So Paul departed – <\/B>Seeing there was little hope of saving them. It was not his custom to labor long in a barren field, or to preach where there was no prospect of success.<\/P> <\/p>\nFuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Verse 33<\/span>. So Paul departed from among them.<\/B><\/I>] He could not be convicted of having done any thing contrary to the law; and, when the assembly broke up, he was permitted to go about his own business.<\/P> <\/p>\n Leaving what he had said to Gods blessing and their consideration. <\/P> <\/p>\n 33. So Paul departed<\/B>Whetherhe would have opened, to any extent, the Gospel scheme in thisaddress, if he had not been interrupted, or whether he reserved thisfor exposition afterwards to earnest inquirers, we cannot tell. Onlythe speech is not to be judged of as quite complete.<\/P><\/p>\n So Paul departed from among them.<\/strong> As it was high time, when they fell to deriding and scoffing at him; for hereby they judged themselves unworthy of the Gospel ministry: the Ethiopic version adds, “from Athens”; but it does not appear that the apostle went directly out of the city; we read afterwards of his departing from Athens, Ac 18:1<\/span> but the sense is, that he went out of the Areopagus, from that court of judicature; and from among the judges of it, and the philosophers of every sect, that stood around him in it; they having no more to say to him, nor he to them. And this shows, that he was not brought to be tried and judged, in order to be punished, but only to be heard concerning his doctrine; of which, when they had heard enough, he departed quietly, no one molesting him, unless with scoffs and jeers.<\/p>\n Thus Paul went out from among them <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). No further questions, no effort to arrest him, no further ridicule. He walked out never to return to Athens. Had he failed? <\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “So Paul departed,”<\/strong> (houtos ho Paulos ekselthen) “Thus (under these circumstances) Paul went out,” of his own accord, as he pleased, from the philosophers there assembled upon, or in the midst of Mars’ Hill, adjacent to the Acropolis, Act 17:22<\/span>.<\/p>\n 2) “From among them.”<\/strong> (ek mesou suton) “Out of or from in the midst of them,” the midst of the skeptic Epicurean and Stoic Athenian philosophers who had challenged and led him up to Mars’ Hill, where this address was delivered on the Areopagus hill with others present, inclusive of two who are named as having been saved, as a result of his message that day, Act 17:34<\/span>; Ecc 11:1-6<\/span>; Isa 55:10-11<\/span>.<\/p>\n ‘Thus Paul went out from among them.’<\/p>\n Having completed his words Paul went out from among them. We are hardly right to suggest that he stopped short in order to do so. And there is no suggestion that they cut him short. It is rather that Luke finishes in this way because he wanted to emphasise that it was the resurrection that was at the root of their problems, and so that he can link a reference to the resurrection with the problems that they had with it. We can rightly assume that Paul had satisfactorily completed his address, before going out (indeed his last recorded words may well have been the climax with greater detail already having been given). What Luke wants us to recognise is that when he left they were discussing the resurrection.<\/p>\n Act 17:33-34<\/span> . ] i.e. with such a result.<\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n ] having more closely attached themselves to him.<\/em> Comp. Act 5:13<\/span> , Act 9:26<\/span> .<\/p>\n .] the assessor of the court of Areopagus.<\/em> This is to be considered as the well-known distinctive designation (hence the article) of this<\/em> Dionysius in the apostolic church. Nothing further is known with certainty of him. The account of Dionysius of Corinth in Eus. H. E.<\/em> iii. 4, iv. 23, comp. Constitt. ap.<\/em> vii. 46. 2, that he became bishop of Athens, where he is said to have suffered martyrdom (Niceph. iii. 11), is unsupported. The writings called after him ( . . .), belonging to the later Neoplatonism, have been shown to be spurious. According to Baur, it was only from the ecclesiastical tradition that the Areopagite came into the Book of Acts, and so brought with him the fiction of the whole scene on the Areopagus.<\/p>\n ] wholly unknown, erroneously held by Chrysostom to be the wife of Dionysius (which is just what Luke does not<\/em> express by the mere ). Grotius conjectures ( juvenca<\/em> ), which name was usual among the Greeks. But even with the well-known interchange of and (Lobeck, ad Phryn.<\/em> p. 179), we must assent to the judgment of Calovius: “Quis nescit nomina varia esse, ac plurima inter se vicina non tamen eadem.” As a man’s name we find in Boeckh, Inscr.<\/em> 2393, and , 1241, also in Pausan. v. 5. 1; and as a woman’s name, , in Diod. xi. 26.<\/p>\n 33 So Paul departed from among them. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Ver. 33. So Paul departed<\/strong> ] They said they would hear him again at better leisure , as that trifler said), but they never had another opportunity: procrastinators seldom speed better; it fareth with them as Plutarch writes of Hannibal, that when he could have taken Rome he would not, when he would he could not. See Jer 14:19<\/span> . <\/p>\n 33. <\/strong> <\/strong> ] ‘In this state of the popular mind:’ (with an expectation of being heard again?) [The “so” of the E. V. does not give this forcibly enough, but looks like a mere particle of transition.]<\/p>\n Act 17:33<\/span> . : may mean, with this scanty result, or simply, after these events, in this state of the popular mind, with an expectation of being heard again (Alford); “ancipiti auditorum obsequio; nullo edito miraculo”: Bengel. : at the opening Paul stood Act 17:22<\/span> , . .: “the two expressions correspond to and explain each other, he that ‘went forth from the midst of them’ must have been standing ‘in the midst of them’ ”; cf.<\/em> Ramsay, Expositor<\/em> , September, 1895, and for the bearing of the words see above on Act 17:22<\/span> . For similar phrase with as frequent in St. Luke’s writings, Friedrich, p. 22. Ramsay thinks that some danger is indicated, but nothing is said of this; the words apparently refer to no trial, although, perhaps, to some kind of preliminary inquiry, see above, Act 17:22<\/span> .<\/p>\n from among them = out of (Greek. ek App-104.) the midst of them. <\/p>\n 33. ] In this state of the popular mind: (with an expectation of being heard again?) [The so of the E. V. does not give this forcibly enough, but looks like a mere particle of transition.]<\/p>\n Act 17:33. , so) the obedience of the hearers being doubtful [ancipiti auditorum obsequio]: having performed no miracle.-, went forth) He did not obtrude himself on them.<\/p>\n Reciprocal: Act 18:1 – departed<\/p>\n 3<\/p>\n Act 17:33. Paul did not take their promise seriously, but departed from the court and went elsewhere in the city.<\/p>\n Act 17:33. So Paul departed from among them. We never hear of his visiting Athens again, nor does he ever in any of his subsequently written letters make mention of the beautiful idol city. Meyer suggests that the speech of Paul at Athens contains three divisions:(a) Theology, Act 17:24-25; (b) Anthropology, Act 17:26-29; (c) Christology, Act 17:30. This third division was never developed, but was abruptly brought to a conclusion owing to Paul being requested to defer the rest of his address until some future time. Milman (History of Christianity, vol ii.) beautifully observes upon the effect the apostles words must have had upon his philosophic audience: Up to a certain point in this high view of the Supreme Being, the philosopher of the Garden as well as of the Porch might listen with wonder and admiration. It soared indeed high above the vulgar religion; and in the lofty and serene Deity who disdained to dwell in the earthly temple and needed nothing from the hand of man, the Epicurean might almost suppose that he heard the language of his own teacher. But the next sentence which asserted the providence of God as the active creative energy,as the conservative, the ruling, the ordaining principle,annihilated at once the atomic theory and the government of blind chance to which Epicurus ascribed the origin and preservation of the universe.<\/p>\n It is interesting to remember that Paul was alone at Athens, and that therefore the report of the speech must have been given to the writer of the Acts by the apostle himself.<\/p>\n Act 17:33-34. So Paul departed from among them Leaving his hearers divided in their judgment, and the generality of them in that deplorable state of ignorance, folly, and superstition, in which he found them; being himself astonished, no doubt, that men who professed wisdom were so little able to discern truth. Howbeit, certain men clave unto him And inquired further into the evidence of that extraordinary doctrine which he taught concerning Jesus and his resurrection; the consequence of which was, that they believed the gospel, and made a public and courageous confession of it. Among whom was Dionysius the Areopagite One of the judges of that court; and a woman named Damaris One of considerable rank and character in the city; and others with them Whose names it is not necessary here to mention. These, it seems, were the only persons Paul met with in this famous mart of learning, capable of seeing and acknowledging the absurdity of the prevailing idolatry! It is not said that Paul wrought any miracles at Athens; and the little success with which he preached, gives reason to suppose that he wrought none. Doubtless, this was by divine appointment, and probably to try what reception the gospel would meet with from learned and inquisitive men, when offered to them merely on the footing of its own reasonableness. The truth is, if such an experiment was anywhere to be made, in order to confute those in after times who should affirm that the general reception of the gospel, in the first stage, was owing not to miracles, but to the absurdities of heathenism, and to the reasonableness of the gospel doctrine, Athens surely was the place where the trial could be made with most advantage, and Pauls oration in the Areopagus was the discourse which should have convinced reasonable men. Nevertheless, at Athens, where the human faculties were carried to the greatest perfection, the apostle was not able to convince his hearers of the folly of idolatry, nor of the reasonableness of worshipping and serving the one living and true God, by purity of mind and goodness of life! <\/p>\n See notes on verse 32<\/p>\n So Paul departed from among them. So Paul departed – Seeing there was little hope of saving them. It was not his custom to labor long in a barren field, or to preach where there was no prospect of success. Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible Verse 33. So Paul departed from among them.] … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 17:33”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-27515","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27515","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=27515"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27515\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=27515"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=27515"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=27515"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"