Acts

PAUL AT ATHENS

Act 17:22 – Act 17:34 .

‘I am become all things to all men,’ said Paul, and his address at Athens strikingly exemplifies that principle of his action. Contrast it with his speech in the synagogue of Pisidian Antioch, which appeals entirely to the Old Testament, and is saturated with Jewish ideas, or with the remonstrance to the rude Lycaonian peasants Act 14:15 , etc., which, while handling some of the same thoughts as at Athens, does so in a remarkably different manner. There he appealed to God’s gifts of ‘rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons,’ the things most close to his hearers’ experience; here, speaking to educated ‘philosophers,’ he quotes Greek poetry, and sets forth a reasoned declaration of the nature of the Godhead and the relations of a philosophy of history and an argument against idolatry. The glories of Greek art were around him; the statues of Pallas Athene and many more fair creations looked down on the little Jew who dared to proclaim their nullity as representations of the Godhead.

Paul’s flexibility of mind and power of adapting himself to every circumstance were never more strikingly shown than in that great address to the quick-witted Athenians. It falls into three parts: the conciliatory prelude Act 17:22 – Act 17:23; the declaration of the Unknown God Act 17:24 – Act 17:29; and the proclamation of the God-ordained Man Act 17:30 – Act 17:31.

I. We have, first, the conciliatory prelude.

It is always a mistake for the apostle of a new truth to begin by running a tilt at old errors. It is common sense to seek to find some point in the present beliefs of his hearers to which his message may attach itself. An orator who flatters for the sake of securing favour for himself is despicable; a missionary who recognises the truth which lies under the system which he seeks to overthrow, is wise.

It is incredible that Paul should have begun his speech to so critical an audience by charging them with excessive superstition, as the Authorised Version makes him do. Nor does the modified translation of the Revised Version seem to be precisely what is meant. Paul is not blaming the Athenians, but recording a fact which he had noticed, and from which he desired to start. Ramsay’s translation gives the truer notion of his meaning-’more than others respectful of what is divine.’ ‘Superstition’ necessarily conveys a sense of blame, but the word in the original does not.

We can see Paul as a stranger wandering through the city, and noting with keen eyes every token of the all-pervading idolatry. He does not tell his hearers that his spirit burned within him when he saw the city full of idols; but he smothers all that, and speaks only of the inscription which he had noticed on one, probably obscure and forgotten, altar: ‘To the Unknown God.’ Scholars have given themselves a great deal of trouble to show from other authors that there were such altars. But Paul is as good an ‘authority’ as these, and we may take his word that he did see such an inscription. Whether it had the full significance which he reads into it or not, it crystallised in an express avowal that sense of Something behind and above the ‘gods many’ of Greek religion, which found expression in the words of their noblest thinkers and poets, and lay like a nightmare on them.

To charge an Athenian audience, proud of their knowledge, with ignorance, was a hazardous and audacious undertaking; to make them charge themselves was more than an oratorical device. It appealed to the deepest consciousness even of the popular mind. Even with this prelude, the claims of this wandering Jew to pose as the instructor of Epicureans and Stoics, and to possess a knowledge of the Divine which they lacked, were daring. But how calmly and confidently Paul makes them, and with what easy and conciliatory adoption of their own terminology, if we adopt the reading of Act 17:23 in Revised Version ‘What ye worship . . . this,’ etc., which puts forward the abstract conception of divinity rather than the personal God.

The spirit in which Paul approached his difficult audience teaches all Christian missionaries and controversialists a needed and neglected lesson. We should accentuate points of resemblance rather than of difference, to begin with. We should not run a tilt against even errors, and so provoke to their defence, but rather find in creeds and practices an ignorant groping after, and so a door of entrance for, the truth which we seek to recommend.

II. The declaration of the Unknown God has been prepared for, and now follows, and with it is bound up a polemic against idolatry.

Conciliation is not to be carried so far as to hide the antagonism between the truth and error. We may give non-Christian systems of religion credit for all the good in them, but we are not to blink their contrariety to the true religion. Conciliation and controversy are both needful; and he is the best Christian teacher who has mastered the secret of the due proportion between them.

Every word of Paul’s proclamation strikes full and square at some counter belief of his hearers. He begins with creation, which he declares to have been the act of one personal God, and neither of a multitude of deities, as some of his hearers held, nor of an impersonal blind power, as others believed, nor the result of chance, nor eternal, as others maintained. He boldly proclaims there, below the shadow of the Parthenon, that there is but one God,-the universal Lord, because the universal Creator. Many consequences from that fact, no doubt, crowded into Paul’s mind; but he swiftly turns to its bearing on the pomp of temples which were the glory of Athens, and the multitude of sacrifices which he had beheld on their altars. The true conception of God as the Creator and Lord of all things cuts up by the roots the pagan notions of temples as dwelling-places of a god and of sacrifices as ministering to his needs. With one crushing blow Paul pulverises the fair fanes around him, and declares that sacrifice, as practised there, contradicted the plain truth as to God’s nature. To suppose that man can give anything to Him, or that He needs anything, is absurd. All heathen worship reverses the parts of God and man, and loses sight of the fact that He is the giver continually and of everything. Life in its origination, the continuance thereof breath, and all which enriches it, are from Him. Then true worship will not be giving to, but thankfully accepting from and using for, Him, His manifold gifts.

So Paul declares the one God as Creator and Sustainer of all. He goes on to sketch in broad outline what we may call a philosophy of history. The declaration of the unity of mankind was a wholly strange message to proud Athenians, who believed themselves to be a race apart, not only from the ‘barbarians,’ whom all Greeks regarded as made of other clay than they, but from the rest of the Greek world. It flatly contradicted one of their most cherished prerogatives. Not only does Paul claim one origin for all men, but he regards all nations as equally cared for by the one God. His hearers believed that each people had its own patron deities, and that the wars of nations were the wars of their gods, who won for them territory, and presided over their national fortunes. To all that way of thinking the Apostle opposes the conception, which naturally follows from his fundamental declaration of the one Creator, of His providential guidance of all nations in regard to their place in the world and the epochs of their history.

But he rises still higher when he declares the divine purpose in all the tangled web of history-the variety of conditions of nations, their rise and fall, their glory and decay, their planting in their lands and their rooting out,-to be to lead all men to ‘seek God.’ That is the deepest meaning of history. The whole course of human affairs is God’s drawing men to Himself. Not only in Judea, nor only by special revelation, but by the gifts bestowed, and the schooling brought to bear on every nation, He would stir men up to seek for Him.

But that great purpose has not been realised. There is a tragic ‘if haply’ inevitable; and men may refuse to yield to the impulses towards God. They are the more likely to do so, inasmuch as to find Him they must ‘feel after Him,’ and that is hard. The tendrils of a plant turn to the far-off light, but men’s spirits do not thus grope after God. Something has come in the way which frustrates the divine purpose, and makes men blind and unwilling to seek Him.

Paul docs not at once draw the two plain inferences, that there must be something more than the nations have had, if they are to find God, even His seeking them in some new fashion; and that the power which neutralises God’s design in creation and providence is sin. He has a word to say about both these, but for the moment he contents himself with pointing to the fact, attested by his hearers’ consciousness, and by many a saying of thinkers and poets, that the failure to find God does not arise from His hiding Himself in some remote obscurity. Men are plunged, as it were, in the ocean of God, encompassed by Him as an atmosphere, and-highest thought of all, and not strange to Greek thought of the nobler sort-kindred with Him as both drawing life from Him and being in His image. Whence, then, but from their own fault, could men have failed to find God? If He is ‘unknown,’ it is not because He has shrouded Himself in darkness, but because they do not love the light. One swift glance at the folly of idolatry, as demonstrated by this thought of man’s being the offspring of God, leads naturally to the properly Christian conclusion of the address.

III. It is probable that this part of it was prematurely ended by the mockery of some and the impatience of others, who had had enough of Paul and his talk, and who, when they said, ‘We will hear thee again,’ meant, ‘We will not hear you now.’ But, even in the compass permitted him, he gives much of his message.

We can but briefly note the course of thought. He comes back to his former word ‘ignorance,’ bitter pill as it was for the Athenian cultured class to swallow. He has shown them how their religion ignores or contradicts the true conceptions of God and man. But he no sooner brings the charge than he proclaims God’s forbearance. And he no sooner proclaims God’s forbearance than he rises to the full height of his mission as God’s ambassador, and speaks in authoritative tones, as bearing His ‘commands.’

Now the hint in the previous part is made more plain. The demand for repentance implies sin. Then the ‘ignorance’ was not inevitable or innocent. There was an element of guilt in men’s not feeling after God, and sin is universal, for ‘all men everywhere’ are summoned to repent. Philosophers and artists, and cultivated triflers, and sincere worshippers of Pallas and Zeus, and all ‘barbarian’ people, are alike here. That would grate on Athenian pride, as it grates now on ours. The reason for repentance would be as strange to the hearers as the command was-a universal judgment, of which the principle was to be rigid righteousness, and the Judge, not Minos or Rhadamanthus, but ‘a Man’ ordained for that function.

What raving nonsense that would appear to men who had largely lost the belief in a life beyond the grave! The universal Judge a man! No wonder that the quick Athenian sense of the ridiculous began to rise against this Jew fanatic, bringing his dreams among cultured people like them! And the proof which he alleged as evidence to all men that it is so, would sound even more ridiculous than the assertion meant to be proved. ‘A man has been raised from the dead; and this anonymous Man, whom nobody ever heard of before, and who is no doubt one of the speaker’s countrymen, is to judge us, Stoics, Epicureans, polished people, and we are to be herded to His bar in company with Boeotians and barbarians! The man is mad.’

So the assembly broke up in inextinguishable laughter, and Paul silently ‘departed from among them,’ having never named the name of Jesus to them. He never more earnestly tried to adapt his teaching to his audience; he never was more unsuccessful in his attempt by all means to gain some. Was it a remembrance of that scene in Athens that made him write to the Corinthians that his message was ‘to the Greeks foolishness’?

Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Act 17:22-31

22So Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said, “Men of Athens, I observe that you are very religious in all respects. 23For while I was passing through and examining the objects of your worship, I also found an altar with this inscription, ‘to an unknown god.’ Therefore what you worship in ignorance, this I proclaim to you. 24The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; 25nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things; 26and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, 27that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we also are His children.’ 29Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought of man. 30Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent, 31because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead.”

Act 17:22 “you are very religious” This is literally “to fear the gods (daimn).” This can mean (1) in a negative sense, “superstitious,” as in the King James Version, or (2) in a positive sense, “very precise in the practice of religious detail” (NKJV, NJB cf. Act 25:19). These men had an intellectual curiosity and respect for religious matters, but only within certain parameters (their traditions).

“all” Notice the number of times in this sermon that Paul uses the inclusive “all” or phrases that parallel it.

1. “all respects,” Act 17:22

2. “all things,” Act 17:24

3. “all life and breath,” Act 17:25

4. “all things,” Act 17:25

5. “every nation,” Act 17:26

6. “all the face of the earth,” Act 17:26

7. “each one of us,” Act 17:27

8. “we” (twice”, Act 17:28

9. “all everywhere,” Act 17:30

10. “the world” (lit. The inhabited earth), Act 17:31

11. “all men,” Act 17:31

Paul’s good news was that God loved all humans (i.e., made in His image, cf. Gen 1:26-27) and has provided a way for them to know Him (i.e., original purpose of creation was fellowship with God, cf. Gen 3:8) and be forgiven (i.e., from the effects of the fall, cf. Genesis 3).

Act 17:23 “inscription, ‘to an unknown god'” The Greeks were afraid they may have forgotten or left out of their worship an important deity who might cause trouble if neglected, so they regularly had monuments of this type (cf. Pausanias, Description of Greece 1:1:4 and Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 6:3:5). It shows their fear of the spiritual realm and their polytheism.

“Therefore what you worship in ignorance” There is a word play between “unknown” (agnet) and “ignorance” (agnoountes). We get the English word “agnostic” from this Greek word. Paul was adapting the gospel presentation to pagans who believed in an impersonal world soul.

“This I proclaim to you” Paul is clearly asserting that he is not a “babbler” (Act 17:18) and that he does know the high God they are ignorant of.

Act 17:24 “The God who made the world and all things in it” Paul’s first theological point is God is creator (cf. Genesis 1-2; Psalms 104; Psa 146:6; Isa 42:5). The Greeks believed that spirit (God) and matter (atoms) were both co-eternal. Paul asserts the Genesis 1 concept of creation where a personal, purposeful God creates both the heavens and the earth (this planet and the universe).

“does not dwell in temples made with hands” This is a quote from (1) the OT (cf. 1Ki 8:27; Isa 66:1-2) or (2) a Greek philosopher, Euripides, Fragment 968. There are several quotes in this context from Greek writers (cf. Act 17:25; Acts 28). Paul was also trained in Greek scholastics.

Act 17:25 “as though He needed anything” This same thought is found in (1) Euripides’ Heracles 1345f; (2) Plato’s Euthyphro 14c; (3) Aristobulus, Fragment 4; or (4) Psa 50:9-12. The Greek temples were often seen as the place where the gods were fed and cared for.

“since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things” This may be an allusion to Isa 42:5. This is Paul’s theological way of asserting (1) God’s love for humanity (mercy, grace) and (2) God’s gracious provision for humanity (providence). A similar truth was made by Zeno, the founder of the Stoic school, recorded in Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 5:76:1. Notice the “autos,” He Himself! What a wonderful truth for Gentile pagans to hear and receive.

Act 17:26 “He made from one” The western family of Greek manuscripts adds “one blood.” However, the Greek manuscripts P74, , A, and B omit the term (the UBS4 gives its omission a “B” rating [almost certain]). If original it refers to Adam. If it is an allusion to Greek philosophy it reflects the unity of humanity from one stock. This phrase and the next one clearly assert the solidarity of all humanity (possibly an allusion from Mal 2:10, or even the LXX of Deu 32:8), and theologically it asserts that humans are made in God’s image (cf. Gen 1:26-27).

The rest of this verse may also allude to the Genesis account. Mankind is commanded to be fruitful and fill the earth (cf. Acts 1:28; Act 9:1; Act 9:7). Humans were reluctant to separate and fill the earth. The Tower of Babel (cf. Genesis 10-11) shows God’s mechanism to accomplish this.

“having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation” Paul asserts that God not only created all things, but directs all things. This may be an allusion to Deu 32:8 (LXX). However, this truth is also asserted elsewhere in the OT (cf. Job 12:23; Psa 47:7-9; Psa 66:7).

Act 17:27 The first phrase may be another quote from the Greek poet, Aratus.

“if” This is a fourth class conditional which means the farthest removed from reality. Humans must recognize their need. Both verbs are aorist active optatives.

NASB, NKJV,

NRSV”they might grope for Him”

TEV”as they felt around for him”

NJB”feeling their way towards him”

The word means “to touch” or “to feel” (cf. Luk 24:39). This context implies a groping due to darkness or confusion. They are trying to find God, but it is not easy. Paganism is a blinding force which characterizes the fall, as does idolatry and superstition (cf. Romans 1-2), but God is present!

“He is not far from each one of us” What a wonderful truth. God created us, God is for us, God is with us (cf. Psalms 139)! Paul is forcibly asserting God’s love, care, and presence with all humans. This is the truth of the gospel (cf. Eph 2:11 to Eph 3:13).

Paul may be alluding to Deu 4:7 or Jer 23:23-24, but extrapolating it to all humans. This is the hidden secret of the New Covenant!

Act 17:28 “even some of your own poets have said” The previous phrase, “in Him we live and move and exist,” is a quote from

1. Cleanthes’ Hymn to Zeus. He was the head of the Stoic school from 263-232 B.C. or

2. Aratus’s (from Soli, a city near Tarsus) Phainomena, line 5. Aratus was from Cilicia and lived from 315-240 B.C. This quote emphasizes either

a. God’s immanence (cf. Act 17:27) or

b. God’s creation of all humans (cf. Act 17:26).

Paul also quotes the Epicureans in 1Co 15:32 and Menander, Thais, in 1Co 15:33. Paul was trained in Greek literature and rhetoric, probably at Tarsus, which was a major university town.

“For we also are His children” This is another quote, possibly from Epimenides, quoted by Diogenes Laertius in Lives of the Philosophers 1:112.

Act 17:29 This is Paul’s conclusion and refutation of idolatry (cf. Psa 115:1-18; Isa 40:18-20; Isa 44:9-20; Isa 46:1-7; Jer 10:6-11; Hab 2:18-19). The tragedy of fallen humanity is that they seek spiritual truth and fellowship from manmade things that cannot hear, answer, or help!

Act 17:30 “overlooked the times of ignorance” This is a surprising aspect of God’s mercy (cf. Rom 3:20; Rom 3:25; Rom 4:15; Rom 5:13; Rom 5:20; Rom 7:5; Rom 7:7-8; 1Co 15:56). But now they have heard the gospel and are spiritually responsible!

“God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere” This statement asserts

1. there is only one God

2. He wants all humans everywhere to repent

It shows the universalism of God’s mercy and love (cf. Joh 3:16; Joh 4:42; 1Ti 2:4; Tit 2:11; 2Pe 3:9; 1Jn 2:1; 1Jn 4:14). This is not universalism in the sense that all will be saved (cf. Act 17:32-33), but in the sense that God desires all humans to repent and trust Jesus for salvation. Jesus died for all! All can be saved! The mystery of evil is that not all will be saved.

“repent” The Hebrew term means “a change of action,” while the Greek term refers to a “change of mind.” Both are crucial. Both schools of philosophy mentioned in Act 17:18 would have rejected this, but for different reasons. See SPECIAL TOPIC: REPENTANCE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT at Act 2:38.

Act 17:31 “because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world” Paul’s message has clearly and repeatedly asserted God’s mercy and provision. But this is only half the message. The God of love and compassion is also the God of justice who desires righteousness. Humans made in His image will give an account of their stewardship of the gift of life (i.e., Psa 96:13; Psa 98:9). The NT theme that God will judge the world (hyperbole on the known world) is recurrent (ex. Mat 10:15; Mat 11:22; Mat 11:24; Mat 16:27; Mat 22:36; Mat 25:31-46; Rev 20:11-15).

“through a Man whom He has appointed” This concept of a Judgement Day based on our faith relationship to a resurrected man, Jesus of Nazareth (YHWH’s agent in judgment), was unheard of and incredible to these Greek intellectuals (cf. 1Co 1:23), but the heart of the gospel witness (cf. Act 10:42; Mat 25:31-33).

“by raising Him from the dead” This theme is repeated many times in Acts (cf. Act 2:24; Act 2:32; Act 3:15; Act 3:26; Act 4:10; Act 5:30; Act 10:40; Act 13:30; Act 13:33-34; Act 13:37; Act 17:31). It is the heart of the gospel affirmation that God the Father accepted the life, teaching, and substitutionary death of Jesus. The fullest teaching text on the subject of (1) Jesus’ resurrection and (2) the resurrection of believers is 1 Corinthians 15.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

Mars’ hill. See Act 17:19.

Ye men of Athens. Greek. andres Aihenaioi. See note on Act 1:11.

perceive. Same as “saw”, Act 17:16.

in = according to. Greek. kata. App-104.

too superstitious = more religiously disposed than others. Greek. deisidaimonesteros, comparative of deisidaimon, compound of deido (to fear) and daimon. Only here. The noun occurs in Act 25:19. The Authorized Version rendering is too rude, and Paul had too much tact to begin by offending his audience. Figure of speech Protherapeia. App-6.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

22.] The Commentators vie with each other in admiration of this truly wonderful speech of the great Apostle. Chrysostom: , , , , , . The oration of Paul before this assembly is a living proof of his apostolic wisdom and eloquence: we see here how he, according to his own words, could become a Gentile to the Gentiles, to win the Gentiles to the Gospel, Neander, Pfl. u. L., p. 317. And Stier very properly remarks (Reden der Apostel, ii. 131), It was given to the Apostle in this hour, what he should speak; this is plainly to be seen in the following discourse, which we might weary ourselves with praising and admiring in various ways; but far better than all so-called praise from our poor tongues is the humble recognition, that the Holy Ghost, the spirit of Jesus, has here spoken by the Apostle, and therefore it is that we have in his discourse a masterpiece of apostolic wisdom. The same Commentator gives the substance of the speech thus: He who is (by your own involuntary confession) unknown to you Athenians (religious though you are),-and yet (again, by your own confession) able to be known,-the all-sufficing Creator of the world, Preserver of all creatures, and Governor of mankind,-now commandeth all men (by me His minister) to repent, that they may know Him, and to believe in the Man whom He hath raised from the dead, that they may stand in the judgment, which He hath committed to Him.

.] The regular and dignified appellation familiar to them as used by all their orators,-of whose works Paul could hardly be altogether ignorant.

., in every point of view: see reff.

] carrying your religious reverence very far: an instance of which follows, in that they, not content with worshipping named and known gods, worshipped even an unknown one. Blame is neither expressed, nor even implied: but their exceeding veneration for religion laid hold of as a fact, on which Paul, with exquisite skill, engrafts his proof that he is introducing no new gods, but enlightening them with regard to an object of worship on which they were confessedly in the dark. So Chrysost.: ., . , .

To understand this word as E. V. too superstitious (superstitiosiores, Vulg., so Luther, Calov., Wolf), is to miss the fine and delicate tact of the speech, by which he at once parries the charge against him, and in doing so introduces the great Truth which he came to preach.

The word itself has both senses: , , Hesych[86]:- (in battle) , Xen. Cyrop. iii. 3. 58: and on the other hand, Theophrast. Char. 16, explains by : and Pollux, , , , .

[86] Hesychius of Jerusalem, centy. vi.

The character thus given of the Athenians is confirmed by Greek writers: thus, Pausan. i. 24. 3, . See other instances in Wetstein. Josephus, c. Apion. ii. 11, calls them .

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Act 17:22. , in the midst) A spacious theatre. [The one single messenger of Christ in this instance had to encounter the might (strongest sinews) of human wisdom.-V. g.]-, said) As among the Lycaonians he set forth natural Theology in the way of instruction (catechetically), so at Athens he set it forth in the way of an address to the ears of a learned audience, with marvellous wisdom, subtilty (refinement), fulness, and courtesy. They ask for new things: Paul, in his apostolico-philosophical speech, begins with what is most ancient and comes to the newest truths; both of which alike were new to them. And he shows them the origin and end of all things, concerning which their philosophers used to discuss so much, and he in a most appropriate manner refutes the Stoics and Epicureans alike.- , in all things) altogether.- ) , religiosus, is a word in itself , of middle signification between good and bad, and therefore has in it an ambiguity conciliatory, and most suitable to this the opening of his speech, wherein, as in the case of the Jews, ch. Act 22:3, so in this case, the apostle deals gently with the Gentiles here, until in his subsequent declaration, , for I found, he verges to reproof. Therefore he calls them , as being persons who in their religion had fear, a feeling not in itself bad, without knowledge; or, in other words, those who , worship ignorantly, the Divinity: the foll, verse. The comparative also mitigates the language; and the particle (as being somewhat too fearful in your religion) explains and softens the expression. Observe, Reader: Impiety and false religions, as many as they are, and as great soever as they may be, as far as concerns the soul, are fears: the Christian religion alone has this peculiarity, that it fully satisfies the noblest faculties and affections of man, and brings with it a calm kind of fear, and confidence accompanying the fear, and love, hope, and joy.- , I perceive you) Great keenness of observation and great freedom of speech. Paul alone against all Athens.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

the One Living and True God

Act 17:22-34

The gospel preacher must avail himself of any circumstance in his surroundings that will enable him to arrest the attention of his audience. He must meet them where they are and take them with him to realms of thought with which they are not familiar. Paul was wise to begin with that altar to the unknown god.

Around them stood the most exquisite temples ever reared by human genius, but these were not the home of God. He seeks the lowly and contrite heart, not of the Jew alone, but wherever man is found, and on whatever intellectual plane. Men, the world over, are brothers-he hath made of one blood all nations. The arrangements of divine providence have been contrived to lead men to God. If they feel after Him with reverence and true desire, He will be found of them. All men are His offspring, but only those who receive the Son of God into their hearts become really sons. Repentance is the act of the will, and therefore it may be commanded. God can overlook much that is hurtful and evil, because He loves the world and deals with men according to their light; and we may rejoice therefore that He will judge mankind by the Man.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

An Unknown God

And Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus, and said, Ye men of Athens, in all things I perceive that ye are somewhat superstitious. For as I passed along, and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. What therefore ye worship in ignorance, this set I forth unto you.Act 17:22-23.

1. The story of St. Pauls visit to Athens in the seventeenth chapter of the Acts gives us the points of contact and of difference between the philosophy of the ancient world and the gospel of Jesus Christ. The circumstances introduce the speech, whose brief outline of only about three hundred words is yet enough to show St. Pauls courage as a Christian and his skill as an orator. Adroit in conciliation, delicate in suggestion, thorough in its adaptation, simple and sweeping in its logic, issuing in that testimony of which he dare not be silent, and which is still the crux and the scandal of worldly wisdomit is characteristic of St. Paul from first to last.

2. Silas and Timothy had been left behind at that Beroea where the Scriptures of the prophets had such honour, and, waiting for them all alone, Paul saw Athens where the only prophets are the poets. It was the city of Athenegoddess of skill and wisdom. All Hellenic art and story and worship and thought centred there. For what it was it stood peerless, supreme. Beautiful for situation, and adorned beyond the rivalry of all later ages, of vast intellectual prestige, of a never-satisfied mental curiosityit was the eye of Greece, and it is the wonder of time.

3. No man of ordinary taste and culture could stand in the midst of its glories without a feeling of sthetic enthusiasm. Yet St. Paul was moved only by an intense pity and indignation. There was the Parthenon, beautified by the skill of Phidias and Praxiteles; there the Areopagus, crowned with its colossal image of Mars; there were the famous schools of philosophy by the Ilissus. On every hand were images of gods and heroes. Pliny says that the city contained three thousand such effigies. It was a proverb, There are more gods than men in Athens. The Apostle possibly walked down the Street of Hermes, where a winged figure adorned the front of every house, or along the Avenue of Tripods, lined on every side with votive offerings made by grateful athletes to the gods who had helped them in the games. Gods everywhere: gods on pedestals, in niches, at the corners of the streetsgods and demigods, good, bad, and indifferenta wilderness of gods! And the heart of the Apostle was moved within him as he saw the city full of idols.

4. Over all was the breath of moral decay. Citizens and all comers alike were having leisure for nothing else than to tell or to hear some newer thing. The latest novelty was the most welcomequid nunc? Aristotle and Plato were long dead, and less noble forms of thought now ruled this city of discussion. And this degeneracy of thought showed the incompetency of even the loftiest type of unleavened human reason to resist the sensualism that seeks its end in pleasures, and the fatalism whose pride of aspiration finds its conclusion in despair. What philosophy as such could do, had there been done. Idolatry had exhausted invention. Priests, sacrifices, shrines, festal days, were always in evidence; but this capital of sthetics was still hopelessly unsatisfied and restlessunhappy and impatientand ritual had lost its earnestness.

When love begins to sicken and decay,

It useth an enforced ceremony.

5. There was no difficulty in getting an audience in this paradise of gossips and saunterers, with its shibboleth, Whats the news? The Athenians quickly gathered about the Apostlemen, women, priests, and philosophers, all sorts and conditions of people. And he spoke to them of Jesus and the Resurrection, or as the Greeks had it, Jesus and Anastasiaa pair of new deities. He who introduced a god into Athens was counted a public benefactor. The interest of his audience was thus enchained at once. To know, therefore, more of this peculiar doctrine, they led St. Paul to the Areopagus, a little rising ground within the city to the north-west of the market-place, so called from a celebrated temple upon it dedicated to Ares or Mars, in which was wont to meet a venerable body of senators, who formed a political and judicial Council which also went by the name of the Areopagus. Eastward from this hill and temple of Mars was the acropolis or citadel, overlooking the whole city and crowned with the magnificent temple of Athene Promachos, the guardian or tutelary goddess, and other public edifices of rare architectural beauty. In every other quarter there were numerous temples and fanes filled with images of their gods. To win over the learned philosopher as well as the other intelligent and cultured citizens, St. Paul accommodated himself, as was his wont, to the time, place, and people.

I

Gods Many

In all things I perceive that ye are somewhat superstitious (or very religious, R.V. mg.).

1. Let us look at this word which St. Paul uses. It is very difficult to represent the meaning of the Greek word in our language. The Revised Version has modified the Authorized Version by introducing somewhat instead of too, according to the classical idiom by which the comparative of an adjective may be used to express the deficiency or excess (slight in either case) of the quality contained in the positive. But the quality in this case may be good or bad, since the adjective deisidaimon and the cognate noun may be used of reverence or of superstition. In classic use the word appears very often in a good sense, and many authorities are agreed in taking it so here. But there is no reason to suppose that St. Pauls words were an accommodation to the usual practice of Athenian orators to commence with a mere compliment. At the same time it is possible that with delicate tact the Apostle made use of a word of doubtful meaning, which could not possibly provoke hostility at the outset, while it left unexpressed with kindly ambiguity his own judgment as to the nature of this reverence for the Divine.

2. Our modern atmosphere is charged to saturation with temptations to overestimate the value of natural religions. Let us all the more carefully arm ourselves against them. In warning us against this overestimate of natural religions, St. Paul may perhaps be allowed to give us also a name for it, by the employment of which we may possibly be able to put a new point on our self-admonitions. He calls it Deisidaimonism. And perhaps, in the absence of a good translation, we may profitably adopt the Greek term to-day, with all its uncouthness of sound and its unlovely associations, and so enable ourselves to make a recognizable distinction between that general natural religiosity and its fruits, which we may call deisidaimonism, and true religion, which is the product of the saving truth of God operating upon our native religious instincts and producing through them phenomena which owe all their value to the truth that gives them form.

As you look out over the heathen world with its lords many and gods many, and see working in every form of faith the same religious aspirations, producing in varying measure indeed, but yet everywhere, to some extent, the same civilizing and moralizing effectsare you perhaps sometimes tempted to pronounce it enough; possibly adding something about the special adaptation of the several faiths to the several peoples, or even something about the essential truth underlying all religions? This is deisidaimonism. And on its basis the whole missionary work of the Church is an impertinence, the whole history of the Church a gigantic error; the great commission itself a crime against humanitylaunching the Christian world upon a fools errand, every step of which has dripped with wasted blood. Surely the proclamation of the gospel is made, then, mere folly, and the blood of the martyrs becomes only the measure of the narrow fanaticism of earlier and less enlightened times.1 [Note: B. B. Warfield.]

On the other hand, there is an attitude to other religions which has hindered the progress of Christianity. It is the attitude of ignorance and contempt. By unduly depreciating all other religions we have placed our own in a position which its Founder never intended for it; we have torn it away from the sacred context of the history of the world; we have ignored, or wilfully narrowed, the sundry times and divers manners in which, in times past, God spake unto the fathers by the prophets; and instead of recognizing Christianity as coming in the fulness of time, and as the fulfilment of the hopes and desires of the whole world, we have brought ourselves to look upon its advent as the only broken link in that unbroken chain which is rightly called the Divine government of the world.1 [Note: Max Mller.]

II

An Unknown God

I found also an altar with this inscription, To an unknown God.

1. At first sight it would appear that when the Athenians had erected an altar to every possible god that they knew or could think of, hardly content with their efforts to stand well with heaven, they then proceeded to something further. Lest they might unwittingly have overlooked or omitted some deity that expected their votive offering, and that they were bound to worship, with a pious zeal which the Apostle could not but admire they erected yet another altar which they left un-appropriated. But not to leave the entablature of this altar entirely blank, they filled it in provisionally with this strange dedication: To an unknown God.

The feeling of an uneasy conscience is shown similarly in the Penitential Psalm which a Babylonian king, about 760 b.c., addressed to his offended deity

Against a God, known and unknown,

I have committed errors, I have multiplied rebellions:

I am afraid, I dread the look of Thy divinity.2 [Note: A. Smythe Palmer.]

2. God is to-day to a very large number of men, some of them men of culture and influence, an unknown God. And that openly, argumentatively. They hold that God cannot be known. They have even invented a title for their attitude to God, calling it Agnosticism. But agnosticism is not something that simply affects religion, it is something that affects all life. The only men who have ever done anything worth doing in the world are men who have acted from deep and profound conviction; and if we are to-day to have an agnostic age, then it is a very bad lookout for those who want to see the life of their country grow more noble, more humane, more just and more free. You can see the effect of agnosticism to-day from the top of the life of this country to the bottom. It has affected politics. We are in an age of unsettled convictions. All the vacillations and hesitations of to-day are very largely the result of the fact that we have been losing our hold of the great driving principles that made humanity advance in the days gone by.

The contrast is striking between the light humour of Matthew Arnolds prose writings and the gloom of his poetry. In the poems, which are so admirable in their way, one may not doubt that his inmost feeling finds expression. There pervades them a tone of sadnessa sadness without remedy and without solace. Faith gone, the fountains of joy are dry. And yet he sees that the millions

have such need of joy!

The want of the world is

One mighty wave of thought and joy lifting mankind amain.

But the poet sees no ground of hope. He has no counsel to give to mortals, in their unquenchable yearning for bliss, but to moderate desire, to be content with what a few days on earth may yield. A lesson may be read in Tennyson the reverse of the despairing inference of Arnold

My own dim life should teach me this,

That life shall live for evermore,

Else earth is darkness at the core,

And dust and ashes all that is;

This round of green, this orb of flame,

Fantastic beauty; such as lurks

In some wild Poet, when he works

Without a conscience or an aim.

You can feel the sort of pessimism and scepticism which is round about us, in the very literature of the land. One man said the other day, that the poets who used to sing the Divine hope into the heart of man are singing agnosticism, pessimism, scepticism. John Davidson writes

Sunset and sunrise came,

The seasons passed, the years went slowly by,

But still to me the Universe was dumb.

William Watson describes his search for the voice of God, and this is how he concludes

Above the cloud, beneath the sod,

The Unknown God, the Unknown God.

And that is all. And Swinburne, most brilliant of all, says this

We have said to the dreams that caressed us,

The terrors that smote usgood-night and good-bye.

Good-night and good-bye to every dream of God that ever came to men in the form of religion! Good-night and good-bye to the summons of your God to a holier life, and the offer of God of forgiveness, courage, peace, and all things that make life worth living! Oh, how different it is from the men who spoke to the generation that has just gone bya bigger generation, take it all in all, than ours. Listen: there was Browning describing himself as a man who was very sure of God. You know the story how a lady once, towards the end of his life, asked him about his faith. And he quoted three lines of his own

That one Face, far from vanish, rather grows,

Or decomposes but to recompose,

Become my universe that feels and knows.

And then he added: That is the Face of Christ, and that is how I feel it. And when a man has looked up into the face of Christ like that, he has got something to teach us then that is worth teachingvery much better than to teach us to say to the dream that caressed and the terror that smote us Good-night and good-bye.1 [Note: C. Silvester Horne.]

III

The Only Living and True God

What therefore ye worship in ignorance, this set I forth unto you.

1. Notice how St. Paul meets his hearers on their own ground. He recognized a form of genuine piety (so the word used in the original Greek for worship implies) as shown in the existence of the altar. That Divine nature which you worship, he says, not knowing what it is (notice, he did not say ignorantly worship, as in the Authorized Version), this very thing I set forth to you. In these words lay the answer to the charge that he was a babbler, a setter forth of strange gods. I is emphatic: I whom you regard as a mere babbler proclaim to you, or set forth, the object which you recognize however dimly, and worship however imperfectly.

2. It was a bold thing that St. Paul did when he stood up to tell the men of Athens the nature of the true God. The philosophers of an earlier time, such as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, had had splendid visions of the truth, but they had not done much to enlighten the people. In the world of St. Pauls day there were gods many and lords many; and yet there was nothing that the world of St. Pauls day so greatly needed as the knowledge of the true God.

3. There is nothing that the world of our own day more greatly needs than the knowledge of the true God. For it is only the thought of a God, present indeed within, but in every respect above us, that can uplift humanity and lead it onwards to its goal. Present-day philosophy seeks to support religion, but its exponents have such disputations amongst themselves that those who have not specialized in their lore scarce know what to make of it. They seem all to have a measure of truth, but none of them, perhaps, the whole truth. But, although we may have doubts as to how far the Absolute of some modern philosophers can answer to the idea of God, whether indeed it be not a gulf rather than a God, it is cheering to see how almost all, whether Absolute or Personal Idealists, Ideal Realists, Spiritual Monists or Pluralists, Pragmatists or Humanists, seek to maintain in their own way the reality of God, the value of Faith and Religion, of Freedom and Immortality, without meaning to sacrifice either Divine or human personality.

4. Not only the old Atheism but even Agnosticism is already being left behind. There may be a good deal of practical undefined agnosticism. But the theologian, and the person whose direct interest is religion, will do well to hold fast to the fact of Revelation; only it must be more broadly and more truly conceived. We can know God only in so far as He reveals Himself. He is partly revealed in nature; but if we stop with nature we shall come short of the knowledge of a God who is really higher than ourselves. For man is more than nature. St. Paul certainly pointed the Athenians to God as the Creator of the world who, just because He is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; neither is he served by mens hands, as though he needed anything, seeing that he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things. He declared His omnipresence and nearness to all, for in him we live and move and have our being; and he quoted the saying of certain of their own poets: For we are also his offspring. So far, his teaching might be expressed in terms of the Eastern fable of the fishes who sought to behold the sea

O ye who seek to solve the knot,

Ye live in God, yet know Him not;

Ye sit upon the rivers brink,

Yet crave in vain a drop to drink;

Ye dwell beside a countless store,

Yet perish hungry at the door.

The revelation of God in nature is that of an omnipresent, all-embracing, all-working Power, an Infinite Reason which is manifested in the unvarying order of the world.

5. How are we to find the true God?

(1) St. Paul teaches us that in order to find God we must get at the true idea of God. The faculty of religion in the Athenians was keen but uninformed. St. Paul set forth the true object of worship, first, as Maker of the world, or in their own language the cosmos, with all the order and beauty, adaptation and design, harmony and conspiring motions and uses of all inanimate existences and living beings in it. And He is not only the Creator, who, having once completed His work, and arranged for its maintenance, has left it to go on by itself, like a man who constructs some curious contrivance to go for an indefinite period, and takes no further care of it. But just as He constructed, so He continues to superintend the evolutions and workings of this huge machine of the universe. He presides at the helm of providence. He is the Lord, the possessor and master of heaven and earth. And being so great, and high, and infinite, of Almighty power, spirituality, and prescience, He necessarily could not dwell in temples made with hands. Neither could He be served or ministered to by mens hands, as though He needed anything, seeing He giveth to all creatures life, and breath, and whatever else may be necessary for their sustenance and continuance. So that the Athenians must henceforth attach to their idea of God the predicates of daily and direct providence, together with a spirituality and omnipotence ever at work, energizing throughout the length and breadth of creation, as well as the predicate of original creative power.

(2) But more than this, man everywhere is by creation the son of God. All nations of men who dwell on the broad earth must acknowledge the one Fatherhood. No one particular people, neither the Greeks, nor their Roman conquerors, neither the Jews, nor any other, could engross to themselves the Divine favour. All were brothers, of whatever race or language, without exception, bearing in their make and constitution the Divine impress, endowed with that faculty of religion, in virtue of which they were all drawn to seek after God, if haply they might feel His presence, and discover His working in the creation around, and in the providence over them, since He was at all times immediately near, present in their hearts in the power of His love and holiness. The great Father of men had been schooling and disciplining His children, through the whole course of history, by the varied dispensations of His providence. He had fixed the bounds and determined the ages and periods of human life, both in single persons and in nations. Jew, and Greek, and heathen alike had been tending and hastening toward the goal of human history, the advent of the Redeemer, and the Promulgation of a wholly spiritual and universal religion, in which the ideas of the one fatherhood, and sonship, and brotherhood of the human family would be finally realized. Knowing, therefore, so much of God, and of our relation and dependence upon Him, for we are also his offspring, it was not reasonable to think that the spirituality and infinity of the Deity could be worthily represented by figures, or images, or material symbols of any sort, although men everywhere have fondly endeavoured to realize His presence under some visible emblem or form.

(3) Further, St. Paul went on to declare that in Jesus Christ God had revealed Himself in His moral character, as the God of Righteousness. If in the past He had seemed to slumber, He was now awake; if He had overlooked the ignorance of the past, He would do so no longer; for He had appointed a day in which he would judge the world in righteousness by the man whom he had ordained; whereof he had given assurance to all men in that he had raised him from the dead. Righteousness was the ruling passion in St. Pauls soul, and as he looked around on that world of many gods and of much wickedness, his spirit was mightily stirred to declare to it a God of Righteousness who should judge the world righteously.

(4) And this righteous God is both immanent and transcendent. He is immanent. The revelation of the true God in Christ teaches us that man is Gods organ, Gods son, to learn and to give expression to the will of his Father. The reason why the world is not better than it is, and why individual lives often remain on such a low level, is because men have been looking too exclusively to a God outside themselves, slow to learn where the living God is, or, having learned, reluctant to do His willperhaps because it called for sacrifice. The power of the revelation of God in Christ is in the fact that Jesus stopped not short of the complete sacrifice of Himself in order to do the Will of God. So entirely was He one with God, so completely was He the Continuator of the Divine working in the world. Moreover, since it was the very life of God that moved in ChristGod as the living Godwe see God Himself in Christ accepting and submitting to the actual order of the Universe, and in that Divine silence which makes human life often seem so dark and tragical, enduring the worst that man can do to man, suffering the result in this life of the sin of humanity. In this light we see that the actual order is an absolutely necessary onenecessary for the making of man and for the accomplishment of the Divine purposes concerning him; therefore, one to be accepted, not only in submission, but in faith and hope.

The belief in Gods Fatherhood is the belief in the immanence of God. It is the faith that His interests are bound up with the interests of the tiny sparrow, maimed by a stone from some ruthless hand, and perishing in its pain, as surely as with the spiritual progress of Augustine or St. Paul or the genius of Shakespeare. If a sparrow could fall to the ground without God, then one would have very little confidence in the Divine dealings with the greatest soul. A God unjust to a sparrow would be unjust to all. But if God is really the principle, both differentiating and integrating, that made and guides and informs the whole universe, that is the glory of the wayside flower, and of the farthest star; if the hurt sparrow dies into the life that gave it being, then we have hope for the sparrow and for the souls of men. The universe was not cast off by God, to plunge itself into this terrible travailconflict and anguish and deathwithout Him. His life and thought are in the slayer and the slain. At the last analysis of inorganic or organic matter we come to God. It is our name for the sum of Beingthe All in All.1 [Note: May Kendall.]

He glows above

With scarce an Intervention, presses close

And palpitatingly, His soul oer ours:

We feel Him, nor by painful reason know!

The everlasting minute of creation

Is felt there; now it is, as it was then;

All changes at His instantaneous will,

Not by the operation of a law

Whose maker is elsewhere at other work.

His hand is still engaged upon His world

Mans praise can forward it, mans prayer suspend,

For is not God all-mighty? To recast

The world, erase old things and make them new,

What costs it Him? So, man breathes nobly there.2 [Note: Browning, Luria.]

But the revelation in Christ shows us that the true God is also transcendenteverywhere present. He was not merely within Jesus by His Spirit, He was at the same time the Father to whom Jesus prayed and whose will He ever sought to do. Immanence is not identity. Man is not himself God, nor the only temple of His presence. Otherwise there would be no God above us to worship, and whose will it is ours to do. As Eckhardt (who has often been accused of the Pantheism which he here opposes) says: The fundamental thought is the real distinction between God and the world, together with their real inseparability; for only really distinct elements can interpenetrate each other. As with the growing plant, its life-principle is at once in it as the vital energy (spirit of life) which it obeys in its development, and above it as the Ideal to be realized in its perfection, so is it with man in relation to God. As Jesus taught, the ideal of our life is nothing short of God Himself in the form of sonship towards Him and likeness to Him. It is only when this ideal is reached that man is one with God, and that in man the immanent Divine is one with the transcendent. It was this that was realized in Christ and manifested in the culmination of His life in the sacrifice of the Cross.

What we need so much for our life is to believe in and realize this presence of God, both as a Holy Spirit within us and as the Infinite Spirit around us ever. His presence within makes itself felt in that something that would always lift us higher and lead us to follow and act out that Best which has ever the supreme claim upon us. His presence without is revealed in the Providence that orders our life, in that higher Will which we cannot alter or resist, in trustful acceptance of which in everything we alone can have peace; and in that Greater, Wiser, and Better than ourselves whom the heart craves for, and whom it finds in prayer, on whom we can cast our burdens and be sustained, to whom our labouring souls can come and find rest, to whom we can commit our way, ourselves, and all persons and interests we are concerned for, and find the peace of God which passeth all understanding guarding our hearts and minds in Christ Jesus. Little children, writes the Apostle, keep yourselves from idols. This is the true God and eternal life. We cannot see God, but

High above the limits of my seeing

And folded far within the inmost heart,

And deep below the deeps of conscious being,

Thy splendour shineth; there, O God, Thou art.1 [Note: W. L. Walker.]

An Unknown God

Literature

Burrell (D. J.), The Gospel of Gladness, 96.

Hessey (J. A.), Moral Difficulties, iii. 37.

Knight (W. A.), Things New and Old, 207.

Miller (J.), Sermons Literary and Scientific, 1st Ser., 63.

Neale (J. M.), Sermons preached in a Religious House, i. 27.

Palmer (A. S.), The Motherhood of God, 93.

Price (A. C), Fifty Sermons, x. 137.

Salmon (G.), Cathedral and University Sermons, 103.

Smith (H. A.), Things New and Old, 130.

Stryker (M. W.), The Well by the Gate, 73.

Tyng (S. H.), The Peoples Pulpit, New Series, iv. 233.

Vaughan (J.), Sermons (Brighton Pulpit), xi. No. 849.

Walker (W. L.), The True Christ, 31.

Warfield (B. B.), The Power of God unto Salvation, 219.

Pulpit Encyclopdia, i. 74 (Horne).

Fuente: The Great Texts of the Bible

Mars’ hill: or, the court of the Areopagites, Act 17:19

I perceive: Act 17:16, Act 19:35, Act 25:19, Jer 10:2, Jer 10:3, Jer 50:38

Reciprocal: Act 19:30 – Paul

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

2

Act 17:22. Paul was invited to speak before this highest court in Athens. His audience was composed of idolaters and various classes of philosophers and Greek statesmen. His introduction was not intended as a criticism but rather a friendly comment. The adverb too is not justified by the Greek original, for it does not have any separate word in the Greek at this place. It is a part of the original for superstitious, so the phrase too superstitious should be rendered “very religious.” This extensive religious attitude was indicated by the presence of so many idols or altars. (See verse 16.)

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Act 17:22. In the midst of Mars Hill, or in the midst of the Areopagus. Wordsworth thus describes the place: Sixteen stone steps, cut in the rock at its south-east angle, lead up to the hill of the Areopagus from the valley of the Agora (the market ), where Paul had been disputing (Act 17:17), which lies between it and the Pnyx. Immediately above these steps, on the level of the hill, is a bench of stone excavated in the limestone rock, forming three sides of a quadrangle. There the Areopagites sat … On this hill are now the ruins of a small church dedicated to St. Dionysius the Areopagite, and commemorating his conversion by St. Paul. The apostle was brought perhaps by these steps of rock, which are the natural access to the summit, from the Agora below, in which he had been conversing, to give an account of the doctrines which he preached. Here, placed as he was in the centre of this platform in the very heart of Athens, with its statues, and altars, and temples of deities around him, he might well say the city was crowded with idols.

Amidst all the memories which were associated with this dread spot, still looked upon, even in the days of decay and partial ruin which had come upon Athens, by the people with superstitious reverence, Paul spoke his famous words, pressing his crucified Masters strange, sweet doctrines home to the citizens of the great idol city. It was the proclamation of the religion of the future (though they guessed it not then) in the face of the dying religion of the past.

Paraphrase of the Speech.

Ye men of Athens. His first words gracefully expressed the joy he felt at seeing the deeply reverential spirit of the Athenians, for among the almost countless altars of deities he had come upon one with the inscription running round it, To the Unknown God. This shrine to the Unknown seemed to speak of their wish to pay a homage to some Divine Being whom they felt was near to them, but whose nature and attributes had not as yet been revealed to them. This revelation was his high mission, to tell them of that Great Unknown whose existence and whose majesty this solitary, nameless altar, at least, showed they suspected.

The God who, as Creator of all, is the true God, seeing He is Lord of all, He, the apostle went on to say, glancing round at the splendid temples about him, dwells in no earth-made house, and needs no earthly service, seeing He provides His creatures with everything. Out of one did this true God create the whole human race destined to spread over all the earth, providing for the regular order of the seasons, and appointing their natural boundaries to each race; and all this He did in order that they might in time seek after the Architect of the glorious order of creation, who never forced them, however, to recognise Him as Lord, but left this seeking for the true God to their own free impulse, and waited for their spiritual longings to seek out and find the unseen Spirit God, who all the while was so near the spirit of each man. Had not one of their own poets come very near the discovery of this great truththe nearness of the true God to each one of us?

Seeing, then, the connection between God and man is really so close, the Spirit God so near to each mans spirit, surely we must never seek for Him in any earthly representation, however beautiful and costly, never in any image hewn by man, be it of marble, of silver, or of gold.

For ages men have missed this lofty truth, the very foundation of all true religion. Is it not surely high time to awake out of this sleep of ages? See how God, for the sake of Jesus Christ (of whom Paul then, or on some previous occasion, had told .them), forgives the past, and, giving a new and clearer revelation, bids men change their lives, and live hereafter as though expecting a resurrection of the body and a day of judgment: strange thoughts to them, but it was no mere ungrounded assertion of his (Pauls). God had indeed given man an earnest of His purpose eventually to raise the bodies of the dead, seeing He had already raised up from the dead their future judge, Jesus Christ.

In all things ye are too superstitious. The words in the English translation, too superstitious, fail to express the graceful courtesy of Paul. It is observable in all the apostles letters, whenever he rapidly proceeded to blame, he invariably begins with winning, gentle words (see for a good instance of this practice of St. Paul the Second Epistle to the Corinthian Church). The Greek English Version, too superstitioussignifies more than ordinarily reverential. The force of the comparative is thus preserved, and also the touch of surprise which evidently was intended to be conveyed by the apostlea surprise stirred up by the unusual appearance of the streets and open places of Athens, literally crowded with altars, shrines, and statues of deities. The word may be translated either as religious or superstitious, in a good sense or in a bad sense. The meaning is left to be determined by the context of the passage. Chrysostom employs the word in a good sense, as does Josephus frequently. The usual German translation is Gottesfurchtig.

This characteristic of the Athenian people was often noticed by writers. Thus Sophocles, in the Oed. Col., says they surpassed all the world in the honours they offered to the gods. Xenophon relates how, in comparison with other peoples, they observed twice the number of festivals (De Repub. Athen.). Pausanias tells us they exceeded all others in their piety toward the gods (Attic.). Josephus especially mentions that the Athenians were the most religious of the Greeks (Contra Apion).

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

As if the apostle had said, “Ye men of Athens have a great number of gods, whom ye ignorantly worship: the God, therefore, whom ye acknowledge not to know, and yet profess to worship, is he that I preach unto you; for as I passed up and down in your city, beholding your altars and images, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD.”

Here observe, 1. The light of nature discovered: the altar is inscribed, TO A GOD. The true God of the Jews was an unknown and uncertain God to the wisest of the Gentiles.

Learn, That some discoveries of God may be made even by the light of nature: these heathens who had nothing but the dim light of nature to guide and direct them, do yet own a God, and acknowledge a worship due unto him, by the erection of an altar.

Observe, 2. The darkness of nature declared: the altar, though erected to a God, yet it is to a God unknown.

Thence learn, That natural light, in its most elevated and raised improvements, can make no full and saving discoveries of God. The true God was but an unknown God, even to the wisest of the heathens, to the men of Athens, who were the most famous, in their day, for the severest wisdom and gravity.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Paul’s Sermon on Mars Hill

The apostle began his sermon by noting that they were very religious, worshipping idols devoted to all types of gods, even an unknown God. Paul seized upon their recognition of their own potentially limited knowledge and began to tell them about the true God. Rather than there being a series of gods, each over some small element of the universe, there is one God who created and rules over all! The Creator is not confined to some building made by men, nor did He need men’s worship. In fact, Paul stated that all beings and all things are sustained by His power.

Paul further declared that the God of heaven had made all the various nationalities. He worked within them in precisely the way and at precisely the time He planned. The apostle to the Gentiles explained that this Divinely controlled ebb and flow of history was used by God to encourage men to seek him. Yet, the supreme God is always near since we live in him, move in him and depend upon him for our very existence. Paul noted that one of their own poets said men are God’s offspring, so God cannot be stone but must be alive just as his children are alive.

Paul then boldly stated that God would no longer overlook the ignorant worship of men. Instead, He demanded that they turn from their ignorance and serve him. Paul saw such repentance as especially important since a day of judgment had been set aside by the Divine Planner. In that day, the resurrected Lord will rightly judge all men, which fact is confirmed by his resurrection from the dead. While some of Paul’s listeners mocked his words, others wanted to hear more. A few actually were moved to obey the gospel ( Act 17:22-34 ).

Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books

Act 17:22. Then Paul stood (Greek, , standing, or being placed, rather, probably on some eminence) in the midst of Mars hill An ample theatre! said, Ye men of Athens Giving them a lecture of natural divinity, with admirable wisdom, acuteness, fulness, and courtesy. They inquire after new things: Paul, in his divinely-philosophical discourse, begins with the first, and goes on to the last things, both which were new things to them. He points out the origin and the end of all things, concerning which they had so many disputes, and equally refutes both the Epicurean and Stoic. I perceive With what clearness and freedom does he speak! Paul against Athens! That in all things ye are too superstitious This translation does not, it seems, exactly express St. Pauls meaning; the original expression, , as Dr. Hammond and others have proved, having a good, as well as a bad sense; and here, probably, signifying, as Doddridge and Wesley have rendered it, greatly addicted to the worship of invisible powers. To take it in the sense of our translation, would be to suppose that Paul began his discourse in very offensive language. Whereas, to render it as here proposed, makes him open his sermon, not only in a manner inoffensive, but even conciliating; which common sense would direct him to do, as far as he could with truth. He introduced his discourse, says Macknight, with a handsome compliment to the Athenians in general: he told them that he perceived they were extremely religious; for, lest any god should be neglected by them, he found they had erected an altar to the unknown God; and from this he inferred, that it would not be unacceptable if he should declare to them that God whom they ignorantly worshipped. For, said he,

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

22-31. After persevering, but necessarily disconnected conversational efforts on the streets, Paul has now an audience assembled for the special purpose of hearing him, and may present his theme in a more formal manner. He has now an audience of Jews and proselytes, but an assembly of demon-worshipers. He can not, therefore, open the Scriptures, and begin by speaking of the long-expected Messiah. The Scriptures, and even the God who gave them, are to them, unknown. Before he can preach Jesus to them, as the Son of God, he must introduce to them a true conception of God himself. It was this consideration which made the following speech of Paul so different from all others recorded in Acts. We will first hear the whole discourse, and then examine the different parts in their connection with one another.

(22) “Then Paul stood up in the midst of the Areopagus, and said: Men of Athens, I perceive that in every respect you are devout worshipers of the demons. (23) For as I passed along, and observed the objects of your worship, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom, therefore, you worship without knowing him, him I announce to you. (24) The God who made the world, and all things which are in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, dwells not in temples made with hands. (25) Neither is he served by the hands of men, as though he needed any thing, for it is he who gives to all men life and breath and all things, (26) and has made from one blood all nations of men, to dwell upon the whole face of the earth, having determined their prearranged periods, and the boundaries of their habitations, (27) that they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him and find him, although he is not far from each one of us. (28) For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as also some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also his offspring.’ (29) Being, then, the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Deity is similar to gold or silver, or stone graven by the art and device of man. (30) Now the times of this ignorance God has overlooked; but now he commands all men everywhere to repent, (31) because he has appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, of which he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.”

The excellence of an argumentative discourse is measured by the degree of adaptation to the exact mental condition of the audience, and the conclusiveness with which every position is established. It would be difficult to conceive how this discourse could be improved in either of these particulars.

The audience were worshipers of demons, or dead men deified. Nearly all their gods were supposed to have once lived on the earth. They regarded it, therefore, as an excellent trait of character to be scrupulous in all the observances of demon worship. Paul’s first remark was not that they were “too superstitious,” nor that they were “very religious;” though both of these would have been true. But the term he employs, deisedaimonestirous, from deido to fear, and daimon a demon, means demon-fearing, or given to the worship of demons. This was the exact truth in the case, and the audience received the statement of it as a compliment. The second remark is introduced as a specification of the first: “For, as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD.” After erecting altars to all the known gods, so that a Roman satirist, said it was easier to find a god in Athens than a man, they had extended their worship even to such as might be in existence without their knowledge. No specification could have been made to more strikingly exemplify their devotions to demon worship. The commentators have suggested many hypotheses by which to account, historically, for the erection of this altar, all of which are purely conjectural. It is sufficient to know, what the text itself reveals, that its erection resulted from an extreme desire to render due worship to all the gods, both known and unknown.

Having spoken in this conciliatory style, both of their worship in general, and of this altar in particular, Paul next excites their curiosity, by telling them that he came to make known to them that very God whom they had already worshiped without knowing him. They had, by this inscription, already confessed that there was, or might be a God to them unknown; hence they could not complain that he should attempt to introduce a new God to their acquaintance. They had also rendered homage to such a God while they knew him not; hence they could not consistently refuse to do so after he should be revealed to them. Thus far the course of the apostle’s remarks was not only conciliatory, but calculated, and intended, to bind the audience in advance to the propositions and conclusions yet to be developed.

He next introduces the God to whom he refers as the God who made the world, and all things in it, and who is Lord of both heaven and earth. That there was such a God, he assumes; but the assumption was granted by a part of his audience, the Stoics, and the Epicureans found it difficult to account to themselves for the fact that the world was made, without admitting that there was a God who made it. He endeavors to give them a just conception of this God, by presenting several points of contrast between him and the gods with whom they were familiar. The first of these is, that, unlike them, “He does not dwell in temples made with hands.” All around the spot where he stood were temples in which the gods made their abode, and to which the people were compelled to resort in order to communicate with them. But that the God who made heaven and earth does not dwell in temples made by human hangs, he argued from the fact that he was “Lord of heaven and earth;” which implies that he could not be confined within limits so narrow. This was enough to establish his superiority to all other gods in power and majesty.

The next point of contrast presented has reference to the services rendered the gods. His hearers had been in the habit of presenting meat offerings and drink offerings in the temples, under the superstitious belief that they were devoured by the gods. But Paul tells them that the unknown God “is not served by the hands of men as though he needed any thing; for it is he who gives to all men life and breath, and all things, and has made from one blood all nations of men,” and appointed beforehand their periods, and the boundaries of their habitations. These facts demonstrate his entire independence of human ministrations, and exhibit, in a most striking manner, the dependence of men upon him. They not only sustain the point of contrast presented by Paul, but they involve an assumption of the most special providence of God. By special providence, we mean providence in reference to individual persons and things. If God gives to all men life and breath and all things, he acts with reference to each individual man, to each individual breath that each man breathes, and to each particular thing going to make up all the things which he gives them. Again, if God appoints beforehand the “periods” of the nation (by which I understand all the great eras in their history,) and the “boundaries of their habitations,” he certainly directs the movements of individual men; for the movements of nations depend upon the movements of the individual men of whom they are composed. Sometimes, indeed, the movements of one man, as of Christopher Columbus, determine the settlement of continents, and the destiny of mighty nations. In view of these facts, we must admit the most special and minute providence of God in all the affairs of earth. It would never, perhaps, have been doubted, but for the philosophical difficulty of reconciling it with the free agency of men, and of discriminating between it and the working of miracles. This difficulty, however, affords no rational ground for such a doubt, for the method of God’s agency in human affairs is above human comprehension. To doubt the reality of an assumed fact, the nature of which is confessedly above our comprehension, because we know not how to reconcile it with other known facts, is equivalent to confessing our ignorance at one moment, and denying it the next. It were wiser to conclude, that, if we could only comprehend that which is now incomprehensible, the difficulty would vanish. While the uneducated swain is ignorant of the law of gravitation, he could not understand how the world can turn over without spilling the water out of his well; but the moment he apprehends this law the difficulty disappears.

The incidental statement that God made from one blood all the nations of men, is an inspired assertion of the unity of the race, and accords with the Mosaic history. To deny it because we find some difficulty in reconciling it with the present diversity in the types of men, is another instance of the fallacy just exposed. It is to deny an assertion of the Scriptures, not because of something we know, but of something we do not know. We do not know, with certainty, what caused so great diversity among the races of men, and, because of this ignorance, we deny their common paternity. Such a denial could not be justified, unless we knew all the facts which have transpired in human history. But much the larger portion of human history is unwritten and unknown; and, at the same time, we are dependent, for all we do know of the first half of it, upon the word of God. The only rational course, therefore, which is left to us, is to receive its statements in their obvious import as the truth of history.

In arguing this last proposition, Paul interweaves with his proof a statement of God’s purpose concerning the nations, “that they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him.” He here has reference to those nations who were without revelation; and means, I think, that one purpose of leaving them in that condition was to make a trial of their ability, without the aid of revelation, to seek and feel after the Lord so as to find him. It resulted in demonstrating what Paul afterward asserted, that “the world by wisdom knew not God,” and that, therefore, “it pleased God, by the foolishness of preaching, to save those who believe.”

From this reference to the efforts of men to find God, a natural association of thought led the speaker to assert the omnipresence of God: “Although he is not far from each one of us; for in him we live, and move, and have our being; as also some of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.” The connection of thought in this passage is this: We are his offspring, as your own poets teach, and this is sufficient proof that he is still about us; for he certainly would not abandon the offspring whom he has begotten.

From the conclusion that we are the offspring of God, Paul advances to the third point of contrast between him and the gods around him: “Being then, the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Deity is similar to gold, or silver, or stone, graven by the art and device of man.” This was a strong appeal to the self-respect of his hearers. To acknowledge that they were the offspring of God, and at the same time admit that he was similar to a carved piece of metal, or marble, was to degrade themselves by degrading their origin.

The argument by which he revealed to them the God who had been unknown is now completed. He has exhibited the uselessness of all the splendid temples around him, by showing that the true God dwells not in them, and that he is the God who made the earth and the heavens and all conceivable things. He has proved the folly of all their acts or worship, by showing that the real God had no need to any thing, but that all men are dependent on him for life and breath and all things. He has exhibited the foreknowledge; the providence, general and special; the omnipresence, and the universal parentage of this God; and has made them feel disgusted at the idea of worshiping, as their creator, any thing similar to metal or marble shaped by human hands. Thus their temples, their services, and their images are all degraded to their proper level, while the grandeur and glory and paternity of the true God are exalted before them.

The speaker next advances to unfold to his hearers their fearful responsibility to God now revealed to them. The times of ignorance, in which they had built these temples and carved these images, he tells them that God had overlooked; that is, to use his own language on another occasion, he had “suffered the nations to walk in their own ways.” “But now, he commands all men everywhere to repent; because he has appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness, by a man whom he has appointed, of which he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.” This was evidently not designed for the concluding paragraph of the speech, but was a brief statement of the appointment of Jesus as judge of the living and the dead, preparatory to introducing him fully to the audience. But here his discourse was interrupted, and brought abruptly to a close.

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

22. Paul standing in the midst of the Areopagus, aid: Athenian men, I perceive that in all things you are very religious, not, as E. V. says, too superstitious, in which case they would have skedaddled him in a hurry.

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

Act 17:22-31. Pauls Speech to the Areopagus.He opens with a compliment to the religiosity of the Athenians. He has walked up and down the city and marked the many objects of worship; he has also found an altar with the inscription To the Unknown God (the argument that follows calls for the definite article). There are various instances in antiquity of such an inscription; though always, it is true, in the plural, not the singular number. Jerome says the inscription in the text must have run To the unknown and foreign gods, and in Pausanias, Philostratus, and other ancient writers such inscriptions are spoken of. In Deissmanns St. Paul (p. 261) an inscription is described which has recently been unearthed at Pergamum, also in the plural. That in our text is the only example in antiquity of the inscription in the singular, and Pauls argument is based on it in that form. It would dedicate the altar on which it appeared to a god of whose name and title the founder was not sure, but whom he took to be a real being. Paul uses the inscription in an opposite sense and makes it refer to the one Supreme God, Maker of the world.

Act 17:25. That God needs nothing is a commonplace in ancient philosophy and literature.made of one: AV of one blood, according to an old reading, might refer to the ancient belief, excluded by Genesis, in the autochthonous origin of man. God has settled the order in which each people is to come and the territory it is to occupy; the purpose of the whole is that they should seek for Him; He is not hard to find.your own poets: the quotation (cf. Tit 1:12) is from a Stoic poet Aratus (Phaenom. 5). Cleanthes, also a Stoic, has a similar sentiment: For we are his (Zeuss) race. Paul had no need to be familiar with Greek poetry in order to quote a line no doubt well known to every one. In Act 17:29 he comes back to the images. Athens had many artificers of such things, but if man is of Gods race, no human figure in whatever precious metal can express the Divine to which he is kindred. A sentence should follow, condemning the view of God which lies behind idolatry: but the speech hurries to its conclusion. God might have visited earlier the mistaken worship of Him in idolatry (Rom 2:4) but He has not done so. Now, however, the day of judgment is at hand (Psa 9:8); men are called to repent; the Judge is known, He whom God raised from the dead.

Act 17:32. Nothing indicates judicial proceedings; the scene ends abruptly with the moderate success secured by Paul. One male convert is named, Dionysius, a member of the court of Areopagus, and one woman, Damaris; and there were others. Of the church of Athens we hear no more; it is perhaps included in 1Co 1:2.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

Verse 22

Too superstitious; meaning very superstitious, that is, very religiously disposed. That the expression is to be understood in a good sense, meaning deeply interested in what relates to the spiritual world, and to the divine character, the following verses plainly show.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

17:22 {12} Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars’ hill, and said, [Ye] men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too {l} superstitious.

(12) The idolaters themselves provide most strong and forcible arguments against their own superstition.

(l) To stand in too foolish and slavish a fear of your gods.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

Paul’s sermon to the Athenians 17:22-31

Luke probably recorded Paul’s address (Act 17:22-31) as a sample of his preaching to intellectual pagans (cf. Act 13:16-41; Act 14:15-18; Act 20:18-35). [Note: See Dean W. Zweck, "The Areopagus Speech of Acts 17," Lutheran Theological Journal 21:3 (December 1987):11-22. See also Witherington, p. 518, for a rhetorical analysis of this speech.] In this speech Paul began with God as Creator and brought his hearers to God as Judge.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Paul was not flattering his audience by calling them "very religious;" this was a statement of fact. The Greek words simply mean that they were firm in their reverence for their gods. Paul again followed his policy of adapting to the people he was seeking to evangelize and met them where they were in their thinking (cf. 1Co 9:22).

"Paul really began with the note of conciliation, and from beginning to end there was nothing calculated to offend, or drive away the men whom he desired to gain." [Note: Morgan, p. 327.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)