Matt. 4: 5. 24: 16. Luke 23: 33, etc. Win. § 53 1. This common usage of the preposition deserves notice only on account of the false sense which has been so often assigned to it here, as mentioned below. The Areiopagus whither Paul was now brought, was a rocky eminence a little to the west of the Acropolis. See Leake's Athens, p. 165. The object of the movement undoubtedly was, to place the apostle in a situation where he could be heard by the multitude with greater advantage. The following description of this important locality, is given by Dr. Robinson, who visited the place. "This is a narrow, naked ridge of lime-stone rock, rising gradually from the northern end (of the city), and terminating abruptly on the south, over against the west end of the Acropolis, from which it bears about north; being separated from it by an elevated valley. This southern end is fifty or sixty feet above the said valley; though yet much lower than the Acropolis. On its top are still to be seen the seats of the judges and parties, hewn in the rock; and towards the south-west is a descent by a flight of steps, also cut in the rock, into the valley below. Standing on this elevated platform, surrounded by the learned and the wise of Athens, the multitude perhaps being on the steps and in the vale below, Paul had directly before him the far-famed Acropolis with its wonders of Grecian art; and beneath him, on his left, the majestic Theseium, the earliest and still most perfect of Athenian structures; while all around, other temples and altars filled the whole city. On the Acropolis, too, were the three celebrated statues of Minerva: one of olive-wood; another of gold and ivory in the Parthenon, the master-piece of Phidias; and the colossal statue in the open air, the point of whose spear was seen over the Parthenon by those sailing along the gulf."-Biblical Researches, Vol. I. p. 10 seq. It is obvious that the peculiar boldness and power of Paul's speech can be adequately realized, only as we keep in mind the impressive outward scene which was here -spread around him. Instead of translating ἐπὶ τὸν "Αρειον πάγον as above, many have rendered iní, before, a forensic sense which it often has, as in speaking of sending up a prisoner for trial, comp. 16: 19. 18: 12. 28: 8, etc.; and hence they have maintained that Paul was arraigned at this time before the court of the Areiopagus, and underwent a formal trial on the charge of having attempted to change the religion of the State. But this opinion rests entirely upon two or three expressions, which like the one just noticed, are ambiguous in themselves; while, in other respects the entire narrative, as well as the improbability of such a procedure, testify against the idea. First, we find here no trace whatever of anything like the formality of a legal process. Secondly, 1849.] He was not tried before the Areiopagus. 343 the professed object of bringing the apostle ἐπὶ τὸν "Αρειον πάγον was to ascertain from him what his opinions were, not to put him on his defence for them before they were known. Again, the manner in which the affair terminated, would have been a most singular issue for a judicial investigation in the highest court of Athens. And, finally, the speech which Paul delivered on the occasion, was precisely such as we should expect before a promiscuous assembly; whereas if he had stood now as an accused person before a legal tribunal, his plea has most strangely failed to connect itself, at any single point, with that peculiarity of his situation. It proves nothing in regard to the question, to show that the court of the Areiopagus had powers (that is admitted) which would have given to it jurisdiction in the case of Paul, supposing that he had been charged at this time with subverting the established worship; since the narrative on which we must rely for our information as to what was done, not only contains no evidence that the Athenians took this serious view of his doctrine, but ascribes their eagerness to hear him to a mere love of novelty; see v. 21. Calvin, Kuinoel, Neander, Winer, Olshausen, De Wette, Meyer, Lisco, Bauer, Doddridge, and the best critics generally, at present, reject the opinion above considered. The authority of Chrysostom, among the ancient critics, stands in favor of it. Hess, Hemsen, Scholz, and a few others among the Germans, also follow on that side; except that some of them would say (this is true of Hemsen), that the Areiopagus was called together not exactly to try the apostle, but to hear from him some account of his doctrine. But was that one of the functions of this court? It is entirely improbable. No evidence is adduced to show it. Bloomfield, in like manner, speaks of the "decorum" with which the apostle demeaned himself before "so august a court ;" and a great many of our English writers go in the same direction. The other ambiguous expressions, which have been supposed to favor the view which has been objected to, will be noticed in their place. Avvάueda provai, Can we know? It would have been an excess, certainly, even of the Attic politeness, to have interrogated a prisoner at the bar in this manner. The object, too, of the inquiry as defined by the accompanying terms, shows clearly that they did not regard him as occupying that position. Vv. 20, 21. §eviovra, the cause for the effect, surprising since the things were foreign, unheard of before. εiopέges-nuor. This phrase, drawn from common life, has an appearance of the utmost reality in this connection. tí av vέhoi, etc. See on v. 18. τί here in apposition with zauza, is to be noticed. It is not precisely like the plural. "The singular zí may stand in such connections as zí ravtá tort, when the question is, what sort of a whole, what combined re sult, do the particulars form?" Krüger, Gr. § 61. 8. 2. V. 21. Their only motive for making the request was, the gratification of their curiosity. Anvaïoi dè návres, now all Athenians. The omission of the article unites the characteristic more closely with the name, as its invariable attendant. Comp. Win. § 17. 10 b. οἱ ἐπιδημοῦντες, i. e. the foreigners permanently resident there; unde iidem mores, as Bengel remarks. εἰς οὐδὲν — εὐκαίρουν, spent their leisure for nothing else. The imperfect does not exclude the continued existence of the peculiarity, but blends the reference to it with the history. See similar examples in 27: 8. John 11: 18. 18: 1. 19: 14. Comp. Kühn. § 256. 4 a. Cr. 567. 7. The verb affirms, first, that they had leisure, and, impliedly, at least, an ample share of it; and, secondly, that they made the use of it which is designated xaivórɛqov newer, sc. than before. Win. § 36. 3. St. § 118. 4. The comparative form of the adjective or the positive could be used in this phrase; but the former characterizes the state of mind in question much more forcibly than the latter. Bengel has illustrated well the point of the idiom: Nova statim sordebant; noviora quaere-bantur. Bloomfield speaks of the comparative here as loosely used for the positive. It is worth remarking, that this singular scene of setting up the apostle to speak for the entertainment of the people, occurs, not at Ephesus, or Philippi, or Corinth, but at Athens; not only the only place, in all his journeyings, where Paul met with such a reception, but just the place where the incident comes up as the spontaneous product of the state of things existing there. We know, from the testimony of ancient writers, that this fondness for hearing and telling some new thing, which Luke mentions, was a notorious characteristic of the Athenians. It would be superfluous to adduce citations in proof of this. See them, in almost any number, in Wetstein, Kuinoel, Bloomfield, and others. The entirely incidental manner in which the exemplification of this trait comes forth in the narrative here, speaks for its truth. Outline of the Course of Thought. The speech which Paul delivered at this time is remarkable for its adaptation, not only to the outward circumstances under which he spoke, but to the peculiar mental state of his auditors. De Wette, whose aesthetic judgment no one will question, calls it "a model of the apologetic style of discourse." "The address of Paul before this assembly," says Neander, "is a living proof of his apostolic wisdom and eloquence; we perceive here how the apostle, according to his own expression, could become also a heathen to the heathen, that he 1849.] Analysis of the Argument. 345 might win the heathen to a reception of the gospel." "The skill," says Hemsen, "with which he was able to bring the truth near to the Athenians, deserves admiration. We find in this discourse of Paul nothing of an ill-timed zeal, nothing like declamatory pomp; it evinces throughout clearness, brevity, coherence, and simplicity of representation." Dr. Robinson, speaking under the impression produced on his mind by a personal survey of the scene, says that, "masterly" as the address is, as it lies on record before us, "the full force and energy and boldness of the apostle's language, can be duly felt only when one has stood upon the spot." Yet Bauer adheres to his habit of objection and dissent even here. He thinks the speech has been over-praised by critics, because Paul did not succeed in bringing it to a formal close. The astonishment which one feels as he reads the address, is not that the speaker was interrupted at length, when he came to announce to the Athenians the peculiar doctrines of Christianity, but that he could command their attention so long, while he bore down with such effect on their favorite opinions and prejudices, exposed their errors, and arraigned them as guilty of the grossest inconsistency and absurdity of conduct. We have first the introduction, which, in the technical language of rhetoric, is eminently conciliatory. The apostle begins by acknowledging and commending the respect of the Athenians for religion; vv. 22, 23. He states next, at the close of v. 23, his design, which is to guide their religious instincts and aspirations to their proper object, i. e. to teach them what God is, his nature and attributes, in opposition to their false views and practices as idolaters. He goes on, then, in pursuance of this purpose, to announce to them, first, that God is the Creator of the outward, material universe, v. 24; secondly, that He is entirely independent of his creatures, having all sufficiency in Himself, v. 25; thirdly, that He is the Creator of all mankind, notwithstanding their separation into so many nations and their wide dispersion on the earth, v. 26; and, fourthly, that He has placed men, as individuals and nations, in such relations of dependence on Himself as render it easy for them to see that He is, verily, the Creator and sovereign Disposer, and they the creatures; and that it is their duty to seek and serve Him, vv. 27, 28. The ground has thus been won for the application which follows. At this point of the discourse, stretching forth his hand, as we may well suppose, towards the gorgeous images within sight, he exclaims: "We ought not, therefore, to suppose that the Deity is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, sculptured by the art and device of men," v. 29. And that which men ought not to do, they may not safely do any longer. It was owing to the forbearance of God that they had been left hitherto to pursue their idolatry without any signal manifestation of his displeasure; now they were required to repent of it and forsake it, v. 30; because a day of righteous judgment awaited them, which had been rendered certain by the resurrection of Christ, v. 31. Here their clamors interrupted him. It is not difficult, perhaps, to conjecture what he would have added. It only remained, in order to complete his well known circle of thought on such occasions that he should have set forth the claims of Christ as the object of religious hope and confidence, that he should have exhorted them to call on his name and be saved. It will be seen, therefore, by casting the eye back, that we have here all the parts of a perfect discourse, viz. the exordium, the proposition or theme, the proof or exposition, the inferences and application. It is a beautiful specimen of the manner in which a powerful and well trained mind, practised in public speaking, conforms spontaneously to the rules of the severest logic. One can readily believe, looking at this feature of the discourse, that it was pronounced by the man who wrote the epistles to the Romans and Galatians; where we see the same mental characteristics so strongly reflected. As we must suppose at all events, that the general scheme of thought, the nexus of the argument, has been preserved, it does not affect our critical judgment of the discourse whether we maintain that it has been reported in full, or that a synopsis only has been given. On this point opinions differ. Examination of the Discourse. Vv. 22-31. The speech of Paul on Mars Hill. V. 22 ¿v μéog may be said obviously of a place or an assembly. It is one of the ambiguous expressions, therefore, already adverted to, which leave it uncertain whether Aqɛíov názov is to be understood of the hill merely or the court assembled there. Ἄνδρες Αθηναῖοι. The remark just made is to be repeated here. It is the style of address which Paul would necessarily use in speaking to a concourse of Athenians; and at the same time, he might use it in speaking before judges. In the latter case, however, the Greeks oftener said o avdoes dixaoraí. See Stallb. Plat. Apol. 17, A. xarà návrα, in every respect, as it were, in every possible mode of exhibition. ὡς - θεωρώ, I see you as (those who correspond to the description, viz.) more religious sc. than ordinary or than other men. For this suppression of the other term of the comparison, see on v. 21. That δεισιδαιμονεστέρους which is a vox media is to be taken here in a good sense, is rendered certain by the illustration which the apostle subjoins. |