Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - Acts 17:16 - 17:34
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
E.—PAUL AT ATHENS; HIS OBSERVATIONS AND OCCASIONAL ADDRESSES; HIS MISSIONARY DISCOURSE ON THE AREOPAGUS, AND ITS EFFECT
22Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars’ hill [the Areopagus], and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things [points] ye are too superstitious [very devout]. 23For as I passed by [through the city], and beheld your evotions [sacred objects], I found [also, ÷áὶ ] an altar with this [the] inscription, to the [an] unknown god. Whom [What] therefore ye ignorantly worship [ye worship without knowing it], him [that] declare [proclaim] I unto you. 24God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth [therein, He ( ïῦ ̓ ôïò ) dwelleth, as he is the Lord of heaven and earth,] not in temples made with hands; 25Neither is worshipped with men’s [Nor is he ministered unto by human] hands, as though [if] he needed any thing, seeing he [whilst he himself, áὐôὸò ] giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; 26And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the [And hath caused that every nation of men, sprung from one blood, should dwell over the whole] face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed [earth, in that he hath fixed the appointed times], and the bounds of their habitation [habitations]; 27That they should [To] seek the Lord [God], if haply [perhaps] they might feel after [om. after] him, and find him, though he be [is] not far from every one of us: 28For in him we live, and move, and have our being [move, and are, ἐóìÝí ]; as certain also [also some] of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring [race]. 29 Forasmuch then as [As, therefore,] we are the offspring [race] of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device [stone, unto a graven work of the art and reflection of a man]. 30And the times [The times, indeed, ìὲí ïῦ ̓ í ] of this [om. this] ignorance God winked at [has overlooked]; but now [and now] commandeth all men every where to repent: 31Because [Inasmuch as] he hath appointed [fixed] a day, in the which [in which] he will judge the world in righteousness by that [a] man whom he hath ordained [appointed]; whereof [in that] he hath given assurance [offered faith] unto all men, in that he hath raised [offered faith unto all, by raising] him from the dead.
32And [But] when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked: and [but the] others said, We will hear thee again of [concerning] this matter. 33So [And thus, ÷áὶ ïὕôùò ] Paul departed from among them [went out of the midst of them]. 34Howbeit [But, äὲ ] certain men clave [attached themselves] unto him, and believed: among the which [whom] was [also, ÷áὶ ] Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them.
b. His spirit was stirred in him [his spirit was moved with indignation], ðáñùîýíåôï ô . ðí ., his spirit was filled with indignation, suffered a moral shock [comp. 1Co_13:5, and ὁ äῆìïò — ὠñãßóèç êáὶ ðáñùîýíèç , Dem. êáôὰ Ìåéäéüõ . p. 514. (Mey.).—Tr.]; the imperfect indicates an abiding state of mind, and not merely a sudden and transient emotion [see Exeg. note, Act_8:15-17 ult.—Tr.]. He had, namely, observed, after spending some time in the city, and carefully surveying it ( èåùñåῖí , not simply é ʼ äåῖí ), that it was full of images of the gods. ( Êáôåßäùëïò , a word not found elsewhere, but accurately formed, according to the analogy of other compounds, is not used in a subjective sense, as if it were equivalent to idolis dedita, but in an objective sense, viz., idolis abundans; compare êáôÜäåíäñïò , arboribus plenus; êáôÜìðåëïò , vitibus abundans). Numerous Greek and Roman writers add their testimony that this characteristic feature distinguished Athens among all the Hellenic cities; thus, Xenophon describes that city as ὅëç âùìüò , ὅëç èῦìá èåïῖ êáé Ì ἀíÜèçìá , de Rep. Ath., and Livy remarks: Athenas—multa visenda habentes—simulacra Deorum hominumque omni genere et materiae et atrium insignia. XLV. 27.—The indignation of the apostle, and his desire to expose such heathenish errors ( ïῦ ̓ í ), induced him to enter into conversation both with Jews and proselytes in the synagogue, and with persons of every other class whom he encountered in the market-place; the truths of religion were the subjects of his äéá ̣ ëÝãåóèáé . Such opportunities the market place daily ( êáôὰ ðᾶóáí ἡìÝñáí ) furnished; as the same remark is not made with regard to the synagogue, it follows that the latter afforded such opportunities only on the sabbath-day.—The expression ἡ ἀãïñÜ , seems to imply that the city possessed only one market-place; this fact was long doubted, and the conjecture was generally adopted that Paul’s conversations were held in a place called Eretria [Potter’s Antiq. of Greece I. 43. Edinb. 1832.—Tr.]. The usual explanation of this name, however, is erroneous, and, in general, those who have more recently furnished us with topographical accounts of Athens, are convinced that this city never contained more than one market-place [forum, agora], and thus the accuracy and fidelity of the narrative before us are established even with regard to a point of apparently little importance ( ἠ ἀãïñÜ ). [For a very full description of this Agora, see Conyb. and H. I. 379. ff.—Tr.]
Act_17:18. Then certain philosophers.—It was doubtless on the occasions when such conversations were held in public place, that some philosophers, who belonged partly to the Epicurean, and partly to the Stoic school, came in contact with Paul. ( ÓõìâÜëëù signifies in Act_4:15 simply to confer together in a friendly manner; the word does not necessarily indicate a debate or a contest). [“The Epicurean philosophy was antagonistic to the Gospel as holding the atomic theory in opposition to the creation of matter,—the disconnection of the divinity from the world and its affairs, in opposition to the idea of a ruling providence,—and the indissoluble union and annihilation together, of soul and body, as opposed to the hope of eternal life, and indeed to all spiritual religion whatever. The Epicureans were the materialists of the ancient world, etc.—While the philosophy of the Stoics approached the truth in holding one supreme Governor of all, it contravened the latter, in its pantheistic belief that all souls were emanations of Him. In spirit it was directly opposed to the Gospel,—holding the independence of man on any being but himself, together with the subjection of God and man alike to the stern laws of an inevitable fate, etc.” (Alford).—Tr.]. In consequence of these conversations, the Athenians were divided in their opinions. Some looked with contempt on Paul, as a vain babbler, who could say nothing that merited attention; ( óðåñìïëüãïò originally signified a rook or crow [Aristoph. Av. 232, 579], and was applied to any one who prated in an inflated or pompous manner.—The question: ôὶ ἂí — èÝëïé ëÝãåéí , primarily signifies: ‘We do not clearly understand what he means to say;’ the interrogator, however, virtually expresses a disparaging judgment). Others were, at least, disposed to seek for more information, as Paul appeared to them to proclaim foreign divinities ( îÝíá äáéìüíéá ; similar language was employed when Socrates was accused: êáéíὰ äáéìüíéá åἰòÜãåé ). This opinion was suggested, as Luke explains, by the circumstance that Paul preached the Gospel concerning Jesus and the resurrection of the dead.—It is not probable that the Athenians supposed that, ἀíÜóôáóéò [“resurrection”] was the name of a goddess or heroine (Chrysostom, Baur, Baumgarten); Luke appears, on the contrary, to have mentioned the resurrection in immediate connection with the Person of Jesus, solely for the reason that this subject most of all surprised the Hellenic philosophers, as a novel or strange ( îÝíïò ) conception.
Act_17:19-21. The people whose interest and curiosity had been aroused by the language of the apostle, conducted him ( ἐðéëáüìåíïé , leniter prehensum, Grotius [comp. Act_9:27]) to the Areopagus, that is, the hill of Ares [Mars—so called from the legendary trial of Mars, Pausan. I. 28. 5—Tr.], north of the western extremity of the Acropolis, on which spot the supreme court of the republic usually held its sittings. But that Paul was not subjected to a formal trial before the court of the Areopagites, and that his discourse was not a judicial defence (as Adami, a divine of the Netherlands, Observ. 1710, conjectured, and as Baur and Zeller have recently asserted), will appear from the following considerations: first, the whole context, which leads to an opposite conclusion, specially, the courteous question in Act_17:19, and the wish expressed in Act_17:20; secondly, the explanatory remark of the narrator in Act_17:21, according to which it was simply curiosity, and neither fanaticism nor intolerance that occasioned the scene which followed; thirdly, the whole tone of the discourse, which nowhere assumes the character of a defence or apology; and, lastly, the scene at the close, when Paul departs without molestation, and not the slightest trace of a judicial process is exhibited.—The request addressed to Paul, viz., that he should explain himself more fully, Act_17:19, is exceedingly polite, and marked by Attic courtesy ( äõíÜìåèá ãíῶíáé ); still, it is somewhat ironical, as the speakers undoubtedly believe that they already understand the subject, and are convinced that Paul can teach them nothing which they do not already know; and the expression in Act_17:20, îåíßæïíôÜ ôéíá , certain strange things, i.e., something strange or foreign, is tinged with that Hellenic arrogance with which barbarians [persons not Greeks by language or nation (Rob.)] were surveyed. Luke adds by way of explanation, Act_17:21, that all the Athenians, both foreigners who resided in the city, and natives, found no occupation more pleasant than that of reporting or hearing of some new thing ( åὐêáßñïõí , vacabant, for which they always had time). Bengel explains the comparative êáéíüôåñïí with great felicity, in the following terms: ‘nova statim sordebant, noviora quaerebantur.’ The people not only derived pleasure from such reports, but also sought for honor and distinction by communicating their own reports of new things ( ëÝãåéí , ἀêïýåéí ). The imperfect åὐêáßñïõí describes a characteristic feature of the people at the time when the occurrence took place, without, however, implying that the remark was also applicable to a later period. [“De Atheniensium garrulitate, et curiositatenimia, seu studio novitatis intempestivo … plures scriptorum veterum loci loquuntur... Conf. Wolfiusin Curis, et Wetstenius ad h. l.” (Kuinoel).—Tr.]
Act_17:22. a. As the request is so plainly addressed to the apostle, he does not hesitate to rise before the most intelligent audience which the heathen world could furnish, even if the request did not proceed from a sincere love of the truth,, and was, moreover, pronounced in an ironical tone of voice; he was conscious that he had received a call (Act_9:15) to “bear the name of Jesus before the Gentiles.” With all the confidence of faith he takes a position ( óôáèåßò ) in the middle of the plateau on the hill, which was about [fifty or] sixty feet high. [i.e., above the valley separating it from the Acropolis. (Robinson).—Tr.]. He saw before him the Acropolis, which rose above him, and was adorned with numerous works of art; beneath the spot on which he stood, was the magnificent temple of Theseus; around him were numerous temples, altars, and images of the gods. Compare Robinson’s Researches, etc., Vol. I. p. 10, 11. [American edition].
b. He begins by saying in gentle terms, well suited to make a favorable impression, and indicating his wish to recognize with candor every favorable circumstance, that the observations which he had made ( èåùñῶ ), enabled him to bear witness that the Athenians were indeed, in every respect, a God-fearing people. Ùò before äåéóéä ., imports: ‘I recognize you as such—such ye appear to me to be.’ The word äåéóéäáßìùí is undoubtedly sometimes found in the classic writers in an unfavorable sense, viz., superstitious; it is here taken in such a sense by the Vulgate, by Erasmus, Luther, and others. It is, however, a vox media, and not unfrequently conveys the idea of genuine fear of God. [Kuinoel says: ‘Vocabulum äåéóéä .—duplici sensu adhiberi solet—bono sensu—malo sensu;’—he furnishes the most important references in each case.—Tr.]. The word is, without doubt, to be understood here in a good sense, although it appears to have been intentionally chosen, in order to indicate, in a mild manner, the conception of fear [ äåßäù ] which predominated in the religion of the apostle’s hearers, and which ultimately led to superstition. The comparative äåéóéäáéìïíåôÝñïõò does not include the collateral idea of excess; the apostle simply compares the Athenians with other Greeks [i.e., “more devout than others are, soil. ἅëëùí .” (Winer: § 35:4)—Tr.]; he does not intend to flatter, but only states a fact which was admitted by the ancients. Isocrates speaks of the Athenians as ôïὺò ðñὸò ôὰ ôῶí èåῶí åὐóåâÝóôáôá äéáêåéìÝéóéä . Similar testimony is borne by Sophocles, Plato, Xenophon, and, lastly, Josephus; see the passages in Wetstein, II. 562 f. [Alf. translates äåéóéä .: carrying your religious reverence very far; Conyb. and H.: all things—bear witness to your carefulness in religion; Hackett: more religious (scil. than others); Alexander: god-fearing (or more exactly demon-fearing.—Tr.]. ÃÜñ , in Act_17:23, implies that the opinion expressed by the apostle in Act_17:22 respecting the eminently god-fearing spirit of the Athenians, was founded on his own observations, since, in addition to other sacred objects (dedicated to gods whose names are known), he had noticed an altar dedicated to an unknown God. ÓÝíáóìá is equivalent to ressacra, or, quod religionis causa homines venerantur; hence it comprehends sacred places, groves and temples, altars, statues, etc. ʼ Áíáèåùñῶ means: to survey several objects in succession.
Act_17:23-25. a. An altar with this inscription: “To the [an] unknown God.”—It was supposed at an early period of the Christian Church, (and the remark has since been frequently repeated), that Paul took the liberty of employing the singular number, while the inscription was expressed in the plural. Thus Jerome remarks on Tit_1:12 : ‘Inscriptio autem arae non ita erat, ut Paulus asseruit: “Ignoto Deo,” sed ita: “Diis Asiae et Europae et Africae, Diis ignotis et peregrinis.” Verum quia Paulus non pluribus Diis ignotis indigebat, sed uno tantum ignoto Deo, singulari verbo usus est.’—While this church father assumes that the apostle here exhibits an instance of rhetorical license, the change in the number has, in more recent times, been ascribed to the historian: the singular, it has been said, is unhistorical; the inscription could not possibly have been otherwise expressed than in the plural, viz., ἀãíþóôïéò èåïῖò (Baur: Paulus, p. 175 ff). But why should the singular be deemed impossible? It is true that if the article had been prefixed to ἀãí . èåῷ , it would not be conceivable that such an inscription should appear on an altar in Athens. But why should it be impossible that an altar should be dedicated ‘to an unknown God’? Pausanias (Attic. I. 1.) says that there were in Athens âùìïὶ èåῶí ôῶí ὀíïìáæ ïìÝíùí ἀãíþóôùí êáὶ ἡñþùí and Philostratus (Vita Apollon. VI. 2) remarks that it was prudent to speak well of all the gods, especially in Athens, ïῦ ̓ êáὶ ἀãíþóôùí èåῶí âùìïὶ ἵäñõíôáé . These two statements may undoubtedly be so understood, as if each of the altars mentioned, had been dedicated “to unknown gods” (plur.); still, they may also, and, indeed, with greater probability, be understood to mean that each one had been dedicated “to an unknown god”, and bore this inscription. Altars with this inscription seem, indeed, to have been erected in Athens in several different places. Various opinions respecting the origin and purpose of such altars, have been entertained, which as they are all founded on mere conjectures, we forbear to notice. [See de Wette, Meyer, etc., ad. loc.—Tr.]
b. After these remarks, the apostle, in order to convince his hearers that he was not discussing a subject which was absolutely new to them, proceeds to state the theme of his discourse: “What ye accordingly ( ïῦ ̓ í ) worship devoutly, without knowing it, I proclaim unto you.” [See note 6 above, appended to the text.—Tr.]. The object of their worship ( åὐáåâåῖôå ,, religiose colitis) is intentionally designated by the neuter, ὃ — ôïῦôï , in an abstract and indefinite manner, corresponding to ἀãíïïῦíôåò ; when the apostle subsequently makes a positive statement, he introduces concrete and personal terms: ὁ èåὸò ὁ ðïéÞóáò , etc.—The Athenians expected to hear something that was altogether new and strange (Act_17:18, îÝíùí äáéì êáôáããåëåýò .; Act_17:20, îåíßæïíôÜ ôéíá åἰòöÝñåéò ); but Paul appeals to their own consciousness, and founds his remarks on the statement involved in the inscription on the altar; his meaning is the following: ignotum, non tamen peregrinum, prædico vobis.
c. He, first of all, proclaims the true God, Act_17:24-25, as the only God ( ὁ èåὸò , etc.), and as the independent and absolute Creator and Lord of the world, who is too exalted to need any thing, such as a dwelling in temples, or the service of human hands, specially that of priests. èåñáðåýåéí is a word frequently used to designate the worship of the gods. The expression ðñïòäåüìåíïò is also happily chosen, as equivalent to ôὸ ἔ÷åéí ìὲí ìÝñïò , ἔôé äὲ äåῖóèáé ðñὸò ôὸ ôÝëåéïí , (Ulpian). [The pronoun ôéíïò , after ðñïòäåüìåíïò “may be either masculine (any one) or neuter (any thing)” (Alex.). “Luther (in his version) takes ôéíὸò as a masculine pronoun, which admirably suits both the words which precede, and also ðᾶóé , which follows.” (Meyer)—Tr.]. The apostle, in full view of those magnificent temples, which were adorned with all the wonders of art, and which constituted the pride of the Athenians, utters these words: ‘God does not dwell in temples made with hands.’ Surrounded, as Paul at the moment is, by numerous altars of sacrifice, he exclaims: ‘God is not ministered unto by human hands.’ The words áὐôὸò äéäïýò , are intended to confirm the remark which he had just made, or, rather to expose the delusion of the Athenians, and mean: ‘It is He Himself, on the contrary, who gives life and breath to all men;’ ðíïÞ expresses the condition on which the continuance of life depends; all that supplies the natural wants of man is indicated by êáὶ ôὰ ðÜíôá .
Act_17:26-28. a. Paul proceeds, in the second place, (in connection with these fundamental truths concerning God) to give a correct view of man. [“Observe the threefold subject of the discourse: Theology, Act_17:24-25; Anthropology, Act_17:26-29; Christology, Act_17:30-31.” (Mey.).—Tr.]. He says, in general, that mankind is one by virtue of the divinely appointed propagation from one blood. ( Áῖ ̓ ìá is here used not merely in the scriptural sense, involving the conception of a connection of life and generation with the blood, comp. Joh_1:3, but also in the strict classical sense; the word occurs, in reference to generation and blood-relationship, already in Homer, Éé . æ . 211; Od. ð . 300, and afterwards, in Sophocles, Euripides, and Aristotle.). With respect to the construction, ðᾶí ἕèíïò does not depend on ἔèíïò as the object of the latter; the whole clause, on the contrary, (including ðᾶí ἔèíïò as the accusative before the infinitive êáôïéêåῖí ) is governed by ἐðïßçóå , in the following sense: instituit, ut ex uno sanguine orta omnis hominum gens—habitaret. [De Wette, who also adopts this view, refers to Mat_5:32; Mar_7:37, as illustrations of an accusative with the infinitive, preceded by ðïéåῖí .—Tr.].—Paul here combats, not so much the opinion of the Athenians specially, who deemed themselves to be autochthones, as, rather, the delusion in general, which was fostered by the. religion of nature in all its forms, according to which the respective origins of the different nations of the earth were all essentially distinct from one another.—The apostle also expresses another thought, viz., that the partition of mankind into nations, is to be ascribed to a divine appointment. God caused men—he says—to spread themselves over the surface of the earth— ὁèéóáò , etc., that is, appointing and determining the times and the boundaries of the nations. The word êáéñïß refers, (as êáôïéêåῖí which precedes, and êáôïéêßáò which follows, plainly show,) principally to the abodes of the nations, that is, to the period during which a nation may retain possession of the territory which it has occupied, and to the point of time when it shall be dispossessed. And thus the Statement is also made, that God controls the history of all nations.
b. After having spoken of the life of nations, Paul refers to the life of the individual, and, in the third place, sets forth the loftiest aim of man, viz., to seek God, with whom he is closely and intimately connected, Act_17:27-28. According to the structure of the sentence, æçôåῖí still refers to ðᾶí ἕèíïò ἀíèñþñùí , i.e., to the nations—it was the design of the divine partition and collocation of the nations that they should seek ôὸí êýñéïí , ‘the Lord of heaven and earth,’ comp. Act_17:24. Æçôåῖí , however, does not indicate a seeking merely after the knowledge of God (Meyer), but also after a living and essential union with Him. Åἰ ἄñáãå with the optative indicates that the result is doubtful; the speaker implies in a delicate manner, that mankind, as a whole, had missed the mark at which they aimed. The result of the search, if it should be successful, would be the øçëáöåῖí and åὑñßóêåéí , that is, the object sought would be reached and touched, and, accordingly, be actually found. The apostle adds: ‘Although ( êáßôïéãå ) it is not necessary to seek him long, since he is not far distant from every one’ (hence an unsuccessful search is the less excusable.). ÃÜñ , in Act_17:28, confirms the proposition which immediately precedes; it explains the meaning of the words: ‘he is not far from every one of us,’ and also assigns the reason: ‘we are, namely, in God, ἐí áὐôῷ ̓, even as we are in space which encompasses us, or in the atmosphere which essentially surrounds us, and on which the functions of life depend.’ ʼ Åí áὐôῷ does not mean through Him (Grotius; Kuinoel), nor does it mean: on Him, that is, reposing on Him as on a foundation; the most obvious grammatical explanation at the same time best suits the logical connection. The three words æῶìåí , êéíïýìåèá , ἐóìὲí , are arranged according to a descending scale, when the objective relation of the conceptions respectively expressed by them is considered; when their subjective logical connection, on the other hand, is examined, they are arranged according to an ascending scale; that is to say, life in itself is more than movement, the latter more than mere existence; but there is a gradual rise in the following thoughts: if we were without God and entirely isolated, we would not live, not even move, indeed, not even exist ( ἐóìὲí ). As a confirmation of his statement, and as fully harmonizing ( ὡò êáὶ — åῖ ̓ ñÞêáóéí ) with the proposition advanced by him ( ἐí áὐôῷ — ἐóìÝí ), Paul quotes an expression used by certain poets who were themselves Greeks like his hearers ( ïἱ êáè ʼ ὑìáò ), the sense of which is: ‘We, too, belong to his race.’ The quotation, which constitutes the beginning of an hexameter, is taken verbatim from the poet Aratus, a native of Soli in Cilicia, who flourished during the third century before the Christian era. The following words occur at the beginning of his astronomical poem, entitled Öáéíüìåíá , Act_17:4 f.:
—— ðÜíôç äὲ Äéὸò êå÷ñÞìåèá ðÜíôåò
ôïῦ ãὰñ ãÝíïò ἐóìÝí .——
T ïῦ (poetical, for ôïýôïõ [Winer §17. 1. init.) refers in Aratus to Zeus [Jupiter], but is applied by Paul to the true God. Now when Paul attributes the same thought to several poets ( ôéíåò — åἰñÞêáóé ), he has probably also Cleanthes of Lycia in view, who in his Hymn. in. Jov. Act_17:5, introduces the following words: ἐê óïῦ ãὰñ ãÝíïò ἐóìÝí . The apostle may have become acquainted with such passages, and retained them in his memory, without rendering it necessary to assume that he had received a regular Hellenic education in his earlier years, or had devoted himself to the study of Greek literature; his acquaintance with the passages quoted by him may be the more readily explained, when we remember that he was reared in Tarsus, in which city Greek culture prevailed, and that Aratus was a native of the same province to which he belonged.
Act_17:29. Forasmuch then.—From this poetical saying, involving a principle which his hearers well knew and readily conceded, Paul draws an additional conclusion ( ïῦ ̓ í ) against the worship of images, as well as against the pagan habit of thought ( íïìßæåéí ), which sustained that worship. However direct and unequivocal this refutation is in principle, the language employed is exceedingly moderate and gentle, especially in the introduction of the first person, ïὐê ὀöåßëïìåí , whereas he might have said: ‘It is foolish and senseless in you to yield to such a delusion!’ The inference is the following: If we are allied to God, if He and we are homogeneous, it must follow that the Deity ( ôὸ èåῖïí , conforming to the philosophical usus loquendi of the ancients), on the one hand, and a substance, on the other, which is nothing but a metal or a stone, cannot be homogeneous, as such a substance (the form of which is simply a work of human art) and man are heterogeneous.—The apostle makes this statement notwithstanding that, or rather, precisely because, the most costly statues of the gods, made of silver and gold, of marble and ivory, the most renowned masterpieces of ancient art, were standing on the Acropolis and other places, as well as in the temples of Athens. X Üñáãìá (from ÷áñÜóóù ) denotes a carved or sculptured work, a production of the skill and deliberation of a man; ἐíèýìçóéò does not, according to the usus loquendi, mean the desire or motive proceeding from an artistic inclination (Meyer), but is equivalent to reflection, consideration. When Paul, therefore, designs to prove that the worship of images is irrational, he directs the attention of his hearers both to the materials of which those images are made ( ÷ñõó ἀñã . ëéè .), and also to the way and manner in which they are constructed and completed, that is, partly by means of skilful hands ( ôÝ÷íçò ), partly by reflection or deliberation on questions like these: “Which of the gods shall be made? of what material? etc.” Terms, that exhibit the most striking contrast, viz., ἀíèñþðïõ and ôὸ èåῖïí , are intentionally placed in juxtaposition. [Meyer].
Act_17:30-31. At this point a new division of the discourse commences, referring to the subject of salvation, to the Saviour himself, to repentance, and to faith. Paul had already intimated that men had hitherto failed to discover the truth—that they had gone astray. After assuming this position ( ïῦ ̓ í ), he proceeds to bear witness that God had overlooked the times of ignorance ( ὑðåñéäþí i.e., had allowed them to pass by without any positive manifestation of grace, on the one hand, but also without a stern rebuke, on the other), whereas now, when a crisis had arrived ( ôáíῦí ), He demands a change of mind, or repentance on the part of all men (the terms ôïῖò ἀíèñþðïéò ðᾶóé ðáíôá÷ïῦ express the conception of universality in the most explicit manner). [“ ὑðåñþðïéò , not to look at, not to notice; LXX. Psa_55:2; Deu_22:1; not to punish, Joseph. Ant. ii. 6. 8 (9),” (de Wette).—“Hath overlooked; it should be observed that no such metaphor as ‘winked at’ is to be found in the original” (Conyb. and H. I. 407. note).—Tr.]. This demand, which concerns all mankind, is now made in view of the fact that ( êáèüôé ) God has fixed a day for the righteous judgment of the world, which he will execute through a man [“ ἐí ἀíäñß , i.e., in the person of a man, who will be the representative of God.” (Meyer).—Tr.], whom he has appointed for that purpose ( ῷ ̓ ὥñéóå , an attraction frequently occurring [Winer, § Act_24:1]), after having offered faith in him to all men by raising him from the dead; the expression ðßóôéí ðáñÝ÷åéí means—to make such faith possible, or bring it near, namely, by means of the testimony borne in favor of him and his dignity by the fact of his resurrection.
Act_17:32-34. a. The speaker had proceeded so far, without, however, having concluded, when he was interrupted by loud mockery of the resurrection; the definite article is intentionally omitted before the genitive in the expression ἀíÜóôáóéò íåêñῶí ; its presence would have denoted the resurrection of all the dead, whereas that of only one who had been dead, namely, Jesus, is here meant. The other hearers, who did not actually mock, and who remarked in courteous terms that they would listen to him on this subject on a future occasion, at least implied that they, too, desired at that time to hear no more. And thus ( ïὕôùò , i.e., when so little could be expected from the manner in which his words had been received), Paul withdrew from the assembly. Still, some men attached themselves to him, and were also converted; among these, Luke mentions only one by name, viz., Dionysius, a member of the Areopagus, which was the most ancient tribunal of Athens, and universally regarded with respect. That he was a man of great distinction may be inferred from the circumstance that the court of the Areopagites consisted of the noblest and most independent men, whose integrity of character was unquestioned. Tradition represents him as having been the first bishop of Athens, and as having died as a martyr; at a later period several writings, and a peculiar system, of a mystical character, were falsely ascribed to him. [See the article Dionysius Areopagita, in Herzog: Encyk. III. 412–418.—Tr.]. Damaris is entirely unknown; the manner in which she is mentioned [simply, ãõíὴ ὀíüìáôé ], clearly shows that it is an error to represent her as having been the wife of Dionysius. (Chrysostom):
b. The unity of this discourse is readily seen; its theme is the inscription on that altar: ἀãíþóôῳ èåῷ . The apostle gladly admits that a religious feeling of a certain character governed the Athenians, but refers to that inscription as an evidence that they were deficient in the true knowledge of God. Hence he proclaims the truth to them, first, with respect to God, Act_17:24-25; secondly, with respect to man, who is appointed to seek and to find God, and who is related to Him, Act_17:26-28. After an intermediate observation, Act_17:29, which rebukes the error of image-worship, Paul proclaims, thirdly, that the times of ignorance had reached their end, and demands a return to God, and faith in the Risen One, who is the Saviour and the Judge of the world. (Comp. Lange: Church History, II. 222 ff.). The whole discourse is admirably suited to the time and the place, is characterized by wisdom and mature reflection, is considerate and yet frank, moderate and yet pointed, lofty in the thoughts which it expresses, and marked by genuine Pauline features in its fundamental views (respecting the unity of the revelation of God in creation, in the conscience, and in the work of redemption), as well as in the distinction-between the ante-Christian and the Christian historical periods; hence we cannot believe that any foundation exists which would sustain the doubt expressed by some writers respecting the credibility of this narrative of the appearance of the apostle in Athens, and of this report of his discourse. [“As this discourse was interrupted (Act_17:32), we have no right to describe it as a mere lesson in natural theology, nor even to assume (with Calvin and some others) that it is less fully reported in the last than in the first part, &c.” (Alex.).—Tr.]
2. The present is also the first occasion on which Christianity comes in contact with philosophy, as well as with art. Here, too, the encounter is not of a friendly nature; the only difference is found in the fact that while Paul commenced the contest in the first case, the philosophers are here the assailants. Neither the narrative in Act_17:16-18, nor the discourse delivered on the Hill of Mars, contains a single expression implying that a direct attack on philosophy had been made by Paul. But both before and after his discourse, the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers speak of his doctrine partly in a mocking and contemptuous, and partly in a cold or disdainful manner. This circumstance may be readily understood, when we remember that it was precisely with the schools of Epicurus and Zeno that Paul came in contact. The systems of both were, more than others, at variance with the Christian doctrine—that of the Epicureans on account of their doctrine concerning the Deity, and pleasure as the sovereign good—that of the Stoics on account of their moral self-sufficiency. Still, this first encounter by no means justifies the inference that Christianity itself is hostile to philosophy. It may, on the contrary, be already predicted, after noticing the fruitful germs of thought which this Athenian discourse presents, that the truth in Christ Jesus will itself give rise to a Christian philosophy.
3. The very first thought expressed in this missionary discourse, is of such a character: ὁ ἀãíïïῦíôåò åὐóåâåῖôå — êáôáããÝëëù ὑìῖí Paul begins by referring to that inscription on an altar: “To an unknown God,” and sets forth more fully the deep meaning which it conveys. The worship of an unknown God involves a confession both of a want of knowledge, and of the pressing need of the worship of Him who is unknown. The gods who are known, mentioned by name, and worshipped as such, do not satisfy the religious wants of man, and hence these wants impel him to look beyond the limits and forms of the existing worship for relief. But the object of worship now added, is confessedly unknown and unnamed ( ὁ ἀãíïïῦíôåò åὐóåâåῖôå , Act_17:23; ἡ ἄãïéá , Act_17:30.); and the worship, moreover, of an unknown Deity, involves a dim conception or presentiment of the unknown God. Religious truth, however indistinctly or dimly apprehended, nevertheless lies hidden even in the mass of pagan legends of gods, forms of worship, and superstitious practices. But that which the religious mind, groping in the dark, attempts to find (comp. æçôåῖí , øçëáöåῖí , Act_17:27), is a gift of revelation, and is now consciously and distinctly proclaimed ( ôïῦôï — êáôáãÝëëù ὑìῖí ). These are the germs both of a “Philosophy of Mythology”, and of a “Philosophy of Revelation.”
4. Paul proclaims the one personal God as the Creator of the world and the Lord of the world, exalted above every creature; thus he states the truth in direct terms, without attempting to controvert and reject any opposite views. His remarks refute, at the same time, the whole system which confounds God and nature—a system which constitutes the foundation of natural religion, which is expressed in its myths, and which clings to the ancient philosophy. The Hellenic gods had a beginning; there was no theological system without a theogony which adopted this principle; even the philosophy of the classical period cannot yet accurately discriminate between God and the world, neither does it rise to a true conception of the creation. (Comp. Baumgarten, Il. I. 249 ff., and, with regard to Plato, Zeller: The Philosophy of the Greeks, II. 474 ff., 2d. ed. 1859.). At all times, and in every stage of philosophic thought, the fact of the creation of the world, and the conception of the supernaturality of God as the Lord of the world, are fundamental principles of the truth, which cannot, without danger, be misunderstood or undervalued.
5. We are indebted to revelation for the true view of man and human nature. The unity of the human race (Act_17:26), was unknown to all polytheistic religions. All these, conforming to the theory that there are many gods, proceeded on the principle that the primordials of the various nations were also many in number, and that these nations and their respective founders were originally of different degrees of rank. This essential difference as to origin, was assumed as perpetuated in the subsequent history of the nations. The conception of unity in the history of mankind, was also entirely foreign to heathenism. Even those nations which had risen to the highest degree of culture and intelligence, the Greeks and the Romans, regarded themselves, respectively, as constituting the central point of the history of the world; they could form no conception of a Universal History of mankind, viewed as one race. (See Baumgarten, II. 1. 269 ff.). That unity is exhibited solely by revelation, both in the Old and in the New Testament, in which the human race is traced back to the one and the true God. According to the truth of the Bible, the history of the world begins with Him, and continually points to Him; this great principle was revealed under the old covenant in facts of history which were full of promise; it was exhibited in its reality in the Person of the Redeemer, who is, at the same time, the second Adam and the Son of God.
6. The indwelling of man in God is asserted by the apostle in Act_17:28 : ἐí áὐôῷ æῶìåí — ἐóìÝí . This proposition has often been misunderstood and subjected to abuse; some have, very erroneously, even found Pantheism in it. For, in the first place, the apostle does not here speak of the world, of the creature, in general, but solely of man, and that, too, in connection with the proposition that man can find God and is near to Him. In the second place, it is simply asserted that we are in God and live in Him, but not even remotely that God, as it were, is lost in the world, that is, combined or identified with it, or that the world is substantially one and the same with God. In the third place, the supermundane nature of God, Act_17:24, is attested with sufficient distinctness by the very conception of the creation and by the words: