The apostle now turns to salute some that were dear to him, whose names are familiar to us throughout the inspired history.
“Salute Prima and Aquila, and the house of Onesiphorus. Erastus remained at Corinth, but Trophimus I left at Miletus sick. Do thy diligence to come before winter. Eubulus saluteth thee, and Pudens, and Linus, and Claudia, and all the brethren. The Lord [Jesus Christ be] with thy spirit. Grace he with you” (ver. 19-22).
“Salute Prizes and Aquila and the house of Onesiphorus.” The two former were early associates, who remained faithful to the last. With them he associates the household of Onesiphorus, the same of whom he made mention at the close of the first chapter of this Epistle. The apostle deeply felt the identification of Onesiphorus with his own circumstances as a prisoner. “He often refreshed me, and was not ashamed of my chain.” He was no longer in Rome, though perhaps not then at Ephesus, his usual dwelling place. When he was in Rome, he zealously sought, out the apostle and found him. God prospers earnest love for Christ's sake. It was indeed no other love than the apostle had proved at Ephesus, and nobody knew what service had been rendered there better than Timothy. These dear saints now receive together the last salutation of the apostle, once more the prisoner of Christ.
“Erastus abode in Corinth; and Trophimus I left at Miletus sick." There was no compulsion in regulating the labors of his fellow-ministers, even for an apostle. They were servants of the Lord, and ammo would have pressed this more, solemnly than Paul, none have more shrunk from setting up a directive authority between the Lord and His servants. There were urgent calls elsewhere, no doubt; but Erectus abode at Corinth. It was he probably who was once treasurer of the city. Very different were the circumstances of Trophimus. Him the apostle left at Miletus sick. Miraculous power was never used by the apostle either for the relief of a brother or even for the progress of the work. Here, again, the Lord only was looked to, and His glory was the sole motive either for working miracles or for abstaining. So we find in the former Epistle the apostle prescribing to Timothy that he should be no longer a water-drinker, but use a little wine for his stomach's sake, and his often infirmities—just as any Christian friend might do at this present time, but without having the Spirit's inspiration. This abides now in the written word. Certainly there was no miracle in his case, any more than in that of Trophimus. Miracles as a rule were signs for unbelievers, not a means of cure for the household of faith.
In the twentieth verse of the fourth chapter [of 2 Timothy], the Apostle Paul informs Timothy that Erastus abode at Corinth. The form of expression implies that Erastus had staid behind at Corinth when the Paul left it. But this could not be meant of any journey from Corinth which Paul took prior to his first imprisonment at Rome; for when Paul departed from Corinth, as related in the twentieth chapter of the Acts, Timothy was with him. And this was the last time the apostle left Corinth before his coming to Rome; because he left it to proceed on his way, to Jerusalem, soon after his arrival at which place he was taken into custody, and continued in that custody till he was carried to Caesar’s tribunal. There could be no need therefore to inform Timothy that Erastus staid behind at Corinth upon this occasion, because, if the fact was so, it must have been known to Timothy, who was present, as well as to Paul.
In the same verse our Epistle also states the following article ‘Trophimus have I left at Miletus sick.' When Paul passed through Miletus on his way to Jerusalem, as related in Acts 20, Trophimus was not left behind, but accompanied him to that city. He was indeed the occasion of the uproar at Jerusalem, in consequence of which Paul was apprehended; for 'they had seen,' says the historian, 'before with him in the city Trophimus an Ephesian, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.' This was evidently the last time of Paul's being at Miletus before his first imprisonment; for, as hath been said, after his apprehension at Jerusalem, he remained in custody till he was taken to Rome,
In these two articles we have a journey referred to, which must have taken place subsequent to the conclusion of Luke's history, and of course after Paul's liberation from his first imprisonment. The Epistle, therefore, which contains this reference, since it appears from other parts of it to have been written while Paul was a prisoner at Rome, proves that he had returned to that city again, and undergone there a second imprisonment.")
“Do thy diligence to come before winter.” In verse 9 he had said, “do thy diligence to come shortly unto me.” The repetition with the defining words, “before winter,” is surely not in vain. He had told Timothy in verse 13 to bring the cloak left at Trees with Carpus. But he also no doubt would warn Timothy to start before wintry weather would expose him to such a voyage as he himself had known; and he would give him the opportunity of helping Paul the aged, and now a prisoner also. The Spirit of God deigns to think of the most ordinary things of this life. The body is for the Lord, not merely the soul; and the Lord is for the body. It is, therefore, not only moral debasement which should be far from the saint, but vanity and worldliness. On the other hand, the Lord condescends to think of that which might be a physical comfort. He has no pleasure in His servant shivering with cold; still less does true devotedness show itself in objects lees plain, any more than in enduring vermin. Superstition revels in these wretched ways; scripture is no less sober than holy. Tradition is the pride of man and the sport of Satan.
“Eubulus saluteth thee, and Pudens, and Linos, and Claudia, and all the brethren.”
The apostle was careful to promote love, and sends the salutations of several by name, not of men only; but of a woman, as well as of the brethren generally. If a woman was put first, and with good reason, in ver. 19, a woman is, with no less wisdom, put last of those personally named in ver. 21. The fabulists have spared the first-named. The second has been sought to be identified with the. vile friend of the vile epigrammatist Martial; in order to build up the romance of his subsequent conversion to Christianity, and marriage with Claudia, a supposed royal maiden of Britain, here assumed to be the Christian companion of the apostle! One admits the ingenuity of the mosaic formed out of small pieces of Martial 1:32; 4:13; 5:48; 6:58,; 11:53; and of Tac. Agric. 14. Ann. 12:32, as well as of the dubious but possible inscription found at Chichester in 1723 (Horsley's Brit. Romans p. 192, No. 76). But it will be noticed that in our verse they are not classed together as a pair: Linus separates them; and there is a Linus in the Spaniard's epigrams, as well as a Pudens, and a Claudia, and a Claudia Rufina whether identical or not. That Romanists should seize on the Linus here mentioned as bishop of Rome in apostolic times is natural. But it is certain that the earliest extant record of this is a sentence of Irenaeus which is palpably unfounded on a point far more important than the identity of Linus. Speaking of Peter and Paul, he says, θεμελιώσαωτες οὖν καὶ οἰκοδομήσαωτες οἱ μακάριοι ἀπόστολοι τὴν ἐκκλησίαν. Λίνῳ τὴν τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς λειτουργίαν ἐνεχείρισαν. Now it is demonstrable from scripture that the church in Rome cannot boast like Corinth of an apostolic foundation. There were converts thence from the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1010Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, (Acts 2:10)). The apostle Paul wrote to them an elaborate Epistle, wholly ignoring Peter's ministry there, much more his episcopate there for 25 years! according to the Chron. of Eusebius. Paul is only known as a prisoner there himself, though he may have edified them after his discharge, before he was a second time in bonds, and his martyrdom that followed. As for Peter, the apostolate of the circumcision was his allotted province (Galatians and though we do hear of his unhappy visit to Antioch, not a word is said of Rome. We only know of his labors outside Judaea in the east (1 Peter 5), not the west. His Epistles are both addressed to the Christian Jews far east of Rome; where, if he went at all, it was to die for Christ, not to found the church there, still less to join Paul in ordaining Linus to its episcopate. Even the Benedictine editors confess and do not pretend to solve “diffioultates quibus primornm Petri (I), successorum turn chronologia, tum suceessio,” etc. Ensebius and Theodoret make Linus to succeed after Peter's death; and so Baronius and deTillemont. The Apost. Coast. (7:48), and Ruffians (Praef. Clem. Reeog.) hold that Linus was appointed bishop at an earlier date, while the apostles lived and moved elsewhere to the regions beyond; with which the words of Irenaeus are quite consistent; and so Bp. Pearson and Flenry the historian. Epiphanies adds to the confusion by the assertion that it was Clement who was ordained by Peter (I) for the Roman see, while he and Paul pursued their apostolic labors, as Tertullian had affirmed before him. All the differences of the ancients are far from being here stated. The only thing certain, when we leave scripture, is the uncertainty of tradition.
As to those whose salutations appear in ver. 21, their names were too common then to build on personally. One thing is sure, that they were Christians, those of whom Martial writes, heathen, who never, as far as we know, submitted to the righteousness of God. Martial came a young man to Rome only about two years before the apostle's death, and did not at first take up letters. His epigrams, as far as is known, were after, most of them long after, when his Pudens, and Linus, and Claudia, were still heathen.
“All the brethren” are added by the apostle who would not forget the least, dear to Timothy as to himself. How strange, not to say unaccountable, that the great apostle Peter, if here then as tradition boldly declares, should have no place, even where persons so little known have their names indelibly inscribed by grace! Can it be believed that he was at Home with “our beloved brother Paul,” at his first defense, when no one took his part, but all forsook him? or that Paul could have written, “only Luke is with me?” It is too plain that tradition is untrustworthy, and fails wholly in those moral elements which ever accompany the inspiration of God.
There is good and ancient evidence for “the Lord Jesus Christ” in the last ver. (22), the Alexandrian and two cursives adding “Jesus” only. Though one or two cursives may omit the clause as a whole, there is no doubt of the “Lord,” which, it may be noticed, is the prevailing designation throughout, save where special reasons have “Christ Jesus.” But the prayer is that He be “with thy spirit.” Such was the last inspired desire of the apostle for Timothy, with “grace be with you” for those in general with Timothy, which is marred in the Posh. Syr.'s, making Timothy the only abject in the second wish as in the first. It is the expression of a heart that could feel fervently for all, yet knew how to make a difference.