen as ‘going up’ to the church in Caesarea. But Jerusalem is no longer important to Luke and he makes this clear by dismissing it with a half reference. He is no longer interested in Jerusalem.
‘And went down to Antioch.’ Paul then returned to Syrian Antioch. His long second missionary journey was over. This visit to Jerusalem is confirmed by the ‘going up’ and the ‘going down’ which are technical terms. Attending the church in Caesarea would not be seen as a ‘going up’. Going from Caesarea to Antioch would not be seen as a ‘going down’. These were technical terms.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Act 18:22-23 . Fourth journey to Jerusalem , according to chap. 9, 11, 15.
From Ephesus Paul sailed to Caesarea ( i.e. Caesarea Stratonis , the best and most frequented harbour in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem; not, as Jerome, Beda, and Lyra suppose, Caesarea in Cappadocia , against which the very word serves as a proof), and from thence he went up to Jerusalem, whence he proceeded down to Antioch.
] namely, to Jerusalem . So Erasmus, Calvin, Beza, Grotius, Bengel, Rosenmller, Heinrichs, Olshausen, Neander, Anger ( de temp. rat. p. 60 f.), de Wette, Wieseler, Baumgarten, Lange, Ewald, and others. Others refer it to Caesarea (so Calovius, Wolf, Kuinoel, Schott, and several others), and think that the word is purposely chosen, either because the city was situated high up from the shore (Kuinoel and others), or because the church had its place of meeting in an elevated locality (de Dieu and others). The reference to Caesarea would be necessary, if . . ., Act 18:21 , were not genuine; for then the reference to Jerusalem would have no ground assigned for it in the context. But with the genuineness of that asseveration, Act 18:21 , the historical connection requires that . . . . . should contain the fulfilment of it. In favour of this we may appeal both to the relation in meaning of the following to this , and to the circumstance that it would be very strangely in contrast to the hurried brevity with which the whole journey is despatched in Act 18:22 , if Luke should have specially indicated in the case of Caesarea not merely the arrival at it, but also the going up (?) to it. In spite of that hurried brevity, with which the author scarcely touches on this journey to Jerusalem, and mentions in regard to the residence there no intercourse with the Jews, no visit to the temple, and the like, but only a salutation of the church, [87] the fidelity of the apostle to the Jewish festivals has been regarded as the design of the narrative (Schneckenburger), and the narrative itself as invented (Zeller, Hausrath; comp. Holtzmann, p. 695). The identification of the journey with that mentioned in Gal 2:1 (Wieseler) is incompatible with the aim of the apostle in adducing his journeys to Jerusalem in that passage. See on Galatians. Nor can the encounter with Peter, Gal 2:11 , belong to the residence of Paul at that time in Antioch (Neander, Wieseler, Lange, Baumgarten).
. . . .] certainly, also, Lycaonia (Act 14:21 ), although Luke does not expressly name it. On , comp. Act 14:22 , Act 15:32 ; Act 15:41 .
[87] The so short residence of the apostle in Jerusalem is sufficiently intelligible from the certainly even at that time (comp. Act 21:21 ff.) very excited temper of the Judaists, with whom Paul now recognised it as incompatible with his more extended apostolic mission to meddle. See Ewald, p. 503 f.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
22 And when he had landed at Caesarea, and gone up, and saluted the church, he went down to Antioch.
Ver. 22. And gone up ] sc. To Jerusalem, which stood on high in respect of Coelesyria and the seacoasts.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
22. ] To Jerusalem : for (1) it would be out of the question to suppose that Paul made the long detour by Csarea only to go up into the town from the beach , as supposed by most of those who omit . in Act 18:21 , and salute the disciples , and (2) the expression ., which suits a journey from Jerusalem (ch. Act 11:27 ), would not apply to one from Csarea.
. . .] The payment of his vow is not mentioned, partly because it is understood from the mere mention of the vow itself, Act 18:18 , partly, perhaps, because it was privately done, and with no view to attract notice as in ch. 21.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Act 18:22 . ., i.e. , Csarea Stratonis, i.e. , came down from the high sea to the coast, the shore, cf. Act 27:5 (Act 21:3 ), so in Homer, and also of coming down from the high land to the coast, see Grimm-Thayer, sub v. , i.e. , to Jerusalem, the usual expression for a journey to the capital, cf. Act 11:2 , Act 15:2 ( b ), Act 25:1 ; Act 25:9 , Mat 20:18 , Mar 10:32 , see Luk 2:42 ; Luk 18:31 ; Luk 19:28 , Joh 2:13 ; Joh 7:8 , Gal 2:1 ; cf. Act 24:1 ; Act 24:22 ; Act 25:6 , where “to go down” is used of the journey from Jerusalem to Csarea. To suppose that the word is used to indicate simply that they landed in the harbour, or because the town lay high up from the shore, or because the place of assembly for the Church was on high ground, is quite arbitrary, and cannot be set against the usage of the term “going up” and “going down” in relation to Jerusalem; see Hort, Ecclesia , p. 96; Ramsay, St. Paul , p. 264; so Bengel, Neander, Meyer, Hackett, Zckler, Rendall, Page, Weiss, Weizscker, Spitta, Jngst, Hilgenfeld, Wendt, Knabenbauer, and Belser, Beitrge , p. 89, who opposes here the position of Blass (and if the T.R. in Act 18:21 is retained in [326] certainly “the going up” to Jerusalem seems naturally to follow). Blass maintains that Csarea is meant, but he is evidently led to adopt this view by his desire to retain the reading in , Act 19:1 , see Zckler, in loco , and Ramsay, p. 264, and Belser, u. s. , for a criticism of Blass’s view. Amongst the more recent critics, Zahn, Einleitung , ii., 343, 350. combats the reasons alleged by Belser, and takes the going up and the Church mentioned to refer to Csarea and the Church there, not to Jerusalem. This visit of St. Paul to Jerusalem is disputed by McGiffert, although he does not deny with Weizscker the whole journey, but admits that the Apostle went as far as Antioch. So too Wendt is not prepared to follow Weizscker entirely, although he holds that as the Apostle went to Syria, Luke concluded that he must have gone up to Jerusalem (so McGiffert). On the other hand, the historical truthfulness of the journey to Jerusalem is stoutly defended by Spitta (pp. 246 248). The silence of the Galatian Epistle is admitted by Wendt to be in itself no proof against its occurrence, and still less objection can be based on the supposed variance at this time between St. Paul and the Jewish Christians of the capital. See Zckler’s note, p. 272, and also Alford, in loco . .: the Church at Jerusalem may be fairly regarded as indicated, the . : “primariam, ex qua propagat sunt reliqu,” Bengel. If St. Luke had meant the Christians in Csarea, he would probably have said that Paul saluted the brethren or the disciples, cf. Act 24:7 (see Belser, u. s. , p. 90). This visit of St. Paul to Jerusalem would probably be his fourth, Act 9:26 , Act 11:30 (Act 12:25 ), Act 15:4 , and if he went on this fourth occasion to complete a vow, this fact alone would prove that the visit was not wanting in an object: see however note on Act 18:18 . .: the word indicates a short stay. Blass interprets that the Apostle went up from the harbour to the city of Csarea, and then “went down to Antioch”. But Ramsay, p. 264, urges that it is impossible to use the term of a journey from the coast town Csarea to the inland city Antioch; on the contrary, one regularly “goes down” to a coast town, Act 13:4 , Act 14:25 , Act 16:8 , etc. At the Syrian Antioch, the mother of the Gentile churches, St. Paul would find a welcome after his second journey, as after his first this so far as we know was his last visit to a place which was now no longer an effective centre for the Apostle’s work, or for the supervision of his new churches.
[326] R(omana), in Blass, a first rough copy of St. Luke.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Act 18:22-23
22When he had landed at Caesarea, he went up and greeted the church, and went down to Antioch. 23And having spent some time there, he left and passed successively through the Galatian region and Phrygia, strengthening all the disciples.
Act 18:22 Act 18:21 ends with Paul sailing from Ephesus. Act 18:22 has him landing in Palestine (Caesarea) and visiting the church in Jerusalem (“he went up,” theologically speaking) and then (down) to Antioch of Syria. It must be remembered that Luke is not recording a daily exhaustive travel itinerary, but jumping from one significant theological event to another. Acts is not modern history, but it is a good, accurate history! Act 18:22 ends the second missionary journey and Act 18:23 begins the third missionary journey.
“the church” See Special Topic at Act 5:11.
“the Galatian region and Phrygia” This phrase “Galatian region” is still the source of controversy among scholars as to whether this refers to racial or political divisions within modern central Turkey.
The Phrygian region is first mentioned in Act 2:10. Some who experienced Pentecost were from this area. Paul was forbidden to preach in this area in Act 16:6.
One wonders if the phrase “strengthening all the disciples” in the latter part of Act 18:23 refers to Pentecost converts in Phrygia or Paul’s converts in Derbe, Lystra, and Iconium, which were in the Pisidian southern part of the Roman province of Galatia.
This is the beginning of Paul’s third missionary journey (cf. Act 18:23 to Act 21:16).
“strengthening all the disciples” Paul took the Great Commission of Mat 28:19-20 seriously. His ministry involved both evangelism (cf. Mat 28:19) and discipleship (cf. Act 15:36; Mat 28:20).
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
when he had landed = having come down.
at = to. Greek. eis. App-104.
gone up, i.e. to Jerusalem. Figure of speech Ellipsis. App-6.
church. App-186.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
22. ] To Jerusalem: for (1) it would be out of the question to suppose that Paul made the long detour by Csarea only to go up into the town from the beach, as supposed by most of those who omit . in Act 18:21, and salute the disciples,-and (2) the expression ., which suits a journey from Jerusalem (ch. Act 11:27), would not apply to one from Csarea.
. . .] The payment of his vow is not mentioned, partly because it is understood from the mere mention of the vow itself, Act 18:18,-partly, perhaps, because it was privately done, and with no view to attract notice as in ch. 21.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Act 18:22. , having gone up) to Jerusalem: Act 18:21.- , the church) The primary church, from which the others were propagated.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Caesarea: Act 8:40, Act 10:1, Act 10:24, Act 11:11, Act 18:22, Act 23:23
gone: Act 25:1, Act 25:9
the church: Act 18:21, Act 11:22, Act 15:4, Act 21:17-19
he went: Act 11:19-27, Act 13:1, Act 14:26, Act 15:23, Act 15:30, Act 15:35
Reciprocal: Act 21:7 – and saluted Act 21:8 – Caesarea Act 21:15 – and went
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
2
Act 18:22. Paul landed at Caesarea on the coast of Palestine. As a brief “side trip” he went to Jerusalem to salute the church. We are not given any account of this visit further than the present statement. After this incident the great apostle to the Gentiles went to Antioch (in Syria), thus ending his second missionary journey.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Act 18:22. And when he had landed at Caesarea. This Roman capital of Judaea was the usual and most convenient port for travellers journeying to Jerusalem.
And gone up, and saluted the church. Gone up, that is, from the lowlands surrounding Csarea to the highlands in the midst of which Jerusalem was situated. The Church is, of course, the mother church of Christianity, the congregations of believers in Jerusalem. This was apparently Pauls fourth visit, since his conversion, to the sacred city. He seems only to have remained a short time, and we hear of no events of any importance taking place during his stay. The very vague mention of it in this passage is the only allusion we find to it. He, no doubt, on this occasion met with James and his brother apostles, and recounted to them the progress of the faith in Corinth and Greece.
He went down to Antioch. Geographically speaking strictly correct, the position of Jerusalem lying much higher than Syrian Antioch. Thus terminated his Second Missionary Journey; it had occupied, roughly speaking, three years.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
See notes on verse 19
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Verse 22
The church; at Jerusalem.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
Paul’s ship landed at Caesarea, the chief port of Jerusalem (cf. Act 10:1). He went from there "up" to Jerusalem and greeted the church. To "go up to" and "go down from" are almost technical terms for going to and from Jerusalem in Acts. [Note: Longenecker, p. 489; Neil, p. 199.] Likewise "the church," without a modifier, is clearly a reference to the mother church in Jerusalem here. [Note: Bruce, "The Church . . .," p. 641.] When Paul had finished his business in Jerusalem, he returned to Syrian Antioch and so completed his second missionary journey (Act 15:40 to Act 18:22). Paul traveled about 2,800 miles on this trip compared to about 1,400 on his first journey. [Note: Beitzel, p. 177.]
Luke highlighted one major speech in each of Paul’s three missionary journeys. During the first journey Paul preached to Jews in Pisidian Antioch, during the second journey he preached to Gentiles in Athens, and during the third journey he preached to Christians at Miletus. [Note: Witherington, p. 560.]