And from thence, when the brethren heard of us, they came to meet us as far as Appii forum, and The three taverns: whom when Paul saw, he thanked God, and took courage. And from thence (that is, from Rome), when the brethren heard of us, х ta (G3588) peri (G4012) heemoon (G2257)] - 'heard of our circumstances' or 'matters;' probably by letter from Puteoli, which would be conveyed by the bearer of the centurion's despatches to the capital. Since this is the first mention of Christians already at Rome, we naturally ask how Christianity was first introduced there. Now it is one of the most remarkable facts in the history of the first planting of Christianity, that while we have in the New Testament explicit and lively accounts of its first introduction into Asia Minor, Proconsular Asia, Macedonia, and Achaia, neither in the New Testament nor in the genuine writings of the early Church, subsequent to the close of the Canon of Scripture, have we any available accounts of the first introduction of Christianity into the great metropolis of the ancient world. That the apostle Peter was there, we have no reasonable ground to doubt; but that he was not there before the last year of his life, is equally beyond reasonable doubt. We have, in fact, no evidence that the first beginnings of the Church of Rome were owing to the labours of any eminent teacher; and from all that can be gathered from the silence of the New Testament-in connection with the small but extremely interesting salutations in the closing chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, and from the confused and contradictory traditions of the fathers, we are shut up to the belief that Christianity was first brought to Rome, and first took root there, through the visits paid to it by private Christians from the provinces, from the great Pentecostal season (see Acts 2:10 ) onwards. (But see Introduction to Epistle to Romans).
They came to meet us as far as Appii Forum - a town 41 miles southeast from Rome,
And the Three Taverns - `and Three Taverns' (without the article, as the name of a place: see the note at Acts 28:8). This place was 30 miles from Rome. It would thus appear that they came from Rome in two parties-one stopping short at the nearer, the other going on to the more distant place.
Whom when Paul saw, he thanked God - for such a welcome. How sensitive he was to such Christian affection, all his Epistles show, ( Romans 1:9-12, etc.)
And took courage - his long-cherished purpose to "see Rome" (Acts 19:21), there to proclaim the unsearchable riches of Christ, and the divine pledge that in this he should be gratified (Acts 23:11), being now about to be auspiciously realized.
Remarks:
(1) Probably there never was any detailed account of a disastrous voyage, ending in the total wreck of the vessel and the safe landing of every soul on board-amounting to nearly four hundred-which bore more unequivocal marks of historic truth; and yet even this portion of the Acts of the Apostles, including the subsequent account of what passed at Malta, has not escaped the attacks of the destructive school of criticism. It is admitted, for example, by Zeller that the substance of these two chapters belongs indubitably to the oldest materials of the book; but he contends that spurious matter has crept into it throughout. The examples which he gives of this are such as are either utterly frivolous, or admit of easy enough explanation; and this whole style of criticism-based on foregone conclusions, and designed to support a theory both of the book and of Pauline Christianity which would scarcely be worthy of refutation but for the ingenuity, acuteness, and learning with which it is supported-might be made to shake the credit of most historical records; in which there are nearly always some circumstances which at first appear improbable, and some which seem contradictory, while the language is often such as to afford to sceptical minds materials of suspicion.
The whole history of the Tubingen school of criticism affords one of the most striking illustrations of the extent to which the acutest and most learned men may allow themselves to be committed in support of a theory once taken up and confidently advocated, especially when that theory has the charm of being perfectly novel, of being a reconstruction of all Christianity, and of furnishing to those who sit uneasy under the authority of the New Testament and the supernatural character of the events which it records an imposing body of evidence in proof of its unhistorical and unreliable character. Time will no doubt dissolve this whole fabric of hostile criticism, which has already lost much of its ground in the land of its birth. But as its withering effects have, to some extent, been felt in this country (Britain), so even when these pass away, the same spirit of unsanctified criticism may be expected to give birth to other forms of assault on the canonical books and on the truths which they proclaim, and must be sedulously guarded against, especially by those who are apt to set too much store by mere learned criticism.
(2) The distinguishing features of our apostle's character, and of his religious principles, come out nowhere more nobly than in this narrative. There was something about him which, from the first, seems to have commanded the deep respect of the centurion Julius; and his whole procedure throughout the voyage showed such loftiness of character, and yet soundness of judgment-such confidence in the divine communications made to him, yet healthy attention to the means of safety and of bodily strength-such anxious solicitation for the welfare of all, yet cheerfulness of spirit and desire to diffuse it over all-that nowhere in this book does he show to more advantage; and one sees in him the saviour of a vast multitude of human beings, hardly more in fulfillment of a divine promise to himself, than in the exercise of his large and ready wisdom (see Ecclesiastes 9:13-18 ). But his religious principles come out quite as strikingly here. Divine agency and human instrumentality-the one controlling all the circumstances so as to secure a most unlikely issue, the other providing the indispensable conditions of that issue-are here not only recognized by the apostle, as perfectly consistent with each other, but acted on as a matter of course, us if in his own mind they created no difficulty at all, and were not so much as thought of in the light of conflicting principles. He who acted on such principles throughout this voyage may surely be expected, in his writings, whenever he has occasion to touch upon and expound them (as in his Epistle to the Romans, Romans 9:1-33), to hold forth and plead for what his own conduct here exemplified; and those who so interpret those writings as to set aside the one of these principles as inconsistent with the other would do well to study a little more deeply the apostle's procedure during this voyage.
(3) "And so we came to Rome," says the historian ( Acts 28:14), as the goal of all that both he and the great apostle had been so anxiously looking forward to. 'How would the heart of the apostle and his companions beat (says Lechler) in anxious expectation, when the imperial city of pagandom, with its cupolas and battlements, lay before their eyes! But how also would the heart of the Roman Caesar have beat in his palace had he had a presentiment that at this moment, in the form of a Jewish prisoner, there entered by the gates a power before which the Roman empire and the whole pagan world would crumble into dust! This was even a more decisive moment than when formerly it was said, Hannibal ante portas (Hannibal is at the gates).'
The Measure of Liberty accorded to Him-His First Interview with the Jews of Rome (28:16-23)