Acts 17:22

Act 17:22. Then Paul stood (Greek, σταθεις, 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. Paul’s meaning; the original expression, κατα παντα ως δεισιδαιμονεστερους, 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,

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Paul’s Speech at the Areopagus, Act_17:22-31.

Men of Athens—The customary address of Demosthenes, Athenian men.

Too superstitious—It is now generally agreed that the insulting term superstitious is an unhappy rendering of Paul’s Greek word. His word is a generic term which is capable of both a good and a bad meaning, and we doubt not that it was for that reason selected. He could not truthfully commend; he could not respectfully condemn; he therefore selects a term which does not unequivocally do either, while it does express the truth. The Greek word is compounded of δειδω, to fear or reverence, and δαιμων, god, demi-god, or supernatural being, good or bad. The Greek compound has not Θεος, God, so as to make it properly God-fearing, and the fear may be either superstitious, or reverential and truly pious. It might, therefore, be strictly rendered, preserving the ambiguity, deity-fearing. Ye are deity-reverencing, and I will tell you what deity to reverence. The apostle uses the comparative degree, more deity-reverencing; that is, than others. This character has been attributed by various authors to the Athenians. No people of pagan antiquity was so completely overruled by their religion, such as it was. Josephus calls them “the most worshipful of the Greeks.” Their own dramatic poet, Sophocles, says, “Piety with you alone of men have I found.”

“The Scriptures here recognise,” says Stier, “a certain religionism of the heathen as something good; and if, in our overpowering zeal, we are not willing to acknowledge this the full force of this discourse of Paul must be hidden from us.” To the Old Testament Hebrew the guilt of idolatry was presented in its most criminal aspect, because it was his special mission to preserve the knowledge and pure and sole worship of the true Creator in the world.

22. Midst of Mars’ hill—Led by the gentle pressure of the Athenian crowd, the apostle ascends, by a flight of limestone steps, a steep of sixty feet height, and finds upon the summit a broad plateau. This, like all the other places of public assembly in the pure air of Athens, was roofless under the open sky. Hewn in rock are the elevated seats of the venerable Areopagite judges. Around him below is a city of temples, altars, theatres, and statuaries, the works of the greatest human masters of art. He has the bold summit of the Acropolis fronting him, crowned with the Parthenon, and the Parthenon surmounted, above all, by the colossal Athene, goddess alike of wisdom and of war, protecting the philosophy, art, and religion of Athens from the innovator, as well as her power from the invader. In the diminutive but lithe apostolic figure that now stands before her, the goddess faces a foe who pronounces the death-sentence of her own divinity.

Said—In arguing with Jews St. Paul could use all the antecedents of Israel; her history, her sacrifices, her prophecies, and all her hopes, as premises from which to deduce Jesus the Messiah. But in here addressing the centre of intellectual Gentilism, to what antecedents or premises could he appeal? In his own celebrated city of Tarsus, however, he had already doubtless encountered philosophers. and hence his present masterpiece of oratory was not wholly impromptu. He appeals to whatever intuition of the true God he can discover even in their idolatries, (22, 23;) to the proofs of God furnished by the creation, (24-29;) to the sentiment of retribution in the human soul as the basis of an expectation of a judgment day, (30, 31.)

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CRITICAL REMARKS

Act_17:22. Too superstitions.—Somewhat superstitious (R.V.); better, more god-fearing, more religious (sc., than others)—i.e., unusually religious; though the word has both senses. Your devotions should be objects of devotion, as temples, images, altars, and the like.

Act_17:23. To the (or, an) unknown God.—Not a singular for a plural as Jerome (ad. Tit., i. 12) asserts: “Inscriptio aræ non ita erat ut Paulus asseruit: ignoto Deo; sed ita: Diis Asiæ et Europæ et Africæ, Diis ignotis et peregrinis. Verum quia Paulus non pluribus Diis ignotis indigebat sed uno tantum ignoto Deo, singulari verbo usus est.” The accuracy of Paul’s statement is confirmed by the testimony of Pausanias, I. i. 4, and Philostratus, Apoll., vi.

2. who both report the existence at Athens of altars to unknown divinities. Whom … Him.—Rather, what … this.

Act_17:26. Blood.—Omitted by the best authorities. Times before appointed, προτεταγμένους, should be times appointed, προστεταγμένους.

Act_17:28. The quotation, For we are also His offspring, is verbally taken from Aratus, a native of Tarsus, B.C. 270, who composed astronomical poems, and in one of the only two extant, the Phœnomena, wrote τοῦ γὰρ καὶ γένος ἐσμέν; though substantially, also, it is contained in the words ἐκ σοῦ (Διὸς) γὰρ γένος ἐσμέν of Cleanthes of Assos in Troas, B.C. 300. Other traces of Paul’s acquaintance with Greek poetry may be found in 1Co_15:33; Tit_1:12.

Act_17:31. Because, διότι. Better, inasmuch as, καθότι Giving the reason why the heathen are required to repent. The world means “the inhabited earth.” That man should be “the” or “a man”—viz., Jesus, of whose appointment to the office of judge God had given assurance, or confirmation—lit., offered faith, or a sufficient ground for faith (“Quia res erat vix credibilis argumentum adfert eximium”—Grotius), unto all men by raising Him from the dead.

Act_17:32. Some mocked.—Perhaps Epicureans. Others, perhaps Stoics (Grotius) or Platonists (Zöckler), said—whether seriously (Calvin, Grotius, Alford) or only courteously, as a polite refusal (De Wette, Meyer), remains uncertain—we will hear thee again of this matter, or less happily person.

Act_17:34. Dionysius, the Areopagite.—Obviously a man of note, though nothing further in known concerning him—at least with certainty. According to tradition he became the first bishop of Athens (Euseb, H. E., iii. 4, iv. 23) and suffered martyrdom under Domitian (Nicephorus, H. E., iii. 11). Damaris.—Conjecturally regarded by Chrysostom to have been the wife of Dionysius, and by Stier unnecessarily supposed to have been a courtesan.

Note.—On the historic credibility of Paul’s visit to Athens and oration before the Areopagus.

I. The usual objections to the narrative on the ground of miracle narrations are in this case awanting, as the apostle is not credited with having performed so much as one wonder in the capital of Achaia.

II. The special difficulties set forth by the Tübingen critics (Baur, Zeller, Overbeck, Hausrath, and others) are so unreasonable that they can hardly claim a refutation. Weizsäcker, indeed, without offering any reasons, dismisses the story of Paul at Athens, as of “no historical value,” and looks upon the speech before the Areopagus as simply “the author’s conception of Paul’s manner of preaching to the heathen.” By those who give reasons it is alleged:

1. That the narrative is so obviously full of purpose and reflection that it must have been manufactured in order to bring out as strongly as possible the contrast between Christianity and Heathenism.

2. That the apostle could not have introduced his mention of the resurrection in so sudden and objectionable a manner as is represented, and in fact in a way so admirably fitted to make the worst possible impression upon his hearers.

3. That the apostle should have alluded to the Athenians’ characteristic irony as well as to their peculiar curiosity.

4. That there was no altar to an unknown God in Athens, but only “to the gods unknown.”

5. That if Paul had been brought before the Areopagus, he must have undergone a judicial trial—which he did not.

6. That the glory of Paul’s “hearing” before the Areopagus, or highest Greek tribunal, was simply invented as a parallel to the account given of Stephen’s appearance before the highest Jewish court.

7. That the last section of the oration breaks off so suddenly as to show that the composer has been without accurate information about what actually occurred. So far as these and other similar difficulties require explanation, that is furnished either in the “Critical Remarks” or under the “Homiletical Analysis”; but their purely arbitrary and subjective character shows the straits to which the opponents of the credibility are reduced.

III. The sufficient answer to all that can be urged against Luke’s narrative is that it bears on its surface evident marks of its truthfulness.

1. The Pauline conceptions and expressions it contains, which are too numerous to have been invented. Compare, eg., Act_17:27 with Rom_1:19-20; Act_17:26 with Rom_5:12; 1Co_15:45; Act_17:30, “times of ignorance,” with Rom_3:25; Act_17:31, “the judgment of the world through Christ,” with 2Co_5:10.

2. The exact acquaintance which it shows with the thoughts and manners of the Athenians, as these are borne witness to by classical writers—as, e.g., with

(1) the habit of the Athenians to ask after new things;

(2) the devotion of the Athenians to idolatry;

(3) the existence in Athens of a worship of unknown gods; and

(4) the belief which prevailed in Athens of the superior origin of their progenitors (see on these points the “Critical Remarks” and “Homiletical Analysis”)—an acquaintance much more easily explained by supposing Luke’s narrative to have proceeded from an eye and ear witness such as Paul, than from a second century fabulist.

3. The possibility of Luke obtaining accurate information about the whole Athenian visit, either from Paul himself or from Dionysius and Damaris, all of whom may have preserved written notes of what took place.

4. The difficulty of discovering how a second century writer could have manufactured the incident and far less the discourse. The suggestion that these were freely constructed out of Paul’s first epistle to the Thessalonians is totally inadequate as a solution of the problem.

HOMILETICAL ANALYSIS.—Act_17:22-34

Paul on Areopagus; or, Preaching to Philosophers

I. The courteous exordium.—

1. A respectful salutation. “Ye men of Athens,” the style of address with which their renowned orators had made them familiar. Had Paul been defending himself before judges he would probably have said: ἄνδρες δικασταί.

2. A complimentary ascription. Possible that he characterised his hearers as “too” or “somewhat superstitious” (R.V.), but more likely that he called them more religious—i.e., more occupied with and devoted to religion than others (see “Critical Remarks”). As a mere matter of good taste he could hardly have expected to gain their ears by reproaching them as superstitious; the course of his subsequent remarks shows he regarded their devotion to religion as something in itself good, which only needed to be instructed and guided to become better.

3. A pleasing intimation. That he had been wandering through their streets, closely observing, not their devotions (A.V.), but the objects of their devotion, such as their temples, images, altars, and the like, and in particular that he had noted one altar more remarkable than the rest, on account of its inscription, which ran: “To the (or to an) unknown God” (see “Critical Remarks”).

4. A startling declaration. That he, whom they had just denounced as a babbler, was prepared to acquaint them with the true personality and character of that divinity they were ignorantly worshipping. What with all their wisdom they had not been able to attain to (1Co_1:21), a just knowledge of the true God, he was ready and willing to impart. By no means a modest pretension; yet splendidly fulfilled.

II. The weighty sermon.—Three main divisions.

1. The relation of God to the world (Act_17:24-25). The Supreme Being was exhibited in five different aspects.

(1) As Creator of the world. A truth denied by both sects of the philosophers who listened to the apostle, but frequently affirmed by the apostle (Act_14:15; Rom_11:36; 2Co_5:18; Eph_3:9), and other New-Testament writers (Heb_3:4; Rev_4:11).

(2) As Lord of heaven and earth (Mat_11:25; compare Gen_14:22); the absolute ownership of the universe flowing of necessity from God’s relationship to it as Creator (Rom_10:12).

(3) As filling immensity with His presence, and therefore as incapable of being confined like idols in temples made with hands (compare Act_7:49). That the heathen failed to distinguish between the Deity and His image, see Act_19:26.

(4) As self-sufficient and therefore as independent of His creatures. Incapable of being profited by any service that might be rendered by man’s hands, God was equally removed above the necessity of requiring such service (Psa_50:9-13). In both respects He transcended the divinities they worshipped, who not only inhabited and were confined to their shrines, but were supposed to be in need of and to be benefited by the sacrifices laid upon their altars (compare Iliad, i. 37).

(5) As the source of life and blessing to His dependent creatures. “Seeing He Himself giveth to all life and for the continuance of the same breath, and all things they require (compare Act_14:17; Psa_104:14-15; Psa_104:27-28; Psa_145:15-16; Mat_5:45; 1Ti_6:17).

2. The dignity and destiny of man (Act_17:26-29).

(1) As forming a divinely constituted brotherhood, all nations, or every nation, of men having been made of one blood, or simply of one (stock, or blood must be supplied), for to dwell on all the face of the earth. A magnificent conception, abundantly asserted in Scripture (Gen_1:26-27; Deu_4:32; Psa_86:9; Mal_2:10), and confirmed by the best science, which must have struck at the pride of Paul’s hearers, who regarded themselves as the flower and cream of humanity, while all others were designed to be their slaves (Aristotle, Pol., I. ii. 6); which still opposes itself like an immovable rock or impregnable fortress to all modern theories which deny man’s descent from a common stock, and on the ground of that (supposed) fact to establish the original, radical, and essential superiority of civilised to savage, or of white to black races; and which warrants the hope and expectation that a day is yet coming when this transcendent truth will receive universal recognition, and when the Scottish poet’s dream will be realised—

“When man to man the world o’er,

Shall brithers be and a’ that.”—Burns.

(2) As guided in all their movements by an invisible hand. That of Him who had called them into existence, and who, so far from being indifferent to and unobservant of their fortunes, had “determined their appointed seasons and the bounds of their habitations”—i.e., fixed the periods of their rising, flourishing, and decaying, “and the limits of their territory” (Deu_32:8), beyond which they could no more pass than could the waves of the sea overstep the sand barriers by which their fury was restrained (compare Job_12:23). The truth thus announced was well adapted to humble his hearers, whose city’s greatness had already passed its meridian, and whose territory was year by year becoming narrower, and to remind them of the wisdom of listening to a message from Him who so manifestly held them in His hand (Psa_22:28; Dan_4:25).

(3) As designed to come to a true knowledge of God and of their obligations to Him. That they did not possess such a knowledge originally, in themselves and on the platform of creation (1Th_4:5), was a clear testimony to their fallen and sinful character and condition (1Co_1:21). Nevertheless it was God’s will and desire that they should grope about after Him, like blind men feeling their way in the dark, in the hope of finding Him who was not beyond their reach by being at a distance from them, but was near to every individual composing them,

“Closer is He than breathing, and nearer than hands and feet.”—Tennyson.

for “in Him we live and move and have our being,” or live and move (or are moving), and are—i.e., every moment depend on Him for life, activity, and being. And that this was no self-invented dogma, but an old and acknowledged truth which their own gifted seers had discerned, he demonstrated to them by citing in its support the similar sentiment of one of their own poets (Aratus, a Cilician poet, B.C. 270), who wrote: “For we are also His offspring,” clearly showing he regarded man as dependent on the Deity for life, activity, and existence.

(4) As convicted of unreason in thinking that the Godhead could be like to gold, or silver, or stone graven by art and device of man. The argument was irresistible. Was man the offspring of God? Then God could in no sense be the handiwork of man. Was man God’s child? Then God must at least be possessed of a nature resembling man’s, and if like man’s then unlike that of molten or graven idols.

3. The doctrine of Christ and His salvation (Act_17:30-31). This third main division of discourse, entered upon, was not finished. So far as it had proceeded it had announced four things.

(1) A new dispensation on the part of God. Whereas God had winked at or overlooked the past ages of ignorance, left them alone without either gracious revelation or stern rebuke, suffering men to go their own ways (Act_14:16), He had now interposed with a word of command that men everywhere should repent—i.e., change their minds, about God and His holiness, about themselves and their sin, about the present world and the next.

(2) A new duty published to men, not in one nation; but in all nations to obey this command instantly, thoroughly, permanently, honestly, cheerfully.

(3) A new argument for the enforcement of that duty. Binding upon men everywhere and at all times without further reasoning, this duty was rendered the more imperative and urgent by the fact of an impending judgment day, on which all would be arraigned at God’s tribunal and reckoned with for their performance or neglect of that duty, the judge already appointed being that man whom he had come to proclaim.

(4) A new certificate provided both for the fact of the judgment day, and for the certainty that Christ would be the judge—viz., His resurrection from the dead. If that was true, as Paul was prepared to show, then Christ could be no other than God’s Son, and if God’s Son sent into the world to redeem men, it was inconceivable that there should not be a day of judgment, at, and on which, He would adjudicate upon the final destinies of men, according as they had repented and believed the gospel, or died in unbelief and sin.

III. The disappointing result.

1. The preacher was abruptly interrupted. Never before had either Stoic or Epicurean listened to sentiments so sublime, or to an orator more worthy of attention. Yet at the mention of the resurrection of the dead—a doctrine which both denied—they felt it impossible to longer remain silent or allow the speaker to proceed. Did they do so, they might seem to grant that such a thing as a resurrection was possible, while according to their philosophy it was not; if, however, on the other hand, it was possible, then the whole contention of the speaker would require to be admitted.

2. The teaching of the sermon was variously regarded.

(1) Some mocked. At the resurrection chiefly, but also at the other tenets of Paul’s gospel concerning God and concerning man. “The Greek was more irrational than the savage, when religion was philosophised about. He laughed when he heard of the resurrection of the dead, for the doctrine was not a fashionable one; but when he was told that our souls would one day pass into cows, oxen, donkeys, etc., he was less opposed to it, for this idea did not seem so new or strange to him, the Pythagoreans having taught it” (Michaelis).

(2) Some procrastinated—deferred coming to a conclusion on the momentous themes which had been submitted to their judgment—saying like Felix (Act_24:25), “We will hear thee concerning this yet again.”

(3) Some believed—credited Paul’s teaching as true, and embraced with their hearts the gospel it contained. Among those who thus received the truth, besides others unnamed, were Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, of neither of whom is anything certain known, though Eusebius (Hist., iii. 4, iv. 23), and other writers report that Dionysius afterwards became bishop of the Church at Athens, and that Damaris was his wife (Chrysostom), for neither of which statements however exist solid grounds of belief.

3. The preacher was obliged shortly after to leave the city. How long he stayed within its precincts after the incident just recorded is unknown; only this much can be told as certain, that no tidings survive of his having ever again preached the gospel in or visited the brilliant but idol-loving metropolis of Greece. That none of his epistles speak of a Christian Church at Athens does not prove that his work there was absolutely fruitless, or that he did not leave behind him a believing community.

Learn.—

1. That advocates of Christianity should both maintain a respectful bearing towards and cherish a charitable view of those whose confidence and conversion they seek.

2. That preachers of the gospel cannot take too comprehensive a view or firm a grasp of the truth they recommend to others.

3. That the ablest and most eloquent discourse will not succeed in converting all who listen to it.

HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS

Act_17:22. Superstition.—Define the meaning of the original adjective, and then state the sense in which the word “superstition” is employed now. It is the preponderance of terror in the religious life.

I. Its causes.—

1. Erroneous views of the attributes of God.

2. Ignorance of the nature of personal religion.

3. Crude conceptions of the works and laws of nature.

4. A desire to have systems of religion and worship of human invention.

II. Its forms.—

1. Idolatry.

2. Corrupted Christianity.

3. Pietistic errors.

4. Popular illusions. Witchcraft, astrology, fortune-telling, warnings.

III. Its evils.—

1. It degrades human nature.

2. It saps the foundations of morality.

3. It lessens the sum of human enjoyment.

4. It hinders the progress of the Gospel.—G. Brooks.

Act_17:22-31. The Areopagus Oration; or, a Sermon for Philosophers.

I. The doctrines it proclaimed.—

1. The personality, self-existence, omnipotence, and unity of God.

2. The reality, universality, and efficiency of Divine providence.

3. The spirituality and non-externality of Divine worship.

4. The unity and brotherhood of the human race.

5. The possibility of a true natural religion.

6. The dignity and dependence of man.

7. The absurdity of idols and idol-worship.

8. The essential graciousness of God’s dealings with the race of man.

9. The duty of immediate and universal repentance.

10. The certainty of a day of judgment.

11. The exaltation of Jesus Christ to the office of supreme Judges

12. The reality of a future life.

II. The errors it corrected.—

1. Atheism, or the dogma that there is no God.

2. Pantheism, or the theory that the all is God.

3. Materialism, or the notion that the world is eternal.

4. Fatalism, or the superstition that no intelligence presides over the universe, but all things come to pass either by necessity or chance.

5. Polytheism, or the fancy that there are, or can be, many gods.

6. Ritualism, or the imagination that God can be honoured by purely external performances.

7. Evolutionism (in its extreme form), or the hypothesis that man is a product of force and matter.

8. Indifferentism, or the creed that man should seek after nothing and no one higher than himself.

9. Optimism, or the delusion that this is the best possible world, and man has no sin of which to repent.

10. Unitarianism, or the tenet that Christ was an ordinary member of the race.

11. Annihilationism, or the belief that after death is nothing.

12. Universalism, or the sentiment that all will be saved.

III. The lessons it taught.—

1. The duty of renouncing idolatry and worshipping only God.

2. The obligation to cultivate a spirit of love towards others.

3. The necessity of repentance and reformation.

4. The wisdom of preparing for the great assize.

Act_17:22-34. The Great Sermon on Mars’ Hill.

I. The wise men (of Athens) charged with superstition (Act_17:22-23).

II. The nature of God and the method of His worship established by natural arguments (Act_17:24-25).

III. The stupidity of men who, though created that they might recognise their Maker, nevertheless walk in darkness (Act_17:26-28).

IV. The absurdity of supposing that God could resemble idols (Act_17:29).

V. The doctrine of Christ and the resurrection of the dead (Act_17:30-31).—From Calvin.

Paul at Athens! A more striking picture than Luther in Rome or Calvin in Paris. Note—

I. The sensations with which the apostle tarries in the city of the Athenians.—

1. He does not shut his eyes to the monuments of the most ingenious art.

2. He does not permit himself to be captivated by their sensuous beauty.

3. A deep feeling of compassion for the error of the human spirit remains as the keynote of his innermost feelings.

II. The testimony which he there bears.—Three great truths opposed to three great falsehoods.

1. Creation out of nothing as opposed to Naturalism.

2. The personality of God as opposed to Pantheism.

3. The nature of sin as opposed to Antinomianism and Rationalism.

III. The result.—

1. Not very consolatory. Prejudices too deeply rooted thwarted the apostolic word.

2. Yet not without comfort. A single convert already weighs heavily in the balance of the kingdom of God.—From Krummacher.

Act_17:23. “To the (or an) unknown God.”—The Athenian altar a significant testimony to three things—

I. The insufficiency of human wisdom.—If any people under heaven could have attained to a knowledge of God by philosophy those people were the Athenians.

II. The unsearchableness of the Divine nature.—After all man can learn from creation, providence, and revelation about the supreme being, he must still acknowledge that he knows only in part, and exclaim with Zophar (Job_11:7) and with Elihu (Job_37:23) that the infinite and eternal One can never be fully understood by man.

III. The incomparable glory of Christ.—“That which can be known of God” is by the gospel more clearly and fully revealed than by either creation or providence. The central figure of the gospel records was the image of the invisible God, the brightness of His Father’s glory, and the express image of His person.

Ignorant Worshippers of God.—Such were the Athenians, the philosophers amongst them no less than the vulgar herd. Both alike were ignorant—

I. Of God’s exalted nature.—As a personal intelligence and spiritual essence. Epicureans and Stoics, indeed, spoke of God or of gods. Yet neither in one system nor the other was there room for God, the Epicureans being practically Atheists and the Stoics Pantheists. Paul’s argument that God must be a personal intelligence rested on two premises:

(1) that molten or carved images could not be God, seeing they lacked mind; and

(2) that God must resemble man, if man is God’s offspring.

II. Of God’s real character.—As

1. The maker of the universe. According to the Epicureans and Stoics matter existed from eternity. The Hebrews held that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

2. The governor of the nations. The Greek philosophers had no true conception of the moral and spiritual rule of the Divine being. This idea, which was known to the Hebrews, received its proper and complete development under Christianity.

5. The preserver of His creatures. “He Himself giveth to all life and breath and all things.” Opposed to the Epicureans and Stoics, who equally believed that the gods, if any existed, were indifferent to men.

4. The judge of men. Neither of the philosophic schools had the smallest idea of a future judgment. Whatever evil they dreaded was present. Immortality found a place in neither of their creeds. Paul’s sermon opened up to them a new thought.

III. Of God’s gracious purpose.—That men should seek after Him and find Him. How did God propose to carry out this?

1. By His providential goodness. “Giving to all life,” etc. (Act_17:25). “Filling their mouths with food and gladness” (Act_14:17). “The goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance” (Rom_2:4).

2. By His governmental restraints. Leading men and nations to see that they had to do with a higher power than themselves, that they might seek after and find Him (Act_17:27).

3. By His longsuffering treatment of them. “The times of this ignorance God winked at” (Act_17:30). “Account the longsuffering of our God salvation” (2Pe_3:15).

4. By His announcement of a new commandment. That men should repent. That men must change their minds. That men can no longer be allowed to go on in sin. Whatever doubt may have existed previously as to man’s duty, now there can be none.

5. By public certification of a future assize. Through Christ’s resurrection from the dead, which showed both who Christ was and to what dignity and power He had been exalted.

Act_17:23-31. God’s Three Great Books about Himself.

I. The book of the world.—In two parts.

1. Nature (Act_17:24-25).

2. History (Act_17:26).

II. The book of the heart.—Also in two parts.

1. Reason (Act_17:27).

2. Conscience (Act_17:28).

III. The book of Scripture.—Again in two parts,

1. Law (Act_17:30).

2. Gospel (Act_17:31).—Gerok.

Act_17:26. Made of One; or, the Unity of the Race.

I. One in origin.—Created by God.

II. One in nature.—One blood and one spirit.

III. One in character.—All equally fallen, sunk in sin, and under condemnation.

IV. One in salvability.—All included in the offers and provisions of the gospel; none, at least, while alive, beyond the reach of grace.

V. One in responsibility.—All alike will be held accountable to God not only for their actions and words, but for their treatment of His gospel.

Act_17:27. Seeking after God.

I. It is God’s desire that men should seek after Him.—He had so constructed the world in which men live, and arranged men’s environment in the same, that they should feel themselves impelled to do this.

II. Men’s interest should lead them to seek after God.—It being inconceivable that men should be capable of attaining happiness apart from God, without a knowledge of His character or without the enjoyment of His favour.

III. Those who seek after God have the greatest possible encouragement.—

1. That if they seek in earnest they are sure to find. And

2. That God is so near to them that seeking should be easy.

Act_17:29. God’s Offspring; or, the Dignity of Man.

I. The sublime truth announced.—That man is God’s offspring.

1. Anticipated by heathen poets. The best pre-Christian and extra-Jewish thought had some dim apprehension of man’s true origin.

2. Revealed by inspired Scripture. In the Old Testament (Gen_1:26; Num_16:22; Mal_2:10). In the New Testament (Mat_5:48; Heb_12:9).

3. Confirmed by modern science. Indirectly at least; first, through its failure to explain man’s mental and moral nature through evolution; and second, through the circumstance that, however eager to establish a paternity for man among the lower animals, it has never been able to more than set forth an unproved hypothesis.

II. The consoling inferences implied.—

1. That God must be a personal intelligence. Neither a senseless image, nor a blind force, nor impersonal matter, but a living personality.

2. That God must be the father of men. Not simply their creator and Lord, their preserver and judge, but their all-wise and loving parent, who regards them with pity and affection.

3. That men, as God’s children, must be brethren. Not members of different races, but children of the same parent, and therefore members of the same family.

Act_17:30. Repentance of Sin.

I. An imperative duty.—Commanded by God.

II. A universal necessity.—Required by all.

III. An immediate obligation.—Admitting of no delay.

IV. A saving grace.—Without which none can stand in the day of judgment.

Act_17:30-31. Past and Present. The Cross of Christ, the dividing line between these.

I. The past.—

1. Times of ignorance. Before the meridian light of gospel-day had come.

2. Times of wickedness. Else repentance would have been unnecessary.

3. Times of forbearance. Otherwise the nations must have been cut off.

II. The present.—

1. Times of illumination. The full light of Divine revelation now shines.

2. Times of commandment. Mankind everywhere enjoined to repent—change their minds and amend their sinful lives.

3. Times of responsibility. Whereas the past dispensation closed with a transcendent discovery of Divine mercy in the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ (the first advent), the present age will terminate in a sublime exercise of judgment, at the glorious appearing of the Son of man (the second coming).

Act_17:31. The World’s Assize; or, the Great Day of Judgment.

I. The fact announced.—God will judge the world.

II. The day fixed.—He hath appointed a day.

III. The judge designated.—That man whom He hath ordained, or set apart for this work.

IV. The standard indicated.—In righteousness. Every verdict will accord with equity and truth.

V. The proof given.—The resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Act_17:31. The Doctrine of a Future Judgment as a Doctrine of Reason.—

1. The character of God requires it.

2. The analogy of the laws of nature indicates it.

3. There are facts in our own experience that foreshadow it. Incipient strivings toward retribution in the present state.

4. There is a general expectation of it among men.

5. Our history would be incomplete without it. Let it not be imagined that by rejecting the claims of revelation we shall escape the doctrine of a future judgment.—G. Brooks.

Act_17:32-34. Man’s Treatment of the Gospel.

I. Derision.—“Some mocked.”

II. Delay.—“We will hear thee again of this matter.”

III. Decision.—“Certain men clave unto him and believed.”

Chap. Act_7:2-58 with Act_17:22-34; or, Stephen and Paul, the Two Apologies of Christianity towards Judaism and towards Heathenism.

I. Both agree in some of their principal expressions.

II. Stephen’s was delivered before the Sanhedrim, whose office it was to protect customs and morals in Jerusalem; Paul’s before the Areopagus, which performed the like service in Athens.

III. Stephen was accused of destroying the old religion, Paul of introducing a new one.

IV. Stephen told his countrymen that the temple worship must cease, Paul the Athenians that God dwelt not in temples made with hands.

V. Stephen extolled the beneficence of God to Israel in His dealings with them as a people, Paul the revelation given by God to men in nature.

VI. Stephen, through the warmth of his eloquence, called forth a storm of violence against him; Paul’s oration took a turn which, in an unexpected fashion, broke up the assembly.—From Holtzmann, who looks on these resemblances as unfavourable to the historicity; whereas, rightly viewed, they confirm it, being fully and satisfactorily explained by remembering that most likely Paul heard Stephen’s defence.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

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’?

Alexander MacLaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (1904–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

17:22-31 Paul’s remarkable sermon in Athens reveals his versatility in preaching the Good News (Rom 11:14; 1 Cor 9:19-23; 10:33; cp. Acts 16:3; 17:2-3; 21:20-26). While Paul’s Greek audience did not know the Scriptures or have a tradition of monotheism as the Jews did, they did have a rich intellectual heritage. So Paul established a point of contact on the basis of an Athenian inscription to an Unknown God. He then explained God’s nature as the Creator (17:22-29), followed by God’s purpose as the Redeemer (17:30-31). • As he did elsewhere in his own writings (see 1 Cor 15:33; Titus 1:12), Paul made use of the Greek poets. There are several points of connection in this sermon with the Hymn to Zeus by Cleanthes (about 315–240 BC). Paul was probably quoting Epimenides, who had declared about God, “In him we live and move and exist” (Epimenides, Cretica, about 600 BC). Paul also cited Aratus, a Stoic poet from Cilicia (about 315–240 BC), who had commented, “We are his offspring” (Aratus, Phaenomena 5). These allusions to their own poets established connections with his audience. Paul was then able to present the singular nature of God (Acts 17:29), and he stressed the coming judgment through Jesus Christ, whom God had raised from the dead. This message, while touching on Greek culture and philosophy, had a clear focus on Christ that presented the challenge of Christ to a cultured and intellectual but idolatrous people.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Act 17:22. Ἐν μέσῳ, 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.]—ἔφη, 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.—κατὰ πάντα, in all things) altogether.—ὡς δεισιδαιμονεστέρους) δεισιδαίμων, religiosus, is a word in itself μέσον, 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, εὗρον γὰρ, for I found, he verges to reproof. Therefore he calls them δεισιδαίμονας, as being persons who in their religion had fear, a feeling not in itself bad, without knowledge; or, in other words, those who ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβοῦσιν, worship ignorantly, the Divinity: the foll, verse. The comparative also mitigates the language; and the particle ὡς (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.—ὑμᾶς θεωρῶ, I perceive you) Great keenness of observation and great freedom of speech. Paul alone against all Athens.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Act_17:22. Σταθεὶς ἐν μέσῳ] denotes intrepidity.

The wisdom with which Paul here could become a Gentile to the Gentiles, has been at all times justly praised. There is to be noted also, along with this, the elegance and adroitness, combined with all simplicity, in the expression and progress of thought; the speech is, as respects its contents and form, full of sacred Attic art, a vividly original product of the free apostolic spirit.

κατὰ πάντα] in all respects. Comp. Col_3:20; Col_3:22.

δεισιδαιμονεστέρους] A comparison with the other Greeks, in preference over whom Athens had the praise of religiousness (see Valckenaer, Schol. p. 551): Ἀθηναίοις περισσότερόν τι ἢ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἐς τὰ θεῖά ἐστι σπουδῆς, Pausan. in Attic. 24. Comp. Soph. O. C. 260; Thuc. ii. 40 f.; Eur. Her. 177. 330; Joseph. c. Ap. i. 12. δεισιδαίμων means divinity-fearing, but may, as the fear of God may be the source of either, denote as well real piety (Xen. Gyr. iii. 3. 58, Agesil. 11. 8) as superstition (Theophr. Char. 16; Diod. Sic. i. 62; Lucian. Alex. 9; Plutarch, and others). Paul therefore, without violating the truth, prudently leaves the religious tendency of his hearers undetermined, and names only its sourcethe fear of God. Chrysostom well remarks: προοδοποιεῖ τῷ λόγῳ· διὰ τοῦτο εἶπε δεισιδαιμονεστέρους ὑμᾶς θεωρῷ. See on this word, Hermann, gottesd. Alterth. § 8. 6. Mistaking this fine choice of the expression, the Vulgate, Erasmus, Luther, Castalio, Calovius, Suicer, Wolf, and others explained it: superstitiosiores. ὡς: I perceive you as more god-fearing, so that you appear as such. See Bernhardy, p. 333.

ὑμᾶς θεωρῶ] Magna perspicacia et parrhesia; unus Paulus contra Athenas, Bengel.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Act 17:22 . σταθεὶς , Lucan, see Act 1:15 . ἐν μέσῳ τοῦ Ἀ . π ., i.e. , in the midst of the Council or Court of Areopagus, see above on Act 17:19 , cf. Act 4:7 , Peter stood in the midst of the Sanhedrim. Ramsay pertinently remarks that the words “in the middle of Mars’ hill” are far from natural or clear, and those who adopt them usually omit the word “midst,” and say that Paul stood on Mars’hill, justifying the expression by supposing that ἐν μέσῳ is a Hebraism for ἐν , Act 1:15 , Act 2:22 . But whilst a Hebraism would be natural in the earlier chapters referred to, it would be quite out of place here in this Attic scene, cf. also Act 17:33 , Ramsay, Expositor , September, 1895, so too Curtius, u. s. , p. 529, in support of the rendering adopted by Ramsay. Ἄνδρες Ἀθην .: usual way of beginning a speech; strange to allege it as a proof that the speech is not genuine: “according to the best MS. evidence, Demosthenes habitually, at least in some speeches, said ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι without ὦ . It is therefore a mistake to note as unclassical the use of the vocative here without ὦ , cf. Act 1:14 , Act 19:35 ,” Simcox, Language of the New Testament , p. 76, note. κατὰ πάντα : “in all things I perceive that ye are,” R.V., meaning that wherever he looked he had evidence of this characteristic the A.V. would imply that in all their conduct the Athenians were, etc. The phrase which is common in classics is only found here, in Act 3:22 , Col 3:20 ; Col 3:22 , Heb 2:5 ; Heb 4:15 , in N.T. ὡς , see Grimm-Thayer, sub v. , i., d., Winer-Moulton, xxxv., 4. δεισιδαιμ .: “somewhat superstitious,” R.V., but in margin, “somewhat religious,” so in Act 25:19 the noun is rendered “religion,” R.V. (in margin, “superstition”), where Festus, in speaking to Agrippa, a Jew, would not have been likely to call the Jewish religion a superstition. R.V. gives a better turn to the word than A.V. with Tyndale, “too superstitious,” cf. Vulgate, superstitiosiores , as it is incredible that St. Paul should have commenced his remarks with a phrase calculated to offend his hearers. The R.V. has modified the A.V. 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 δεισιδαίμων and the cognate noun may be used of reverence or of superstition, cf. for the former Xen., Cyr. , iii., 3, 58; Arist., Pol. , v., 11; cf. C. I. Gr [311] , 2737b; Jos., Ant. , x., 32; Polyb., vi., 56, 7, and for the latter, Thcoph., Char. , xvi.; Plut., De Superstit. , 10; Jos., Ant. , xv., 8, 2; M. Aurelius, vi., 30, and instances in Philo, cf. also Justin Martyr, Apol. , i., 2 (see Hatch, Biblical Essays , p. 43). Ramsay renders: “more than others respectful of what is divine”; so Renan, “le plus religieux”; Holtzmann, “Gottesfürchtige,” so Weiss, so Zöckler, “religiosiores ceteris Græcis” (Horace, Sat. , i., 9, 70), cf. Winer-Moulton, xxxv., 4. In thus emphasising the religious spirit of the Athenians, St. Paul was speaking in strict accordance with similar testimonies from various quarters, cf. Thuc., ii., 40; Soph., O. C. , 260; Jos., C. Apion. , ii., 11; Pausanias, In Attic. , 24; Petronius, Sat. , c. 17. The context, Act 17:24 , where εὐσεβεῖτε , religiose colitis (Wetstein), is one result of this δεισιδαιμονία , strengthens the view that the adjective is used here in a good sense; cf. the comment on its good use here by St. Chrys., Hom. , xxxviii., and Theophylact. There is therefore no reason to suppose that Paul’s 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, verbum per se μέσον , which could not possibly provoke hostility at the outset, while it left unexpressed his own judgment as to the nature of this reverence for the divine “with kindly ambiguity,” Grimm-Thayer.

[311] Greek, or Grotius’ Annotationes in N.T.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The idolaters themselves minister most strong and forcible arguments against their own superstition.

To stand in too peevish and servile a fear of your gods.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

We have here St. Paul's sermon at Athens. Divers sermons we have had, which the apostles preached to the Jews, or such Gentiles as had an acquaintance with and veneration for the Old Testament, and were worshippers of the true and living God; and all they had to do with them was to open and allege that Jesus is the Christ; but here we have a sermon to heathens, that worshipped false gods, and were without the true God in the world, and to them the scope of their discourse was quite different from what it was to the other. In the former case their business was to lead their hearers by prophecies and miracles to the knowledge of the Redeemer, and faith in him; in the latter it was to lead them by the common works of providence to the knowledge of the Creator, and the worship of him. One discourse of this kind we had before to the rude idolaters of Lystra that deified the apostles (Act 14:15); this recorded here is to the more polite and refined idolaters at Athens, and an admirable discourse it is, and every way suited to his auditory and the design he had upon them.

I. He lays down this, as the scope of his discourse, that he aimed to bring them to the knowledge of the only living and true God, as the sole and proper object of their adoration. He is here obliged to lay the foundation, and to instruct them in the first principle of all religion, that there is a God, and that God is but one. When he preached against the gods they worshipped, he had no design to draw them to atheism, but to the service of the true Deity. Socrates, who had exposed the pagan idolatry, was indicted in this very court, and condemned, not only because he did not esteem those to be gods whom the city esteemed to be so, but because he introduced new demons; and this was the charge against Paul. Now he tacitly owns the former part of the charge, but guards against the latter, by declaring that he does not introduce any new gods, but reduce them to the knowledge of one God, the Ancient of days. Now,

1. He shows them that they needed to be instructed herein; for they had lost the knowledge of the true God that made them, in the worship of false gods that they had made (Deos qui rogat ille facit - He who worships the gods makes them): I perceive that in all things you are too superstitious. The crime he charges upon them is giving that glory to others which is due to God only, that they feared and worshipped demons, spirits that they supposed inhabited the images to which they directed their worship. "It is time for you to be told that there is but one God who are multiplying deities above any of your neighbours, and mingle your idolatries with all your affairs. You are in all things too superstitious - deisidaimonesteroî you easily admit every thing that comes under a show of religion, but it is that which corrupts it more and more; I bring you that which will reform it." Their neighbours praised them for this as a pious people, but Paul condemns them for it. Yet it is observable how he mollifies the charge, does not aggravate it, to provoke them. He uses a word which among them was taken in a good sense: You are every way more than ordinarily religious, so some read it; you are very devout in your way. Or, if it be taken in a bad sense, it is mitigated: "You are as it were (hōs) more superstitious than you need be;" and he says no more than what he himself perceived; theōrō - I see it, I observe it. They charged Paul with setting forth new demons: "Nay," says he, "you have demons enough already; I will not add to the number of them."

2. He shows them that they themselves had given a fair occasion for the declaring of this one true God to them, by setting up an altar, To the unknown God, which intimated an acknowledgment that there was a God who was yet to them an unknown God; and it is sad to think that at Athens, a place which was supposed to have the monopoly of wisdom, the true God was an unknown God, the only God that was unknown. "Now you ought to bed Paul welcome, for this is the God whom he comes to make known to you, the God whom you tacitly complain that you are ignorant of." There, where we are sensible we are defective and come short, just there, the gospel takes us up, and carries us on.

(1.) Various conjectures the learned have concerning this altar dedicated to the unknown God. [1.] Some think the meaning is, To the God whose honour it is to be unknown, and that they intended the God of the Jews, whose name is ineffable, and whose nature is unsearchable. It is probable they had heard from the Jews, and from the writings of the Old Testament, of the God of Israel, who had proved himself to be above all gods, but was a God hiding himself, Isa 45:15. The heathen called the Jews' God, Deus incertus, incertum Mosis Numen - an uncertain God, the uncertain Deity of Moses, and the God without name. Now this God, says Paul, this God, who cannot by searching be found out to perfection, I now declare unto you. [2.] Others think the meaning is, To the God whom it is our unhappiness not to know, which intimates that they would think it their happiness to know him. Some tell us that upon occasion of a plague that raged at Athens, when they had sacrificed to all their gods one after another for the staying of the plague, they were advised to let some sheep go where they pleased, and, where they lay down, to build an altar, tō prosēkonti Theō - to the proper God, or the God to whom that affair of staying the pestilence did belong; and, because they knew not how to call him, they inscribed it, To the unknown God. Others, from some of the best historians of Athens, tell us they had many altars inscribed, To the gods of Asia, Europe, and Africa - To the unknown God: and some of the neighbouring countries used to swear by the God that was unknown at Athens; so Lucian.

(2.) Observe, how modestly Paul mentions this. That he might not be thought a spy, nor one that had intruded himself more than became a stranger into the knowledge of their mysteries, he tells them that he observed it as he passed by, and saw their devotions, or their sacred things. It was public, and he could not forbear seeing it, and it was proper enough to make his remarks upon the religion of the place; and observe how prudently and ingeniously he takes occasion from this to bring in his discourse of the true God. [1.] He tells them that the God he preached to them was one that they did already worship, and therefore he was not a setter forth of new or strange gods: "As you have a dependence upon him, so he has had some kind of homage from you." [2.] He was one whom they ignorantly worshipped, which was a reproach to them, who were famous all the world over for their knowledge. "Now," says he, "I come to take away that reproach, that you may worship him understandingly whom how you worship ignorantly; and it cannot but be acceptable to have your blind devotion turned into a reasonable service, that you may not worship you know not what."

II. He confirms his doctrine of one living and true God, by his works of creation and providence: "The God whom I declare unto you to be the sole object of your devotion, and call you to the worship of, is the God that made the world and governs it; and, by the visible proofs of these, you may be led to this invisible Being, and be convinced of his eternal power and Godhead." The Gentiles in general, and the Athenians particularly, in their devotions were governed, not by their philosophers, many of whom spoke clearly and excellently well of one supreme Numen, of his infinite perfections and universal agency and dominion (witness the writings of Plato, and long after of Cicero); but by their poets, and their idle fictions. Homer's works were the Bible of the pagan theology, or demonology rather, not Plato's; and the philosophers tamely submitted to this, rested in their speculations, disputed them among themselves, and taught them to their scholars, but never made the use they ought to have made of them in opposition to idolatry; so little certainty were they at concerning them, and so little impression did these things make upon them! Nay, they ran themselves into the superstition of their country, and thought they ought to do so. Eamus ad communem errorem - Let us embrace the common error. Now Paul here sets himself, in the first place, to reform the philosophy of the Athenians (he corrects the mistakes of that), and to give them right notions of the one only living and true God, and then to carry the matter further than they ever attempted for the reforming of their worship, and the bringing them off from their polytheism and idolatry. Observe what glorious things Paul here says of that God whom he served, and would have them to serve.

1. He is the God that made the world, and all things therein; the Father almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth. This was admitted by many of the philosophers; but those of Aristotle's school denied it, and maintained "that the world was from eternity, and every thing always was from eternity, and every thing always was what now it is." Those of the school of Epicurus fancied "that the world was made by a fortuitous concourse of atoms, which, having been in perpetual motion, at length accidentally jumped into this frame." Against both these Paul here maintains that God by the operations of an infinite power, according to the contrivance of an infinite wisdom, in the beginning of time made the world and all things therein, the origin of which was owing, not as they fancied to an eternal matter, but to an eternal mind.

2. He is therefore Lord of heaven and earth, that is, he is the rightful owner, proprietor, and possessor, of all the beings, powers, and riches of the upper and lower world, material and immaterial, visible and invisible. This follows from his making heaven and earth. If he created all, without doubt he has the disposing of all: and, where he gives being, he has an indisputable right to give law.

3. He is, in a particular manner, the Creator of men, of all men (Act 17:26): He made of one blood all nations of men. He made the first man, he makes every man, is the former of every man's body and the Father of every man's spirit. He has made the nations of men, not only all men in the nations, but as nations in their political capacity; he is their founder, and disposed them into communities for their mutual preservation and benefit. He made them all of one blood, of one and the same nature; he fashions their heart alike. Descended from one and the same common ancestor, in Adam they are all akin, so they are in Noah, that hereby they might be engaged in mutual affection and assistance, as fellow-creatures and brethren. Have we not all one Father? Hath not one God created us? Mal 2:10. He hath made them to dwell on all the face of the earth, which, as a bountiful benefactor, he has given, with all its fulness, to the children of men. He made them not to live in one place, but to be dispersed over all the earth; one nation therefore ought not to look with contempt upon another, as the Greeks did upon all other nations; for those on all the face of the earth are of the same blood. The Athenians boasted that they sprung out of their own earth, were aborigines, and nothing akin by blood to any other nation, which proud conceit of themselves the apostle here takes down.

4. That he is the great benefactor of the whole creation (Act 17:25): He giveth to all life, and breath, and all things. He not only breathed into the first man the breath of life, but still breathes it into every man. He gave us these souls he formed the spirit of man within him. He not only gave us our life and breath, when he brought us into being, but he is continually giving them to us; his providence is a continued creation; he holds our souls in life; every moment our breath goes forth, but he graciously gives it us again the next moment; it is no only his air that we breathe in, but it is in his hand that our breath is, Dan 5:23. He gives to all the children of men their life and breath; for as the meanest of the children of men live upon him, and receive from him, so the greatest, the wisest philosophers and mightiest potentates, cannot live without him. He gives to all, not only to all the children of men, but to the inferior creatures, to all animals, every thing wherein is the breath of life (Gen 6:17); they have their life and breath from him, and where he gives life and breath he gives all things, all other things needful for the support of life. The earth is full of his goodness, Psa 104:24, Psa 104:27.

5. That he is the sovereign disposer of all the affairs of the children of men, according to the counsel of his will (Act 17:26): He hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation. See here, (1.) The sovereignty of God's disposal concerning us: he hath determined every event, horisas, the matter is fixed; the disposals of Providence are incontestable and must not be disputed, unchangeable and cannot be altered. (2.) The wisdom of his disposals; he hath determined what was before appointed. The determinations of the Eternal Mind are not sudden resolves, but the counterparts of an eternal counsel, the copies of divine decrees. He performeth the thing that is appointed for me, Job 23:14. Whatever comes forth from God was before all worlds hid in God. (3.) The things about which his providence is conversant; these are time and place: the times and places of our living in this world are determined and appointed by the God that made us. [1.] He has determined the times that are concerning us. Times to us seem changeable, but God has fixed them. Our times are in his hand, to lengthen or shorten, embitter or sweeten, as he pleases. He has appointed and determined the time of our coming into the world, and the time of our continuance in the world; our time to be born, and our time to die (Ecc 3:1, Ecc 3:2), and all that little that lies between them - the time of all our concernments in this world. Whether they be prosperous times or calamitous times, it is he that has determined them; and on him we must depend, with reference to the times that are yet before us. [2.] He has also determined and appointed the bounds of our habitation. He that appointed the earth to be a habitation for the children of men has appointed to the children of men a distinction of habitations upon the earth, has instituted such a thing as property, to which he has set bounds to keep us from trespassing one upon another. The particular habitations in which our lot is cast, the place of our nativity and of our settlement, are of God's determining and appointing, which is a reason why we should accommodate ourselves to the habitations we are in, and make the best of that which is.

6. That he is not far from every one of us, Act 17:27. He is every where present, not only is at our right hand, but has possessed our reins (Psa 139:13), has his eye upon us at all times, and knows us better than we know ourselves. Idolaters made images of God, that they might have him with them in those images, the absurdity of which the apostle here shows; for he in an infinite Spirit, that is not far from any of us, and never the nearer, but in one sense the further off from us, for our pretending to realize or presentiate him to ourselves by any image. He is nigh unto us, both to receive the homage we render him and to give the mercies we ask of him, wherever we are, though near no altar, image, or temple. The Lord of all, as he is rich (Rom 10:12), so he is nigh (Deu 4:7), to all that call upon him. He that wills us to pray every where, assures us that he is no where far from us; whatever country, nation, or profession we are of, whatever our rank and condition in the world are, be we in a palace or in a cottage, in a crowd or in a corner, in a city or in a desert, in the depths of the sea or afar off upon the sea, this is certain, God is not far from every one of us.

7. That in him we live, and move, and have our being, Act 17:28. We have a necessary and constant dependence upon his providence, as the streams have upon the spring, and the beams upon the sun. (1.) In him we live; that is, the continuance of our lives is owing to him and the constant influence of his providence; he is our life, and the length of our days. It is not only owing to his patience and pity that our forfeited lives are not cut off, but it is owing to his power, and goodness, and fatherly care, that our frail lives are prolonged. There needs not a positive act of his wrath to destroy us; if he suspend the positive acts of his goodness, we die of ourselves. (2.) In him we move; it is by the uninterrupted concourse of his providence that our souls move in their outgoings and operations, that our thoughts run to and fro about a thousand subjects, and our affections run out towards their proper objects. It is likewise by him that our souls move our bodies; we cannot stir a hand, or foot, or a tongue, but by him, who, as he is the first cause, so he is the first mover. (3.) In him we have our being; not only from him we had it at first, but in him we have it still; to his continued care and goodness we owe it, not only that we have a being and are not sunk into nonentity, but that we have our being, have this being, were and still are of such a noble rank of beings, capable of knowing and enjoying God; and are not thrust into the meanness of brutes, nor the misery of devils.

8. That upon the whole matter we are God's offspring; he is our Father that begat us (Deu 32:6, Deu 32:18), and he hath nourished and brought us up as children, Isa 1:2. The confession of an adversary in such a case is always looked upon to be of use as argumentum ad hominem - an argument to the man, and therefore the apostle here quotes a saying of one of the Greek poets, Aratus, a native of Cilicia, Paul's countryman, who, in his Phenomena, in the beginning of his book, speaking of the heathen Jupiter, that is, in the poetical dialect, the supreme God, says this of him, tou gar kai genos esmen - for we are also his offspring. And he might have quoted other poets to the purpose of what he was speaking, that in God we live and move: -

Spiritus intus alit, totamque infusa per artus

Mens agitat molem.

This active mind, infus'd through all the space,

Unites and mingles with the mighty mass.

- Virgil, Aeneid 6

Est Deus in nobis, agitante calescimus illo.

'Tis the Divinity that warms our hearts.

- Ovid, Fast. 6

Jupiter est quodeunque vides,

Quocunque moveris.

Where'er you look, where'er you rove

'The spacious scene is full of Jove.

- Lucan, lib. 2

But he chooses this of Aratus, as having much in a little. By this it appears not only that Paul was himself a scholar, but that human learning is both ornamental and serviceable to a gospel minister, especially for the convincing of those that are without; for it enables him to beat them at their own weapons, and to cut off Goliath's head with his own sword. How can the adversaries of truth be beaten out of their strong-holds by those that do not know them? It may likewise shame God's professing people, who forget their relation to God, and walk contrary to it, that a heathen poet could say of God, We are his offspring, formed by him, formed for him, more the care of his providence than ever any children were the care of their parents; and therefore are obliged to obey his commands, and acquiesce in his disposals, and to be unto him for a name and a praise. Since in him and upon him we live, we ought to live to him; since in him we move, we ought to move towards him; and since in him we have our being, and from him we receive all the supports and comforts of our being, we ought to consecrate our being to him, and to apply to him for a new being, a better being, an eternal well-being.

III. From all these great truths concerning God, he infers the absurdity of their idolatry, as the prophets of old had done. If this be so, 1. Then God cannot be represented by an image. If we are the offspring of God, as we are spirits in flesh, then certainly he who is the Father of our spirits (and they are the principal part of us, and that part of us by which we are denominated God's offspring) is himself a Spirit, and we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device, Act 17:29. We wrong God, and put an affront upon him, if we think so. God honoured man in making his soul after his own likeness; but man dishonours God if he makes him after the likeness of his body. The Godhead is spiritual, infinite, immaterial, incomprehensible, and therefore it is a very false and unjust conception which an image gives us of God, be the matter ever so rich, fold or silver; be the shape ever so curious, and be it ever so well graven by art or man's device, its countenance, posture, or dress, ever so significant, it is a teacher of lies. 2. Then he dwells not in temples made with hands, Act 17:24. He is not invited to any temple men can build for him, nor confined to any. A temple brings him never the nearer to us, nor keeps him ever the longer among us. A temple is convenient for us to come together in to worship God; but God needs not any place of rest or residence, nor the magnificence and splendour of any structure, to add to the glory of his appearance. A pious, upright heart, a temple not made with hands, but by the Spirit of God, is that which he dwells in, and delights to dwell in. See Kg1 8:27; Isa 66:1, Isa 66:2. 3. Then he is not worshipped, therapeuetai, he is not served, or ministered unto, with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, Act 17:25. He that made all, and maintains all, cannot be benefited by any of our services, nor needs them. If we receive and derive all from him, he is all-sufficient, and therefore cannot but be self-sufficient, and independent. What need can God have of our services, or what benefit can he have by them, when he has all perfection in himself, and we have nothing that is good but what we have from him? The philosophers, indeed, were sensible of this truth, that God has no need of us or our services; but the vulgar heathen built temples and offered sacrifices to their gods, with an opinion that they needed houses and food. See Job 35:5-8; Psa 50:8, etc. 4. Then it concerns us all to enquire after God (Act 17:27): That they should seek the Lord, that is, fear and worship him in a right manner. Therefore God has kept the children of men in a constant dependence upon him for life and all the comforts of life, that he might keep them under constant obligations to him. We have plain indications of God's presence among us, his presidency over us, the care of his providence concerning us, and his bounty to us, that we might be put upon enquiring, Where is God our Maker, who giveth songs in the night, who teacheth us more than the beasts of the earth, and maketh us wiser than the fowls of heaven? Job 35:10, Job 35:11. Nothing, one would think, should be more powerful with us to convince us that there is a God, and to engage us to seek his honour and glory in our services, and to seek our happiness in his favour and love, than the consideration of our own nature, especially the noble powers and faculties of our own souls. If we reflect upon these, and contemplate these, we may perceive both our relation and obligation to a God above us. Yet so dark is this discovery, in comparison with that by divine revelation, and so unapt are we to receive it, that those who have no other could but haply feel after God and find him. (1.) It was very uncertain whether they could by this searching find out God; it is but a peradventure: if haply they might. (2.) If they did find out something of God, yet it was but some confused notions of him; they did but feel after him, as men in the dark, or blind men, who lay hold on a thing that comes in their way, but know not whether it be that which they are in quest of or no. It is a very confused notion which this poet of theirs has of the relation between God and man, and very general, that we are his offspring: as was also that of their philosophers. Pythagoras said, Theion genos esti brotoios - Men have a sort of a divine nature. And Heraclitus (apud Lucian) being asked, What are men? answered, Theoi thnētoi - Mortal gods; and, What are the gods? answered, athanatoi anthrōpoi - Immortal men. And Pindar saith (Nemean, Ode 6), En andrōn hen theōn genos - God and man are near a-kin. It is true that by the knowledge of ourselves we may be led to the knowledge of God, but it is a very confused knowledge. This is but feeling after him. We have therefore reason to be thankful that by the gospel of Christ we have notices given us of God much clearer than we could have by the light of nature; we do not now feel after him, but with open face behold, as in a glass, the glory of God.

IV. He proceeds to call them all to repent of their idolatries, and to turn from them, Act 17:30, Act 17:31. This is the practical part of Paul's sermon before the university; having declared God to them (Act 17:23), he properly presses upon them repentance towards God, and would also have taught them faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, if they had had the patience to hear him. Having shown them the absurdity of their worshipping other gods, he persuades them to go on no longer in that foolish way of worship, but to return from it to the living and true God. Observe,

1. The conduct of God towards the Gentile world before the gospel came among them: The times of this ignorance God winked at. (1.) They were times of great ignorance. Human learning flourished more than ever in the Gentile world just before Christ's time; but in the things of God they were grossly ignorant. Those are ignorant indeed who either know not God or worship him ignorantly; idolatry was owing to ignorance. (2.) These times of ignorance God winked at. Understand it, [1.] As an act of divine justice. God despised or neglected these times of ignorance, and did not send them his gospel, as now he does. It was very provoking to him to see his glory thus given to another; and he detested and hated these times. So some take it. Or rather, [2.] As an act of divine patience and forbearance. He winked at these times; he did not restrain them from these idolatries by sending prophets to them, as he did to Israel; he did not punish them in their idolatries, as he did Israel; but gave them the gifts of his providence, Act 14:16, Act 14:17. These things thou hast done, and I kept silence, Psa 50:21. He did not give them such calls and motives to repentance as he does now. He let them alone. Because they did not improve the light they had, but were willingly ignorant, he did not send them greater lights. Or, he was not quick and severe with them, but was long-suffering towards them, because they did it ignorantly, Ti1 1:13.

2. The charge God gave to the Gentile world by the gospel, which he now sent among them: He now commandeth all men every where to repent - to change their mind and their way, to be ashamed of their folly and to act more wisely, to break off the worship of idols and bind themselves to the worship of the true God. Nay, it is to turn with sorrow and shame from every sin, and with cheerfulness and resolution to every duty. (1.) This is God's command. It had been a great favour if he had only told us that there was room left for repentance, and we might be admitted to it; but he goes further, he interposes his own authority for our good, and has made that our duty which is our privilege. (2.) It is his command to all men, every where, - to men, and not to angels, that need it not, - to men, and not to devils, that are excluded the benefit of it, - to all men in all places; all men have made work for repentance, and have cause enough to repent, and all men are invited to repent, and shall have the benefit of it. The apostles are commissioned to preach this every where. The prophets were sent to command the Jews to repent; but the apostles were sent to preach repentance and remission of sins to all nations. (3.) Now in gospel times it is more earnestly commanded, because more encouraged than it had been formerly. Now the way of remission is more opened than it had been, and the promise more fully confirmed; and therefore now he expects we should all repent. "Now repent; now at length, now in time, repent; for you have too long gone on in sin. Now in time repent, for it will be too late shortly."

3. The great reason to enforce this command, taken from the judgment to come. God commands us to repent, because he hath appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness (Act 17:31), and has now under the gospel made a clearer discovery of a state of retribution in the other world than ever before. Observe, (1.) The God that made the world will judge it; he that gave the children of men their being and faculties will call them to an account for the use they have made of them, and recompense them accordingly, whether the body served the soul in serving God or the soul was a drudge to the body in making provision for the flesh; and every man shall receive according to the things done in the body, Co2 5:10. The God that now governs the world will judge it, will reward the faithful friends of his government and punish the rebels. (2.) There is a day appointed for this general review of all that men have done in time, and a final determination of their state for eternity. The day is fixed in the counsel of God, and cannot be altered; but it is his there, and cannot be known. A day of decision, a day of recompence, a day that will put a final period to all the days of time. (3.) The world will be judged in righteousness; for God is not unrighteous, who taketh vengeance; far be it from him that he should do iniquity. His knowledge of all men's characters and actions is infallibly true, and therefore his sentence upon them incontestably just. And, as there will be no appeal from it, so there will be no exception against it. (4.) God will judge the world by that man whom he hath ordained, who can be no other than the Lord Jesus, to whom all judgment is committed. By him God made the world, by him he redeemed it, by him he governs it, and by him he will judge it. (5.) God's raising Christ from the dead is the great proof of his being appointed and ordained the Judge of quick and dead. His doing him that honour evidenced his designing him this honour. His raising him from the dead was the beginning of his exaltation, his judging the world will be the perfection of it; and he that begins will make an end. God hath given assurance unto all men, sufficient ground for their faith to build upon, both that there is a judgment to come and that Christ will be their judge; the matter is not left doubtful, but is of unquestionable certainty. Let all his enemies be assured of it, and tremble before him; let all his friends be assured of it, and triumph in him. (6.) The consideration of the judgment to come, and of the great hand Christ will have in that judgment, should engage us all to repent of our sins and turn from them to God. This is the only way to make the Judge our friend in that day, which will be a terrible day to all who live and die impenitent; but true penitents will then lift up their heads with joy, knowing that their redemption draws nigh.

Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Then Paul stood . . . and said--more graphically, "standing in the midst of Mars' hill, said." This prefatory allusion to the position he occupied shows the writer's wish to bring the situation vividly before us [BAUMGARTEN].

I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious--rather (with most modern interpreters and the ancient Greek ones), "in all respects extremely reverential" or "much given to religious worship," a conciliatory and commendatory introduction, founded on his own observation of the symbols of devotion with which their city was covered, and from which all Greek writers, as well as the apostle, inferred the exemplary religiousness of the Athenians. (The authorized translation would imply that only too much superstition was wrong, and represents the apostle as repelling his hearers in the very first sentence; whereas the whole discourse is studiously courteous).

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 22. Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill] That is, in the midst of the judges, who sat in the Areopagus.

Ye are too superstitious.] Κατα παντα ὡς δεισιδαιμονεϚερους ὑμας θεωρω; I perceive that in all respects ye are greatly addicted to religious practices; and, as a religious people, you will candidly hear what I have got to say in behalf of that worship which I practise and recommend. See farther observations at the end of the chapter. See Clarke on Ac 17:34

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

22. Men of Athens. We may divide this sermon of Paul into five members. For though Luke doth only briefly touch those things which he set down in many words, yet I do not doubt but that he did comprehend the sum, so that he did omit none of the principal points. First, Paul layeth superstition to the charge of the men of Athens, because they worship their gods all at a very venture; secondly, he showeth by natural arguments who and what God is, and how he is rightly worshipped; thirdly, he inveigheth against the blockishness of men, who, though they be created to this end, that they may know their Creator and Maker, yet do they wander and err in darkness like blind men; fourthly, he showed that nothing is more absurd than to draw any portraiture of God, seeing that the mind of man is his true image; in the first place, he descendeth at length unto Christ and the resurrection of the dead. For it was requisite to handle those four points generally, before he did descend unto the faith of the gospel.

As it were, more superstitions. The Grecians do oftentimes take [δεισιδαιμονια] in good part; notwithstanding it doth sometimes signify immoderate fear, wherewith superstitious men do carefully torment themselves, whilst that they forge to themselves vain doubts. And this seemeth to be the meaning of this place, that the men of Athens pass all measure in worshipping God, or that they do not perceive what manner [of] work moderation should be; as if he should say, that they deal very undiscreetly in that they weary themselves in going byways. Thus much touching the words; now to the matter. He proveth by this one reason, that all the worshippings of the men of Athens are corrupt, because they be uncertain what gods they ought to worship, because they take in hand rashly and unadvisedly divers rites, and that without measure. For in that they had set up an altar to the unknown God, it was a token that they knew no certainty. They had, indeed, a great company of gods whereof they spake much, but when they know nothing of the true divinity. Furthermore, whosoever doth worship God without any certainty, he worshippeth his own inventions instead of God. Howsoever credulous men do flatter themselves, yet neither doth God allow any religion without knowledge and truth, neither ought it to be counted holy and lawful. Yea, how proud soever they be, yet because they doubt in their consciences, they must needs be convict by their own judgment. For superstition is always fearful, and doth ever know and then coin some new thing.

Therefore we see how miserable their condition is who have not the certain light of the truth, because they do both always doubt in themselves, and lose their labor before God. Notwithstanding, we must note that the unbelievers, whilst that they sometimes make themselves blind through voluntary stubbornness, and are sometimes amidst divers and manifold doubts, [yet] strive and fight with themselves. Oftentimes they do not only flatter themselves, but if any man dare mutter against their folly, they rage cruelly against him; the devil doth so bewitch them, that they think nothing to be better than that which pleaseth them. Nevertheless, if there arise any doubt, if any seducer put up his head, if any new folly [delirium] begin to appear, they do not only waver, being in doubt, but also of their own accord offer themselves to be carried hither and thither. Whereby it appeareth, that neither in judgment, neither in quiet state of mind, they stay and rest in the common custom of worshipping God, but that they droop like drunken men. But carefulness and doubtfulness, [anxiety,] which doth not suffer the unbelievers to flatter and please themselves, is better than amazedness. Finally, though superstition be not always fearful, yet forasmuch as it is inwrapt in divers errors, it disquieteth men’s minds, and doth prick them with divers blind torments. This was the cause that the men of Athens did mix their domestical gods (whom they thought they knew, because in their vain opinion they had invented them) with unknown gods. For thereby appeareth their unquietness, because they confess that they have not as yet done as they ought, when they have done sacrifice to the familiar gods, which they had received of their fathers, and whom they called their country gods. Therefore, to the end Paul may pluck out of their minds all vain and false persuasions, he taketh this maxim, that they know not what they worship, neither have they any certain divine power, [deity.] For if they had known any god at all, being content with him, they would never have fallen away unto unknown gods, forasmuch as the knowledge of the true God alone is sufficient for the abolishig of all idols.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(22) Paul stood in the midst of Mars’ hill.—Better, Areopagus, as before. The Court sat in the open air on benches forming three sides of a quadrangle. A short flight of sixteen steps, cut in the rock, led from the agora to the plateau where the Court held its sittings. If it was actually sitting at the time, the temptation to have recourse to it, if only to cause a sensation and terrify the strange disputant, may well have been irresistible. As the Apostle stood there, he looked from the slight elevation on the temple of the Eumenides below him, that of Theseus to the east, and facing him on the Acropolis, the Parthenon. On the height of that hill stood the colossal bronze statue of Athena as the tutelary goddess of her beloved Athens, below and all around him were statues and altars. The city was “very full of idols.”

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

22. in the midst of Mars’ hill] Better, in the midst of the Areopagus. See on Act_17:19. There is no need for translating the name in one way there, and in another here.

Ye men of Athens] The language of the Apostle’s address takes exactly the form which it would have assumed in the mouth of one of their own orators. This may be due either to St Paul’s knowledge of Greek literature, and to his desire, everywhere manifest, to find words acceptable to his audience; or it may be that St Luke giving an abstract of the speech has cast the initial words into a form which Demosthenes would have employed. In the latter case it is no mark of unfaithfulness in the author, who clearly in these ten verses can only mean to give a skeleton of what the Apostle really uttered. St Paul spake at length, we cannot doubt, when he stood in such a place and before such an audience. The historian in the Acts gives the barest outline of what was spoken, and cannot be thought to have meant his words to be otherwise accepted, seeing that what he has given us would hardly occupy five minutes in the utterance.

ye are too superstitious] The Greek adjective which the Apostle here employs has two shades of meaning,” superstitious,” as in the A. V., and “religious” in a better sense. At the outset St Paul would not wish to give offence, and so the more complementary sense is to be preferred. As the word is of the comparative degree, this sense may be expressed either by “somewhat superstitious” (as R. V.) or “very religious.” The first would imply only a small shade of the less acceptable meaning, the latter would be an expression of praise of the Athenians above other people. The former is to be chosen, for St Paul did not wish to give praise, but after some slight blame to point out a more excellent way. For a description of the δεισιδαίμων, which exactly answers to what we call “superstitious,” see Theophrastus Charact. c. xvii.

22–31. Speech of St Paul at Athens

Taking notice of the extreme religious scrupulousness, which had led the Athenians to raise an altar to an unknown God, the Apostle declares to them the God whom alone they ought to worship, and whom as yet they did not know. This God was the Maker and Preserver of all things, and the Father of all men, and He desired to bring all to a knowledge of Himself. Athenian poets had spoken of this Fatherhood of God. Such a God is not fitly represented by graven images, and He would have men cease from such ignorant worship, for he will be the Judge as well as Father of men, and has given proof of the reality of the judgment and of the world to come by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill,.... Or of Areopagus, as it is better rendered in Act 17:19 for it is the same place, and it is the same word that is here used: Paul stood in the midst of that court of judicature, amidst the Areopagites, the judges of that court, and the wise and learned philosophers of the different sects that were assembled together:

and said, ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious; or "more religious", than any other persons, in other places, which has been observed before on Act 17:16 they had more gods, and more altars, and more festivals, and were more diligent and studious in the worship of the gods, than others. And this manner of addressing them, both as citizens of Athens, and as very religious persons, and who, as such, greatly exceeded all others, must greatly tend to engage their attention to him.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

22 Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars’ hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.

Ver. 22. You are too superstitious] You are fearers of evil spirits; so one renders it; and Paul elsewhere tells the Corinthians that what they sacrificed to idols they sacrificed to devils, 1Co 10:20.

Beza renders ως δεισιδαιμονεστερους, quasi religiosiares (as if the apostle had used an euphemismus), {a} somewhat superstitious, or rather religious; the better to insinuate, for the Athenians had tender ears, and loved to hear toothless truths; which made Demosthenes call upon get their ears healed. ( Orat. de Ord. Civ.)

{a} That figure of speech which consists in the substitution of a word or expression of comparatively favourable implication or less unpleasant associations, instead of the harsher or more offensive one that would more precisely designate what is intended. ŒD

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Then Paul - This commences Paul’s explanation of the doctrines which he had stated. It is evident that Luke has recorded but a mere summary or outline of the discourse; but it is such as to enable us to see clearly his course of thought, and the manner in which he met the two principal sects of their philosophers.

In the midst of Mars’ hill - Greek: Areopagus. This should have been retained in the translation.

Ye men of Athens - This language was perfectly respectful, notwithstanding his heart had been deeply affected by their idolatry. Everything about this discourse is calm, grave, cool, argumentative. Paul understood the character of his auditors, and did not commence his discourse by denouncing them, nor did he suppose that they would be convinced by mere dogmatical assertion. No happier instance can be found of cool, collected argumentation than is furnished in this discourse.

I perceive - He perceived this by his observations of their forms of worship in passing through their city, Act 17:23.

In all things - In respect to all events.

Ye are too superstitious - δεισιδαιμονεστέρους deisidaimonesterous. This is a most unhappy translation. We use the word “superstitious” always in a bad sense, to denote being “over-scrupulous and rigid in religious observances, particularly in smaller matters, or a zealous devotion to rites and observances which are not commanded.” But the word here is designed to convey no such idea. It properly means “reverence for the gods.” It is used in the Classic writers in a good sense, to denote “piety toward the gods, or suitable fear and reverence for them”; and also in a bad sense, to denote “improper fear or excessive dread of their anger”; and in this sense it accords with our word “superstitious.” But it is altogether improbable that Paul would have used it in a bad sense. For:

(1) It was not his custom needlessly to blame or offend his auditors.

(2) It is not probable that he would commence his discourse in a manner that would only excite prejudice and opposition.

(3) In the thing which he specifies Act 17:23 as proof on the subject, he does not introduce it as a matter of blame, but rather as a proof of their devotedness to the cause of religion and of their regard for God.

(4) The whole speech is calm, dignified, and argumentative - such as became such a place, such a speaker, and such an audience. The meaning of the expression is, therefore, “I perceive that you are greatly devoted to reverence for religion; that it is a characteristic of the people to honor the gods, to rear altars to them, and to recognize the divine agency in times of trial.” The proof of this was the altar reared to the unknown God; its bearing on his purpose was, that such a state of public sentiment must be favorable to an inquiry into the truth of what he was about to state.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Over-religious.[4] Or very superstitious. To be superstitious, or given to superstition, is commonly taken for a vain and groundless religious worship, but it is also sometimes used in a good sense. And perhaps St. Paul, in the beginning of his speech to so many men of learning, does not so openly blame them for being vainly and foolishly superstitious, but by their inscription, to the unknown[5] God, he take notice how nice and exact they pretended to be, in not omitting to pay some kind of homage to any god, or gods of all other nations, whom they might not know. For some interpreters think, that by this altar they designed to worship every god of any nation, who was not come to their knowledge: or to worship that great God hinted at in the writings of Plato: or as others conjecture, that God of the Jews, of whom they might have heard such wonders, and whose name the Jews themselves said to be unknown and ineffable. However, from this inscription St. Paul takes an occasion, with wonderful dexterity, with sublime reflections, and with that solid eloquence, of which he was master, and which he employed, as often as it was necessary, to inform them, and instruct them, concerning the works of the one true God, of whom they had little knowledge, by their own fault: that this one true God made the world, and all things in it: that from one man he raised all mankind: that his presence is not confined to temples made by the hands of men, being every where, and in all creatures, preserving them every moment: that in him we live, move, and have our being, or subsist: that it is he, who hath determined the time, limits, or bounds of every empire, and kingdom, and of every man’s life: that this true God, who made, preserves, and governs all things in heaven and on earth, cannot be like to gold, silver, or any thing made by the art, or fancy of men. He puts them in mind that according even to one of their own heathen poets, Aratus, men themselves are the offspring of God, being blessed with a being and knowledge above all other creatures in this world: who by the light of reason ought to seek God, and by considering the visible effects of Providence over the world, and the creatures in it, might come to the knowledge of this one God, the author of all, at least to an imperfect knowledge of him, as men find out things by feeling, or as it were, groping in the dark. He then adds, (ver. 30.) that having, as it were, overlooked, and permitted men for many ages to run on in this ignorance and blindness, in punishment of their sins, (this their ignorance of one true God, the author of all things, being wilful and inexcusable) now the same true God hath been pleased to announce to all men, that henceforward they acknowledge, and worship him, that they repent, and do penance for their sins. (Witham)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Superstitiosiores, Greek: deisidaimonosterous, from Greek: deido, timeo, and Greek: daimon. Greek: Deisidaimonia is sometimes taken in a good sense for religio, as also superstitio in Latin. See Budæus, and Plutarch apud Scapulam. See also Suidas.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Mars’ hill: See Poole on "Act 17:19".

Too superstitious; sometimes this word is taken in a good sense; many then, as now, taking superstition to be religion. But it is often taken in a bad sense: thus Theophrastus says, that a truly pious man is a friend of God; οδε δεισιδαιμων κολαξ θεου, but the superstitious man is a flatterer of God. Now this word being then of a kind of middle signification, the apostle would seem not to bear too hard upon the Athenians, who were devout and religious, according to the measure of their knowledge, and whom he desired to win by love and gentleness.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

And for then, A.V.; the Areopagus for Mars" hill, A.V.; in all things I perceive that for I perceive that in all things, A.V.; somewhat for too, A.V. In the midst is simply a local description. He stood in the midst of the excavated quadrangle, while his hearers probably sat on the scats all round. Ye men of Athena. The Demosthenes of the Church uses the identical address Andrev jAqhnaioi which the great orator used in his stirring political speeches to the Athenian people. Somewhat superstitious. There is a difference of opinion among commentators whether these words imply praise or blame. Chrysostom, followed by many others, takes it as said in the way of encomium, and understands the word deisidaimonesterouv as equivalent to eujlabesterouv, very religious, more than commonly religious. And so Bishop Jacobson ("Speaker"s Commentary"), who observes that the substantive deisdaimonia is used five times by Josephus, and always in the sense of "religion," or "piety." On the other hand, the Vulgate (superstitiosiores), the English Versions, Erasmus, Luther, Calvin, etc., take the word in its most common classical sense of "superstitious;" and it weighs for something towards determining St. Luke"s use of the word that Plutarch uses deisidaimonia always in a bad sense, of superstition, as in his life of Alexander and elsewhere, and in his tract "De Superstitione" (Deisidaimonia). Perhaps the conclusion is that St. Paul, having his spirit stirred by seeing the city full of idols, determined to attack that spirit in the Athenian people which led to so much idolatry; which he did in the speech which follows. But, acting with his usual wisdom, he used an inoffensive term at the outset of his speech. He could not mean to praise them for that deisidaimonia which it was the whole object of his sermon to condemn. Josephus ("Contr. Apion.," 1:12) calls the Athenians toutouv twn jEllhnwn, the most religious of all Greeks (Howson).

Vers. 22-29. God revealed: his nature and relation.

Paul"s spirit was "stirred" with holy indignation, and with pure and strong compassion, as he witnessed the abounding signs of superstition in the streets of Athens. But he had the wisdom to begin his address to these "men of Athens" by an expression which they would take to be complimentary. He told them that he perceived they were abundantly religious. He did not conclude this from witnessing their numerous divinities, but from the inscription he had read on an altar, "To the unknown God." Adroitly seizing on this as proof positive that they were in ignorance as to the true object of worship, he said that he could declare to them the Deity whom they were ignorantly or unconsciously worshipping. Then he spoke out the everlasting truth concerning the living God, which he had learned, and in the knowledge of which he stood superior, not only to those degenerate philosophers, but to the wisest man that had ever spoken their language and immortalized their city.

I THE NATURE OF GOD.

1. Paul taught the unity of the Godhead. "God that made the world," etc.; a very noticeable singular, He taught, concerning his nature, that this was:

2. Spiritual; such that it is a vain and senseless thing to try to make any likeness of him. God is a Spirit," we ourselves being his children, and it is not in gold or stone or silver to produce any sort of semblance of him (ver. 29).

3. Independent; so that he does not need the service of human hands. Except as expressions of our feelings of penitence, or trust, or gratitude, or homage, all offerings are an insult to his majesty and his power. (ver. 25; and see Ps 1)

4. Omnipresent. We need repair to the interior of no temple walls to find him, for he is "Lord of heaven and earth" (ver. 24), filling immensity with his presence. He is net far from any one of us; he compasses our path and our lying down; he besets us behind and before; we cannot go where he is not (ver. 27).

5. Sovereign. He is Lord of heaven and earth; he is the Divine Ruler of all.

II THE DIVINE RELATION TO MANKIND. We not only want to know generally who and what God is; we also and equally want to know what is the particular relation in which he stands to us. And what, we ask, does he desire we should be to him? Here is the answer:

1. He is the Maker of the world in which we live: he "made the world and all things therein" (ver. 24).

2. He is the Divine Benefactor from whom all blessings flow: "He giveth to all life," etc. (ver. 25).

3. He is the Divine Provider and Arranger of all human affairs (ver. 26). His intelligence has foreseen, and his wisdom directed everything.

4. He is the Father of all human spirits: "We are also his off spring" (ver. 28). And we are so in that

(1) he is the Author (ver. 26) of our common humanity (ver. 26);

(2) he is sustaining us all in constant existence: In him we live," etc. (ver. 28);

(3) he is deeply interested in us, and desires our approach to him; he has so wrought that men should seek him, if haply they might feel after him and find him." He desires to be sought and found of us, that we may commune with him and rejoice in him, that we may attain to his likeness and prepare for his nearer presence. If such is the nature of God, and such the relation in which he stands to us, then:

(1) How pitiful a thing is

(a) heathenism, the ignorance of God; and

(b) atheism, the denial of God; and

(c) indifference, the rejection of God!

(2) How excellent and how wise a thing is

(a) reverence for God;

(b) obedience to God;

(c) an earnest effort to obtain the Divine favor, and to live in his love! C.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Then Paul standing in the midst of the Areopagus - An ample theatre; said - 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!

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

The first part of Paul’s speech:

v. 22. Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars Hill and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.

v. 23. For as I passed by and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, To the Unknown God. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, Him declare I unto you.

v. 24. God, that made the world and all things therein, seeing that He is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands,

v. 25. neither is worshiped with men’s hands, as though He needed anything, seeing He giveth to all life and breath and all things;

v. 26. and hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation,

v. 27. that they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after Him, and find Him, though He be not far from every one of us;

v. 28. for in Him we live, and move, and have our being, as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also His offspring.

Paul had been placed by those men that conducted him and now stood in the midst of the Council, or Court, of Areopagus. "The Areopagus was, in ancient times, a judicial council of Athens which held its meetings on the ’hill of Mars,’ a little west of the Acropolis, which is in full view from its summit. On the top of this hill can still be seen the rock benches on which the Areopagites sat in the open air, and the two great rocks on which the accused prisoners sat. But it is not certain that Paul was officially tried before this ancient court. He may have been taken to this place as the most appropriate spot at which to address quietly an interested audience, or this may have been merely an informal inquiry made by the members of the court concerning his teaching. Yet from all the evidence available it seems certain that this council had the right to pass upon the qualifications of all lecturers either in the university or in the city, and the official arrest of this unauthorized lecturer is by no means impossible. " But whether the council heard Paul formally or informally, whether he spoke on the hill adjoining the Acropolis or in one of the great halls near the forum (Stoa Basileios), where the people had a better opportunity of hearing him, his address before this select company of the world’s foremost wise men was an uncompromising stand for repentance and faith. He addresses the assembly in the customary manner as "Men of Athens. " That they were a very religious people (literally, demon-fearing in a very high degree) he had observed, so it appeared to him to be; they carried their religious relevance very far. For as he was wandering through the streets of their city and making it a point to consider with attentive interest their objects of religious veneration, the temples, groves, altars, statues which they considered sacred, he had found also an altar with the inscription: To an Unknown God; an epigraph since found on at least one altar, and referred to occasionally in ancient writings. There can be no doubt, on the basis of Rom 1:18-20, for which many parallels from secular sources may be adduced, that many heathen felt the insufficiency and the inadequacy of their religion. Their natural knowledge of God led them to doubt, and often to condemn, the idolatry as practiced by their own people, and should have prompted them to search so long until they had found the revelation of the true God; for there never was a time in the history of the world in which the worship of the God of heaven was not proclaimed somewhere. The altars to the unknown God seem to have been a semiconscious admission of the vanity and emptiness of idolatry. The Athenians thus worshiped what they knew not; they acknowledged with relevance a divine existence which was nameless to them. But what they thus worshiped devoutly, without knowing it, Paul proclaimed to them.

After this short introduction, Paul set forth the true God to them, that they might both know His name and knowingly relevance Him. The God that made the world, the created universe, and everything it contains, He, natural Lord as He is of heaven and earth, does not make His dwelling in temples made by the hands of men. Paul deliberately contrasts the true God with the idols whose dwelling was in temples made with hands, and whose statue often filled only a small niche of such a temple. The true God is also not served or worshiped with gifts or sacrifices made by the hands of men, as though He did not possess perfection and a full measure of everything, but was still in need of something. It is rather, on the contrary, He Himself who gives life and breath to all men, and all things which they are in need of. To attempt to dispense to the Giver of all good gifts what He Himself has always possessed is obviously a foolish proceeding, since the very life of men, as well as their continued existence, depends upon Him alone. And this almighty Creator made out of one, by making Adam the father of the entire human race, every race of people for the purpose of dwelling on the entire face, in every part, of the earth. There is no need of theory and guess-work, of false philosophy; Adam is, by the will of God, the ancestor of the entire human race. And this same God has also fixed, determined, the times that were appointed beforehand and the boundaries of the abodes of men. By His will and arrangement there are periods during which nations may retain possession of the territory which they have occupied, and there are points of time when they shall be dispossessed. Thus God, who has created all men, also controls the history of all nations. And the purpose which God has in thus manifesting His almighty power and providence is that men should seek the Lord, if by any means their minds might grasp some of His essence and they might thus find Him. They should be induced to obtain the very knowledge of God which Paul is here trying to impart to them. It may be a groping, as that of a blind man, and with all efforts it would result in only partial recognition of the essence of God; but it would lead onward, and should then be supplemented by the knowledge of revelation. For He, the Creator, is not far from every single human being, His personal presence is with every one of His creatures, not with any idea of pantheism, but with a personal relationship which shows His tender care for every single life. It is in Him that all men live, and move, and exist, are personal beings. If it were not for God who sustains us, we could not give evidence of life, it would be impossible for us to move, we could, indeed, not even exist. The knowledge which Paul thus advanced might be gained even by a contemplation of the works of God, as passages from the Greek poets tended to show, which Paul briefly quotes: For we His offspring are. The words are found in the poems of Aratus and of Cleanthes, and were familiar to all that knew anything of Greek poetry. That Paul here applied words from a heathen poem to the true God should give all the less offense since the poets were undoubtedly voicing the natural knowledge of God, which they had strengthened by a careful observation of the world and its government. Thus Paul, basing his remarks upon the natural knowledge of a divine being which is found in the hearts of men even after the fall of man, had given his hearers some idea of the true God and of their relation to Him in creation and preservation. The same arguments may well be applied under similar circumstances to this day.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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.

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

22–31. Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill. In the Areopagus. Let the reader keep in mind that this address was spoken in the literary capital of the ancient world, the most cultured city of the earth to which every Roman who sought a finished education resorted to complete his studies, the home of the philosophers, orators, sculptors, painters and poets, and the great university where many thousands of strangers were gathered for study. This ancient city of so glorious history is the modern capital of Greece, and has about 100,000 inhabitants. Ye men of Athens. The introduction of Paul has always been regarded as a masterpiece of skill. He does not say, “In all things ye are too superstitious” (see Revision in the margin), or ye are “more religious than others.” His remark is a compliment, and he confirms it by a statement that he had found an altar to the unknown God. Besides thousands of altars and statues of deities whom they named, this altar was dedicated to the “Unknown,” as if to some deity whose presence they felt, but whom they did not comprehend. This Unknown, he announces, I declare unto you. Ancient writers speak of altars at Athens to the unknown God, or gods. Such an introduction was well calculated to fix the attention of his critical audience.

God that made the world. He now declares the attributes of that unknown God: (1) The God that made the world; (2) Lord of heaven and earth; (3) dwelleth not in temples; (4) not worshiped by human hands; (5) giveth life to all that lives; (6) made of one blood all nations; (7) appointed that men should seek the Lord; (8) we are his offspring; (9) hence, the Godhead is not like any idol made by human hands. It dishonors so glorious a being to liken him to man's device. Then comes the application.

The times of this ignorance. The times when there was no revelation in to those in darkness. God winked at. Overlooked. Now commandeth. The gospel is world-embracing. (1) All men, (2) everywhere, are command to repent. This call to repentance is urged because God

hath appointed a day; the day of coming judgment, when the world will be judged through Christ. Of this the resurrection of Christ is an assurance.

Appointed times (verse 26). Athens had had her day. She was once the mistress of the seas. The same fact is true of every nation.

Certain of your poets. Aratus, who wrote about 200 years before. Also Cleanthes, in his Hymn to Jupiter.

Raised him from the dead (verse 31). If Jesus was raised, all men will be raised; hence, the assurance of a general judgment after death.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

General Information:

Paul begins his speech to the philosophers on the Areopagus.

very religious in every way

Paul is referring to the Athenians' public display of honoring the gods through prayers, building altars, and offering sacrifices.

For as I passed along

"Because as I walked past" or "I walked along"

To an Unknown God

Possible meanings are 1) "to a certain unknown god" or 2) "to a god not known." This was a specific writing or inscription on that altar.

translationWords

Paul

worship

altar

God

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

22–31. SPEECH OF ST PAUL AT ATHENS

Taking notice of the extreme religious scrupulousness which had led the Athenians to raiso an altar to an unknown God, the Apostle declares to them the God whom alone they ought to worship, and whom as yet they did not know. This God was the Maker and Preserver of all things, and the Father of all men, and He desired to bring all to a knowledge of Himself. Athenian poets had spoken of this Fatherhood of God. Such a God is not fitly represented by graven images, and He would have men cease from such ignorant worship, for he will be the Judge as well as Father of men, and has given proof of the reality of the judgment and of the world to come by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

22. ἐν μέσῳ τοῦ Ἀρείου πάγου, in the midst of the Areopagus. See above on Act 17:19.

ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, men of Athens. The language of the Apostle’s address takes exactly the form which it would have assumed in the mouth of one of their own orators. This may be due either to St Paul’s knowledge of Greek literature, and to his desire, everywhere manifest, to find words acceptable to his audience; or it may be that St Luke, giving an abstract of the speech, has cast the initial words into a form which Demosthenes would have employed. In the latter case it is no mark of unfaithfulness in the author, who clearly in these ten verses can only mean to give a skeleton of what the Apostle really uttered. St Paul spake at length, we cannot doubt, when he stood in such a place and before such an audience. The historian in the Acts gives the barest outline of what was spoken, and cannot be thought to have meant his words to be otherwise accepted, seeing that what he has given us would hardly occupy five minutes in the utterance.

κατὰ πάντα ὡς δεισδαιμονεστέρους ὑμᾶς θεωρῶ, in all things I perceive that ye are somewhat superstitious. δεισιδαίμων has two senses: (1) superstitious, (2) religious. The Apostle intends the word in the former sense, but by the comparative he qualifies it in some degree. He implies a degree of blame which perhaps comes nearly to ‘more superstitious than you ought to be.’ His desire is not to offend at first by too stern an expression of blame, but by gently pointing out a fault to lead his hearers into a more excellent way. For a description of the δεισιδαίμων, which exactly answers to our ‘superstitious,’ see Theophrastus, Charact. c. XVII.

κατὰ πάντα means ‘in everything which he had noticed while wandering about their city.’

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

22.] The Commentators vie with each other in admiration of this truly wonderful speech of the great Apostle. Chrysostom: τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ εἰρημένον τῷ ἀποστόλῳ, ἐγενόμην τοῖς ἀνόμοις ὡς ἄνομος, ἵνα κερδήσω ἀνόμους· Ἀθηναίοις γὰρ δημηγορῶν, οὐκ ἀπὸ προφητῶν οὐδὲ ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμου διελέχθη, ἀλλʼ ἁπὸ βωμοῦ τὴν παραίνεσιν ἐποιήσατο· ἀπὸ τῶν οἰκείων αὐτοὺς ἐχειρώσατο δογμάτων· διὸ οὐκ εἶπεν “ἄνομος,” ἀλλʼ “ὡς ἄνομος.” ‘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.’

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

κατὰ π., in every point of view: see reff.

δεισιδαιμονεστέρους] 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.: δεις., τουτέστιν εὐλαβεστέρους.… ὥσπερ ἐγκωμιάζειν αὐτοὺς δοκεῖ, οὐδὲν βαρὺ λέγων.

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: δεισιδαίμων, ὁ εὐσεβής, :—ἐν τῷ τοιούτῳ (in battle) γὰρ δὴ οἱ δεισιδαίμονες ἧττον τοὺς ἀνθρώπους φοβοῦνται, Xen. Cyrop. iii. 3. 58: and on the other hand, Theophrast. Char. 16, explains δεισιδαιμονία by δειλία πρὸς τὸ δαιμόνιον: and Pollux, εὐσεβής, θεῶν ἐπιμελής, ὁ δὲ ὑπερτιμῶν, δεισιδαίμων καὶ δεισίθεος.

The character thus given of the Athenians is confirmed by Greek writers: thus, Pausan. i. 24. 3, Ἀθηναίοις περισσότερόν τι ἢ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἐς τὰ θεῖά ἐστι σπονδῆς. See other instances in Wetstein. Josephus, c. Apion. ii. 11, calls them εὐσεβεστάτους τῶν Ἑλλήνων.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

I perceive [θεωρω] . I regard you, in my careful observation of you. See on Luk 10:18.

Too superstitious [δεισιδαιμονεστερους] . This rendering and that of the Rev., somewhat superstitious, are both unfortunate. The word is compounded of deidw, to fear, and daimwn, a deity. It signifies either a religious or a superstitious sentiment, according to the context. Paul would have been unlikely to begin his address with a charge which would have awakened the anger of his audience. What he means to say is, You are more divinity - fearing than the rest of the Greeks. This propensity to reverence the higher powers is a good thing in itself, only, as he shows them, it is misdirected, not rightly conscious of its object and aim. Paul proposes to guide the sentiment rightly by revealing him whom they ignorantly worship. The American revisers insist on very religious. The kindred word deisidaimonia occurs ch. 25 19, and in the sense of religion, though rendered in A. V. superstition. Festus would not call the Jewish religion a superstition before Agrippa, who was himself a Jew. There is the testimony of the Ephesian town - clerk, that Paul, during his three years' residence at Ephesus, did not rudely and coarsely attack the worship of the Ephesian Diana. "Nor yet blasphemers of your goddess" (Act 19:37).

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.