AP

Studies in Acts

Preaching in Athens (Acts 17:16-34)

Paul arrived in Athens after a turbulent time in Thessalonica and Berea, probably in the fall of AD 50, or Feb/March 51. His stay turned out to be of relatively short duration. As was his custom, he first “reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the God-fearing Greeks.” Then also “in the market-place day by day with those who happened to be there” (Acts 17:17). Luke does not state how many days Paul spent there, but from the few converts gained the reader gets the impression that it cannot have been very many. Perhaps two weeks.

“Paul was preaching the Good News about Jesus and the resurrection” (v.18). It is possible that Paul’s hearers thought he was speaking about two deities: Jesus (the male deity) and Resurrection (the female deity). There were a number of religions in which the male deity was brought back to life by the female deity. From hearing the words ‘Jesus’ and ‘Resurrection’, the Athenians inferred that Paul was advocating “foreign gods.” Athens was familiar with many ‘gods’, but a god called Jesus and a god called ‘resurrection’ were unknown to them. In his address Paul also refers to Jesus (“the man appointed”) and the resurrection (“by raising him from the dead” v. 31).

Athens as Paul Found It

Although Athens had declined in importance since her heyday, it was still the cultural capital of the world. The Bible implies that Paul came to Athens by ship (“The brothers immediately sent Paul to the coast” 17:14).

The Parthenon, admired by tourists to this day, was the chief temple of Athena on the Acropolis. All over the agora, the marketplace, there were reminders of pagan religions, including emperor worship, with temples, statues, and altars. There was a temple of Ares, a temple of Hephaistos, an altar to Zeus, and statues for the various emperors that were worshipped. There were thirteen small altars dedicated to Augustus alone. Emperor Claudius, under whose reign Paul arrived at Athens, is even described in one of the inscriptions as “saviour and benefactor.” There was a cult to Antonia Augusta, designated as Thea Antonia, in Athens as the place of her conception, complete with a priestess and later a high priest. No wonder Paul was distressed! As a strict monotheist he would be revolted by the evidence of polytheism. It was ‘A forest of idols’, ‘covered with’ or ‘luxuriant with’ idols.

The ancient historian Pausanias claimed that it was on the road between Piraeus and Athens that Paul observed “altars to gods unknown.” Geography and layout of the city suggest that Paul preached in that part of the agora that was most readily accessible when he entered the business part of town after landing at the harbour of Piraeus, i.e., the north-west corner where philosophers used to gather. “The Stoa Poikile or ‘Painted Colonnade’ was the place where Zeno had argued and taught, and his followers had received their appellation ‘Stoics,’ ‘the men of the Stoa.’ The abundance of statues in Athens, and in general the evidence of the Athenian religiosity, were remarked on by other visitors in addition to Pausanias, such as Livy, Strabo, Sophocles, and Josephus.

The Areopagus

Verse 19: Luke writes that “they took him and brought him to a meeting of the Areopagus.” The Areopagus was the main governing council of Athens after 86 BC This could mean that they took him to a council meeting on the hill, Mars Hill or Ares Hill, or that they, as a council, questioned him in one of the Stoa, e.g., the Royal Portico (Stoa Basileios). The NIV has: “Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus,” but the Greek says, “in the midst of the Areopagus.” This would imply the body of people rather than the hill. It is difficult to stand in the middle of a hill. Also, at the end of his speech, Paul is said to have gone forth “from the midst of them,” translated in the NIV as “At that, Paul left the Council.”

Paul’s speech followed a classical rhetorical form: exordium (v. 22), narratio (v. 23), divisio (vv. 24ff.) and conclusio (vv. 29ff.). However, classical rhetoric usually also had a section devoted to the proof of the case (confirmatio) and one on refutation of opposing arguments (confutatio) before ending with the conclusion, which was called the peroratio. But even if it did not follow the pattern of classical rhetoric very closely, it is clear that the speech was well constructed, as befits his elite audience on that occasion.

The Epicureans

The Epicureans were one of two groups of people Paul encountered. The founder of their movement, Epicurus (341-270 BC), saw his philosophy as a substitute religion, and the organization of the “Garden,” where he taught, as an association of friends. The Epicureans were structured like religious associations. They were expected to provide the basis for the realization of the life of true happiness and friendship, with the founder seen as a divine figure. The goal was to establish the true happiness of the individual soul.

A comparison has been made between the Epicurean communities and the Christian communities founded by Paul. In Wayne Meeks’ words: “they [the Epicureans] strove to produce the intimacy of a family among the members, who included male and female, slave and free, bound together by love…Moreover, it is recorded that Epicurus undertook to maintain that unity among groups of his followers settled in different places, by writing letters ‘to the friends’ in those places.” In contrast with the Epicureans, however, Paul sought to build up the believers as a community, not just a collection of individuals.

Epicurus based his system on a materialistic conception of the universe, based in the main on the Atomic theory of Democritus. According to this the universe consists of atoms, which are eternal, without origin and without end, constantly forming new combinations, which gradually break up and give rise to new ones. The combination is due to chance acting on the atoms which are eternally falling through infinite space.

In Epicureanism, the aim was to be totally independent and imperturbable. Epicureans believed there were no spiritual realities outside of the material world as constituted by the atoms, and even the soul is nothing but a part of this world. For the Epicureans, everything happened by mere chance, and there was no life after death.

Pleasure was the real purpose in living, though not necessarily by over-indulgence, but by living a life of tranquillity, free from pain, disturbing passions, and superstitious fears (including, the fear of death). During the 1^st century BC Epicureanism became identified with hedonism. Its decline coincided with the decline of Rome. Paul’s speech provides both coincidences with and divergences from Epicurean beliefs.

The Stoics

Stoicism was very popular in the Roman empire. It was founded by Zeno (born c.336 BC), who gained the respect of the Athenians. In theology, Stoics were essentially pantheistic, God being regarded as the Word-soul. The only goal was to live in agreement with the Logos. Zeno’s successor Chrysippus modified that to: “to live in agreement with nature (physis).”  In later Stoicism, ‘nature’ is the same as ‘according to reason.’

Stoicism lacked the concept of a personal God. It was materialistic and deterministic. Stoics were fatalists: everything that happens must be accepted. In behaviour, Stoics aimed for ‘ataraxy,’ imperturbability, perhaps comparable to Paul’s ‘contentment’ in Philippians 4:11-13, as the ultimate virtue. The Stoics shared with Paul a belief in a Creator God, but it was not the same God that Paul proclaimed. The God of the Stoics would never have personalized himself by being incarnated as a man.

The Altar to the Unknown God

The story of the altar to an unknown God is based on a tradition recorded as history by Diogenes Laertius. In the sixth century before Christ, Athens was struck by the plague. Many offerings to the multitude of Athenian gods had been made, but still the plague continued. Finally, the oracle instructed the Athenians to call on Epimenides, a Cretan hero, to come over and help them. He advised them to have hungry sheep ready by dawn, and to bring them to Mars Hill. Shepherds were instructed to watch them and see if any lay down, which would be very unusual, as the hungry sheep would naturally want to graze first rather than lie down. Then Epimenides instructed the shepherds to mark the spot where the sheep laid down. The sheep that lay down were sacrificed there on special altars which were inscribed “To an Unknown God.” After that, the plague was lifted. Paul uses the existence of the altar as a lead into his evangelistic message.

Paul’s speech

Luke has given a summary of Paul’s speech. It can be shown to be in character with Paul, his other writings, his desire to be “all things to all men,” and with the situation in Athens. Paul seeks to establish various connections with his hearers, from which he can then proclaim the true God.

Men of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. Paul seeks to meet the Athenians on their ground. Even though he is greatly distressed by the many idols, he does not say so. He does not mention that they have “exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles” (Romans 1:22-3). He uses a neutral expression. All people are, in fact, religious, whether they acknowledge it or not. Even an atheist is religious. In Athens, the problem was polytheism, not atheism.

For as I walked around and observed your objects of worship, I even found an altar with the inscription: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. Note how polite Paul is: he does not say “your worthless idols,” but again uses a neutral expression: objects of worship. Paul had taken the time to look around and get the ‘feel’ of their culture and beliefs, including the altar to the Unknown God. It is very well possible that Paul was acquainted with the story of Epimenides and the altar, for in verse 28 he quotes a line from his poetry and in his letter to Titus (1:12-13) he quotes him again, as ‘a prophet’ no less! Both quotations in fact come from the same piece of poetry, which in the original refers to Zeus:

They fashioned a tomb for thee, O holy and high one –

The Cretans, always liars, evil beasts, idle bellies!

But thou art not dead; thou livest and abidest forever;

For in thee we live and move and have our being.

If he was indeed familiar with Epimenides’ role in the lifting of the plague centuries earlier, it is not surprising that Paul would use this knowledge as an ‘opener’ in his evangelistic work.

Now what you worship as something unknown I am going to proclaim to you. Paul is going to proclaim the Unknown God to the Athenians. The ‘I’ is emphatic. But the root word for ‘unknown’ is the same as the one that describes the Athenians themselves: they were without knowledge: i.e., what you, being ignorant, worship. He uses what they have confessed not to know about, as a link to what they need to know, i.e., the living God. There is irony in Paul’s message as it relates to ‘ignorance.’ He is saying this in a city of great learning before the Areopagus Court, which was composed of thirty of the most literate men of Paul’s day.

The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth… The doctrine of creation is basic to Christian theology. In his letters Paul often assumes (Romans 1:25, Ephesians 1:4, Colossians 3:10) or teaches explicitly (Ephesians 3:9, Colossians 1:15-7, 1 Timothy 4:3-4) that God is the Creator of the whole universe. Of course, this was not a new teaching: the Old Testament similarly proclaimed God as Creator. There are no lesser deities to govern over any parts or aspects of creation. It all belongs to the Lord of heaven and earth. Jewish audiences would already know that, but Paul spells it out for the Athenians. The Epicureans would deny that God, or the gods, created the universe. The Stoics would believe in a Creator, but not a transcendent one. Their beliefs were pantheistic.

… and does not live in temples built by hands. The Athenians are surrounded by temples. Paul states that God is not confined to buildings. God is everywhere present. After Solomon had built the temple, he also confessed: “The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you. How much less this temple I have built!” (1 Kings 8:27). Stephen also proclaimed that “the Most High does not live in houses made by men” (Acts 7:48).

And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything… This proclaims what is known in theological terms as God’s aseity, his independence or self-existence. The Epicureans also held to God’s aseity. By saying that God does not need anything, Paul is not saying that God is not pleased with the worship and service of his creatures. Indeed, in his letters Paul gives examples of how we may please the Lord. We should make it our goal to find out what pleases the Lord (Ephesians 5:10; 2 Corinthians 5:9; Colossians 1:10, 3:20; 1 Thessalonians 2:4, 4:1 and 1 Timothy 2:1-4).

…because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. Paul here teaches God’s providential care over his creation. This echoes Psalm 145: 9, 13b, and 17. He had earlier proclaimed God’s generosity to humankind in his address to the pagan people of Lystra (Acts 14:17). The ‘he himself’ is emphatic. The combination of life and breath seems to reflect the thought of Isaiah 42:5, “This is what God the LORD says – He who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and all that comes out of it, who gives breath to its people, and life to those who walk on it…”

The distant ‘gods’ in Epicureanism were not at all concerned with human life. The Stoics made little distinction between the Creator and creation, but they did believe that God gives life to all. They saw evidence of it throughout the cosmos. Its eternal laws reveal the divine Logos that was the cause of the world, and which penetrated all that exists.

From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth. Paul proclaims the unity of the human race, implying their basic equality. The Greeks considered themselves superior to other peoples, but Paul points out that there is no basis for feelings of superiority. The Stoics would not deny the unity of the human race, but they, like the Epicureans, tended to attract only the elite, whereas the Christian faith has proved valid for all classes and conditions of humankind, even if the poor have been especially eager to embrace Christ. The earth, created by God, was especially designed to be a home for his image-bearers, even before he created Adam and Eve (Psalm 115:16). The references to ‘every nation’ and ‘the whole earth’ can be seen to be allusions to the stories of Genesis and the Tower of Babel, when the nations were scattered over the earth in response to God’s confusing their language.

…and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. Paul preaches God’s sovereignty over history. God is actively involved in history. There seems to be a reference here to Deuteronomy 32:8 “When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, when he divided all mankind, he set up boundaries for the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel.” Alternatively, or additionally, it could refer to God’s determination of the rise and fall of empires, as in Daniel’s interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream (Daniel 2).

God did this so that men should seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. While the pagans lived without the light of the gospel, they groped around in the darkness, like blind people trying to identify some object. Paul now gets to the point that the Athenians should try to find this God. He is immanent as well as transcendent. The idea that God is not far from us was attractive to pagans. In the minds of the Athenians, this immanence had more to do with a pantheistic closeness rather than a relational closeness such as can be experienced by becoming children of God. The phrase “from each one of us” further suggests that God is interested not just in mankind in general, but in individual people also.

‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’ Paul uses the Greek poets to support his argument. He is able to acknowledge the good in their own theories, which he accepts and appreciates, without buying into them wholesale. The first quote, as we have seen, comes from Epimenides. The second is from Aratus, and in the original it also related to Zeus:

Never, O men, let us leave him unmentioned,

all ways are full of Zeus and all meeting-places of men;

the sea and the harbours are full of him.

In every direction we all have to do with Zeus;

for we are also his offspring.

The Zeus of these Stoic poets is the logos or world-principle which animates all things. Their language, however, is largely adaptable to the God of revelation. By presenting God as Creator and Judge, Paul emphasizes God’s personality in contrast to the materialistic pantheism of the Stoics. The God whom Paul proclaims is more than a cosmic force (see Colossians 1:15-17; Psalm 139:7-10). Paul is not equating Zeus with the Christian God, but he is focusing on the sentiment that mortal men feel some kinship with the divine being as his offspring. He does not mean this in a Stoic, pantheistic sense, but as being made in the image of God.

Therefore, since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone – an image made by man’s design and skill. Having made his point of contact, Paul then develops it further. Paul corrects them gently, saying ‘we’ instead of using the more accusing ‘you.’ If people are God’s offspring, then God cannot be like gold or silver or sculpture. Paul does not spend a lot of time criticizing their idols, except to point out that they are ‘an image made by man’s design and skill.’ This the Greeks would have had to acknowledge readily.

In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. The Greek noun for ‘ignorance’ here is agnoia, again related to his themes in verse 23 of being ignorant and of the unknown. Paul does not dwell on past sins, which he dismisses as ‘ignorance.’ This is in marked contrast with Paul’s letter to the Romans, where he characterizes pagan godlessness and wickedness as being the result of people “suppressing the truth,” and people who do not worship God as being “without excuse” (Romans 1:18-20). In other words, when he writes about pagans, he is much more severe on them than when he meets them in the flesh. At Lystra Paul had similarly indicated that God “let all nations go their own way” (Acts 14:16). 

Having prepared the ground and built up some trust between himself and the Athenians, Paul now feels free to call them to repent. Repentance implies sin, which would be a difficult concept to grasp for people whose thinking had “become futile and [whose] foolish hearts were darkened” (Romans 1:21). Still, Paul calls them to turn from their evil ways and invites them to worship the true God. Paul implies that God is not going to be tolerant of idolatry forever. Now is the day of salvation; today is the time to repent!

For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice [righteousness] by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead. The concept of a final judgement is foreign to most non-Christian theologies. The concept of ‘judging the world in righteousness’ is prominent in the Psalms (9:8; 94:15; 96:13 and 98:9).  This is where Paul leaves a gap in his logic: he does not explain why and how Jesus had to live and die in the first place. There is no mention of how Jesus fulfilled all righteousness, or even that he is the Son of God. He goes straight from judgement and ‘the man appointed’ to his resurrection. The resurrection is proof of Christ’s mission and his authenticity, but Paul has not explained Christ’s mission in dying on the cross. He could have explained how “Love and faithfulness meet together; righteousness and peace kiss each other” (Psalm 85:10) in the work on the cross. The teaching about the resurrection proves to be the dividing line between those who sneered and those who became followers.

Outcomes

At the mention of the resurrection, some sneered and some believed. As a culture, Greeks were not interested in the resurrection of the body. They would have considered that an absurd notion. Following Plato, they thought of the body as ‘the prison house of the soul,’ and death as a release from that prison. They were more interested in the immortality of the soul, except for the Epicureans, who did not believe in any kind of afterlife and specifically rejected the possibility of resurrection. For them, death was nothing but dissolution, and there was no reason to fear it. The Stoics believed that all souls return to the primeval Fire at the conflagration.

Of the few men and the others who believed, only two are named: Dionysius and Damaris. The former was a member of the Areopagus, a member of the local élite. The theology of the god Dionysus included a death-resurrection concept. Eusebius wrote that “Dionysius the Areopagite, a member of the elite Areopagus Council, converted to Christ through Paul’s preaching and went on to become a bishop in the church.” and that he was martyred for his faith. Of Damaris we know nothing further, but from the fact that she is also named, it would appear that she was a woman of some standing. She could have been converted at the synagogue or at the agora. The ‘others with them,’ i.e., with Dionysius and Damaris, likely were a mixed group of men and women.

Some, like Sir William Ramsay, have portrayed Paul as being “disappointed and perhaps disillusioned by his experience in Athens” and that after this meagre harvest he went on to Corinth “resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified” (1 Corinthians 2:2). In other words, Paul has learned from his ‘mistake’ of omitting the cross from his message in Athens. It is possible that Luke did not report on that part of the speech dealing with the cross, it being similar to what Paul had preached many times. It is also possible that the reaction to the mention of the resurrection caused Paul’s speech to be interrupted before he could expound on the meaning of the cross. But even the message of the cross is “foolishness to those who are perishing” (1 Corinthians 1:18), so if he had preached the cross first, the division between believers and sneerers may have occurred before he got to the resurrection. In any case, if every sermon resulted in a harvest of “a few men” and “others with them,” the church would still grow very steadily.

Questions:

What are some of the ‘hooks’ on which we may hang the gospel in our culture?

What can we use to establish common ground with Australians and gain their trust?

Can you think of any books, films, or songs that share a theme of redemption?

How can we avoid using ‘churchy’ language and use the idiom of the day?

How can we bridge the gap between contemporary culture (including philosophy) and the revelation of God as given in the Bible?

– Alida Sewell