1. As to the first, at that time it is, that for giving intimation of the treaty, _giving the right hands of fellowship_ is the expression employed: and that if this union were to be taken in a literal, and thence in a physical sense, as an agreement in which, as a token of mutual consent, the physical operation of junction of hands was employed,--here must have been an actual meeting, in which John was seen as well as the two others--and, consequently, on the supposition that the account thus given by Paul, is, in this particular, on both occasions correct,--this must have been a different meeting from the first: on which supposition, on comparison with the account given in the Acts of Paul's second visit,--there can be no difficulty in determining that this visit cannot have been any other than the third. But, so evidently figurative is the turn of the expression,--that, even in the language used in this country at this time, slight indeed, if it amounted to anything at all, would be the force, of the inference drawn from it, in favour of the supposition of mutual presence. To signify an agreement on any point--especially if regarded as important--who is there that would scruple to speak of his having given the right hand of fellowship to another, although it were known to be only by letter? or, even through the medium of a common friend, and without any personal intercourse? 2. As to the other consideration, whatsoever might be the force of it, if applied to a composition of modern times--after so many intervening centuries, during several of which the arts of literary composition have, with the benefit of the facilities afforded by the press, been the subject of general study and practice;--whatsoever on this supposition might be the force of it, applied to the style and character of Paul, little weight seems necessary to be attached to it. Of the confusion--designed or undesigned--in which the style of this self-named Apostle involves every point it touches upon, not a page can be read without presenting samples in abundance, to every eye that can endure to open itself to them: in this very work, some must probably have already offered themselves to notice; and before it closes, many will be presented in this express view: the point in question belongs to the field of chronology: and, of the perturbate mode of his operation in this field, a particular exemplification has been already brought to view, Ch. 2, in a passage, in which, of a long train of sufferings and perils,--some real, some to all appearance not so--the one first undergone is last mentioned.[39] From the order in which two events are mentioned by this writer, no argument, in any degree conclusive, can be deduced, for the persuasion, that that which stands first mentioned, was so much as intended by him to be regarded as that which first took place.