This theory, however, implies a rendering and a construc- tion of Ac 106 to which exception has been taken. This verse, •18 it stands in modern editions, reads thus: iivkOov Zl t>;v
tpvyictv Kot't raXccTixriV ^oipccv, xaikvOivTn vto toZ' Ayou nK!/,tweTOf
>aX«rai to* Xoyov iv tt 'Ar/ot. Prof. Ramsay contends that ^pvyia,* is here an adj., not a substantive, and that the deiiiigna- tion Tt]» . . . x^pae-t means 'the country to which the epithets Phrj'gian and Galatic apply,' 'the Phrygo-Galatic territory.' This country, Phrygia-Galatica, lies in the southern part of the Rom. province G., and includes Iconium, Lystra, and Antioch of Pisidia. But in the only other passages in which St. Luke mentions Phrygia (Ac 2*0 and IS^^) he uses *^[/>-/« as a sub- stantive. In the latter of these p;issages the expression t-,* raXocTjaj^v x^?'^'* **' ^pvy'"*.^ throws light on IC^. It may be inferred that in both passages he had the same tract of country in view, and that as in 182^ *^t/>.,a is a substantive, so it is m 1C6. And as it is grammatically possible to render the dis- puted phrase ' Phrygia and the Gal. countr>',* it becomes very doubtful whether Prof. Ramsay's rendering is tenable.
It has also been supposed that the use of the phrase ' the GaL ■ouDtry/ and the avoidance of the simple 'Galatia,' implies or
suggests that St- Tjuke may have wished thiis to indicate that he was speaking of the whole land that could be rjilhd '(Jala- tiaii,' rather than ol the smaller country which originally waj known as G. This is plausible. But it may be that the writer wished to indicate that rural districts as well as cities were evangelized by St. Paul (see 146).
Again, I*rof. Ramsay's construction requires a somewhat unusual and diincult relation of the participle <*>>.t^i»T(.- to the uiuin verb iirXfio*-. The natural construction uiKloubtedly is that wlilch RV has adopted, involving that St. Paul and the rest passed through Phrygia and O. in consequence of liaving been prevented from preaching in Asia. But I'rof. Uamsay maintains that the sequence of the verbs Oi they stand in tlie sentence \'Ai\\G sequence ol time: '(1) they went through the Phrygo-Galatic land ; (2) they were forbidden to speak in Asia ; (3) they came over against Mysia; (4) they essayed to go into Bith^'nia; (5^ the Spirit sulfertd them not; (6) they passed through Mysia ; (7) they came to Troas.'
In this uncertainty the suggestion of Dr. OilTord (Expositor, July 18!>4) is worthy of consideration. He sujjpoaca that the Phrygian and Gal. country is the borderland between the two countries, the E. ed^^a of Phrygia and the W. strip of G. Leav- ing Antioch, St. Paul, instead of going W. to Euhcsus in A*sia, as apparently he ha<^i intended, went northwards through the Phrygian-Gal. borderland with the purpose of entering Bithynia ; but when he came opposite Mysia he was compelled to turn W. to the coast.
In the otiier Epp. of St. Paul we find one significant allusion to 'the churches of G.,' 1 Co 161 'Concerning the collection tor the saints as I eave order unto the churches of G., so do ye.' Now, if by this designation we are to understand the churcliea of N. G. exclusively, then how is it that the churches of the S.. which he so repeatedly visited and cherished, were not included in this great scheme of beneficence? On this allusion to ' the churches of G.* Dr. Plummer has the following justobsr.n'ation : 'We are not entitled to conclude that because St. Luke, when historically relating the course of St. Paul's journeys, describes the places visited by their precise geographical designations, St. Paul may not have used the word G. in a wide sense when in want of a word to include all the churches which he had founded in the Rom. province of G. In fact, if he had wished to include under one designation the churches of Antioch, Iconium, Derbe, and Lystra, together possibly with others in the adjacent district, it is hanl to say what other term he could have used. There is ... no certain evidence that St. Paul founded churches in G. proper ; if he did, these, of course, would be included among the churches of G. But the question is whether we are bound to understand St. Paul's use of the word as excluding all cburcliei save those of G. proper? Now, it is not likely either that when he was organizing a collection for the poor Christiana ol Jerus., he would omit to appeal to the churches in the Gal. province with which his relations were so intimate, or thai he would leave those churches unmentioned when writing to Corinth.'
In the Ep. itself (413-18) there occurs an allusion to the circumstances in which he first preached the gospel to the churches now addressed, «1S«ti 'in ii' oca-OiviiKv riji e-a.pxif tlr.yyiXKToi/xvjv uluv to ^poTipov, which can only mean, 'you know that it was on account of an infirmity of my flesh I formerly preached to you.' This statement implies that he was weak and ill when in the district referred to, and that but for this weakness he would not have preached in it. Prof. Ramsay in- geniously construes the situation thus: While on his first journey St. Paul caught a fever at Perga, and as its natural cure a change to the higher and purer air of Antioch was pre- scribed. He reached Antioch with traces of illness upon him, and with liability to its recurrence. This is possible ; but m.ay not the ' weakness' have been connected with the stoning he suffered at Lystra? It was after this stoning, which must have left very obvious marks upon him, that he preached in Derbe, Lystra itself, Iconium, and .\ntioch (Ac 1419-23). in this case, as in the course of events suggested by Prof. Ramsay, rt rrpoTtpov receives its proper sense, ' on the former of my two visits.' *