The Athens of the first century was a shadow of its glorious past. The golden age of Athens was some 500 years before Paul visited the city, but it was nevertheless an impressive city. The emperors Augustus and Claudius both made generous donations to maintain public buildings and even Herod the Great donated statues to the city. Jews lived in Athens as early as the fourth century B.C. 2 Maccabees 6:1-2 refers to an Athenian senator sent by Antiochus IV Epiphanes to Jerusalem to persuade the Jews to give up on their traditions (Schnabel, 2:1174).
Despite the reputation of the city, there is a certain amount of prejudice in Luke’s description of Athens. “All they do is sit around and talk philosophy all day!” (Acts 17:21). Even though this might have been respectable to some, Luke’s description of the philosophical activity seems negative.
As for Paul, he is distressed by the idolatry of the city. Luke uses a phrase here which means something like “shaken in his spirit,” but can also mean “provoked to wrath”(παροξύνω, BDAG). In the LXX, both Hos 8:5 and Zech 10:3 use the word for God’s anger over the idolatry of his people (cf. PsSol 4:21). As a Jew, Paul was not just annoyed by the idolatry he saw, but increasingly angry! Yet Paul follows his usual ministry pattern, reasoning with people in the synagogue and in the marketplace. The synagogue and marketplace were the two places he thought he would meet groups interested in his gospel.
In the marketplace, Paul encounters a group of philosophers who recognize Paul as presenting a new teaching. Luke specifically mentions Stoics and Epicureans, two popular philosophical traditions. Although the Stoics were a school of philosophy founded by Zeno of Citium (335-263 B.C.), they continued to have an influence on Roman society in the middle of the first century. Seneca represents the Later Stoa, or Roman Stoicism. Seneca (A.D. 1-65) was born into an equestrian family and was the tutor of Nero until he was forced to commit suicide for allegedly plotting against the emperor. Because Seneca talks about God in very warm and personal terms some early Christian writers “adopted” Seneca (Tertullian referred to him as “always our Seneca” and at least one apocryphal tale was written concerning letters exchanged between Paul and Seneca.
The Epicureans take their name from their founder, Epicurus (341-270 B.C.). He argued “good” was pleasure and the avoidance of pain, so a person ought to live their life in such a way as to seek the “good” – pleasure. His statement “It is not possible to live happily without living prudently, honorably, and justly” is remarkably close to the Judeo-Christian ethic, similar to Micah 6:8 in fact.
Epicureans and Stoics were the chief rivals for the hearts of intellectual people in the Hellenistic age. Both emphasized a high level of moral values and both looked to the philosophical way of life the only way to be truly happy and content. And both have some affinity with early Christianity, but is it clear from Paul’s speech that Christianity is a rival to these two great philosophies? In what ways does Paul’s sermon create connections to Greek philosophy yet remain clearly distinct from them? In other words, how does Paul function in the “marketplace of ideas” the Greco-Roman world?
Bibliography: Charles, J Daryl. “Engaging The (Neo) Pagan Mind: Paul’s Encounter With Athenian Culture As A Model For Cultural Apologetics (Acts 17:16-34).” Trinity Journal 16 (1995): 47-62.
I personally looked at this passage with the idea that Paul was using scaffolding. He started out with a familiar concept and built on it. In this way the audience felt included but was also able to understand what Paul was trying to say. Paul was trying to put the gospel into some sort of context in order that the people could understand. I do not think he was promoting that particular philosophy but rather putting the gospel into an understandable context. He starts out by using the altars in Athens (v. 23) and he quotes the philosophers in verse 28. In both of these contexts he does not condone the activities of the Athenians but rather explains himself in light of these things using them as context not content.
It’s interesting to look at Paul’s preaching methods and we’ve discussed a little in class about how differently they would be viewed today. In Paul’s sermon here we see him take aspects from both Stoicism and Epicureanism in order to convey points about Christianity. This is somewhat similar to his combining of two like-sounding phrases in scripture in order to make a point. It’s a little unorthodox, but it meets the people in their own culture and works off of what they already know. I feel like most of the stories in Acts go back to that concept.
Paul used the Greek philosophy in the same way we might use some of the teachings of Mother Theresa. They promote good morals, and most people of this time know who she is, so it is a good way to say this is the type of way you should live. Paul uses these philosophies that everyone understands to make a point, and to shed light onto a subject that otherwise would be difficult to understand for people who have never heard the gospel or the scriptures. It makes sense that Paul would pull from the Greek philosophy when presenting the Gospel, especially the two that were named. The thing that I notice though, is that in the next few verses, he does a complete 180 and preaches only Jesus. What I see happening here is that he used something these people would understand and be able to connect with to help them grasp the idea, and then came straight out and told them what they need to do in order to be saved. So, as Sydney said above, it does come back to the idea of meeting people where they are, but once you have met them there, you need to show them exactly what they need to do.
He seems to use somewhat of a Greek philosophical knowledge he had, to connect with his audience. In Acts 17:21 Luke says that “all the Athenians and the foreigners who lived there” were riveted when hearing what Paul had to share, because it was something new for their ears to hear. The message that Paul brought to the table was a new message that they were yet to understand. Verse 19-20 describe their thirst to understand more. When I think on this passage I begin to reflect on over-seas missions. It is crucial that you go into a new country with at least some kind of knowledge of the culture and people you are entering into. It would have been difficult for Paul to make a connection with these men, if he spoke solely in Jewish jargon. This passage then stands as an example to us as we embark on the mission of reaching the lost, to seek to understand who it is it we are addressing and what will get their minds going in order to respond to the message we share.
Paul’s message to the people of Athens may have identified with many in its basic principles, but groups such as the stoics may have realized that taking on a belief in Jesus would have to change their thought process and lifestyle. The stoics were very focused on the importance of each individual being self sufficient (The book of the Acts, F.F. Bruce, 330). They were also so focused on having high amounts of dignity that they felt it was their duty to commit suicide if their life no longer held enough dignity. Some of their practices were also focused on breaking down barriers between classes and trying to make everyone equal in society. Although many of their practices were not necessarily bad or evil, deciding to follow Jesus would have to complete change their thought process and focus in life. This example of the stoics shows how difficult it must have been for Paul to share Jesus with the people at that time. There were so many different groups of people with an ingrained lifestyle that were not willing to even hear what Paul had to say. His work in beginning to spread the word of Jesus must have been incredibly difficult as he attempted to bridge gaps in culture and lifestyle.
Passages like these show that these characters in the Bible are human just like you and me who face tremendous challenges and are put in situations that really test us in living out our faith. In Acts 17:16-21, Paul is put in a situation where he is getting annoyed with the idolatry that is taking place at the market place. I would assume explaining the idea of the importance of living your life according to good pleasure would be a aspect of life that God wants for us and wants to see us live out. I don’t know how much of Paul’s speech preached the idea of being a “rival philosophy”. A matter of fact, verse 17 says that he “reasoned with them” which had to have been a very polite gentle manner. This idea of “reasoning” I believe we can apply to our own lives when witnessing to Jews or Muslims as we can find common ground in our Old Testament prophets but then hopefully after they are listening and engaged, explain the aspect of God’s Grace and how that is so much better than the works aspects of those religions as it gives us an aspect of eternal joy than can lead to a good pleasurable, honoring life to the one true God.
Passages like these show that these characters in the Bible are human just like you and me who face tremendous challenges and are put in situations that really test us in living out our faith. In Acts 17:16-21, Paul is put in a situation where he is getting annoyed with the idolatry that is taking place at the market place. I would assume explaining the idea of the importance of living your life according to good pleasure would be a aspect of life that God wants for us and wants to see us live out. I don’t know how much of Paul’s speech preached the idea of being a “rival philosophy”. A matter of fact, verse 17 says that he “reasoned with them” which had to have been a very polite gentle manner. This idea of “reasoning” I believe we can apply to our own lives when witnessing to people of other faiths as we can find common ground in our Old Testament prophets but then hopefully after they are listening and engaged, explain the aspect of God’s Grace and how that is so much better than the works aspects of those religions as it gives us an aspect of eternal joy than can lead to a good pleasurable, honoring life to the one true God.
Paul, as you stated, is placed in a situation that he comes to wrath for the idolatry of the city of Athens who worship other God’s and philosophies of life. Paul in this state is preaching in the market and synagogues that Jesus Christ is the Lord, Redeemer, Savior of their lives. While doing so he sparks the interest of some students studying philosophy who listen and are intrigued in this new philosophy. Paul in his hot-headedness does what he does best and speak the truth in a radical way to these people. Paul is firm and rooted in what believes of Christ and strives to bring and enlighten these young men to follow and believe in the teachings of Christ. As you Troy eludes to the idea that we as Christians have to speak and share Christ to others who are willing to listen.
In John: 13:14-15 it states, “In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people’s heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their heart and turn, and I would heal them” (Holy Bible NIV)
Thus, those who are willing to listen will hear the good news while those who seek nothing will not here.
3/27
Upon reading this blog I couldn’t help to think about the parallels I found with my Philosophy class. We have touched on various forms of philosophy and it is so cool to see how accurate the Bible is along with the history of Philosophy. This passage in Acts 17:16-21 shows the development of the individuals who wanted to seek more understanding of the world and humans and would sit around discussing as stated in Acts 17:21. Athens was a city filled with people who sought to learn and understand more about the world, yet they were so mixed up with the distractions of idolatry and a pagan culture. Paul is so upset with these people who are just so confused and are desperately seeking the “good life” but not finding the actual true source of life fulfilment. Paul is trying to “reason with them” making them see the error of their thinking and find the real answer to life! If you have ever stepped into a culture unlike your own you would feel the same. I remember going for the 7th time on a mission’s trip to the indigenous tribes of Costa Rica and seeing no change in the people who we had taught to many things too. They were still worshiping nature instead of the Creator despite those who said they understood and believed. I can only imagine the frustration of Paul upon finding people so confused to the real truth. We can take this as a real challenge to not give up on people. Everyone is at a different level and we need to patiently reason with the people until they truly understand!
From reading the passage and your post It does not seem like the philosophers are really competing with Paul at all. I think they are probably use to people coming in and presenting new ideas, so it could not really have a threatening nature in their minds. Which is what spurs them to ask Paul more after they hear him apparently “babbling” in verse 19. It is not until verse 24 that Paul solidifies his preaching as a challenge against their society. And I believe that it is because of the reasonable and sensible argument that he makes that some of them are open to continue listening to his preaching. Paul showed us an example of sharing the Gospel in a way that was incredibly effective for his listeners. And I would say that he fits into the marketplace of ideas in the Greek world just fine because of their drive to find the best way to live life. They sit around talking all day about which Gods are best and which way is better to live, and Paul delivers and reasonable introduction to that answer, enough to peak their interest.
Paul, better than anyone else would understand and know how to challenge the knowledge of Stoics and Epicureans because he was brought up with the best teachers and no doubt had encountered this logic before. He also understood the depths of grace that God gives and how that is truly the way that man will find peace and happiness. However, because Paul favors the gospel over the teachings of the philosophies, he was called a babbler. Polhill says that by calling Paul a babbler, he is picking at ideas and speaking about them without understanding what he is talking about (2122). However, this is not the case with Paul. His understanding and knowledge of God are so great that it is his teachings that they are not able to comprehend. They are confused by what he has to say, but still, they listen because it intrigues them.
Paul’s message relates to their interests and also strays from them at the same time. In verse 21 the passage says that these men spent their time only telling or hearing something new. For Paul, this is good in the sense that they will be open to listening to what he has to say, but it also is against him because they are willing to listen to anything else as well. With Paul telling the people that there is only one God, he is challenging every other idol that is present in the city and the teachings or logic that are being discussed. By doing this, he is removing the core of what they know to be truth and logic, thus making his teachings a possible rival to that of the philosophies.
Acts chapter 17 was never a passage I had studied in depth, so in all honesty Paul and his conversations with the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers was new to me. One thing that stood out to me from the original passage was in verse 18. The philosophers call Paul a babbler, “And some said, ‘What does this babbler wish to say?’ Others said, ‘He seems to be a preacher of foreign divinities’”(Acts 17:18). Polhill shares a take on this,
The call Paul a babbler (… ‘one who picks up seeds,’ derived from an older and less common meaning ‘pick up’). This term suggested on who pecks at ideas like a chicken pecks at seeds and then sprouts them off without fully understanding them. (2122)
I think this is interesting as we look at how Paul fits into the philosophical marketplace of the time. Paul is competing with many different worldviews. The worldviews opposed to him can be appealing, but Paul was bringing in a new message. The message of the Gospel and of Jesus Christ. This led to the opportunity of sharing the good news of the gospel though a discussion of morality and humanity. Paul was gifted in how he presented and spoke; he was full of knowledge and well equipped. These are all things that help to boost the effectiveness of the message, although God is in control of the heart and the Holy Spirit directed Paul’s path. This is one story that can easily be relatable today. Even today we encounter new ideas, philosophies, and new worldviews. Understanding how Paul made his position effective can be a great tool.
I think that one of the main ways that Paul connects Christianity with these two religions is through emphasizing God’s high moral standards for His creations/us in verse 30-31 where Paul tells them that “God commands all people everywhere to repent” (Acts 17:30-31, ESV). Though God’s definition of what is moral certainly differed from the Greek’s, Paul was getting his point across to them through this. I think that Paul also connects it to both groups when he made sure to make his case intelligent and rational. As said in the blog post, the “Epicureans and Stoics were the chief rivals for the hearts of intellectual people in the Hellenistic age” and I’m sure that if Paul’s argument was not logical, that they would not have invited him to speak at the Areopagus of all places nor had some say “[w]e will hear you again about this” (Acts 17:32, ESV).
As far as appealing to the Stoics specifically, according to Polhill, when Paul refers to “Adam, in whom all people find their ancestral unity, [it’s] an idea that would appeal to the Stoics’ strong sense of human brotherhood” (2122). However, we understand that it’s a different kind of brotherhood that’s not just on blood, but in the Spirit. I believe that Paul also appeals to the Epicureans when he touches on that God made “the world and everything that is in it” (Acts 17:24, ESV). If the Epicureans believed that they should pursue what was “good” then I’m sure than most, if not all, of what they believed to be good was a product of the world that God created (Phillip Long).
Paul was a pharisee and strong in Jew religion, eager person and zealous person. Some of his strong eagerness still shows after he became a christian. So he knows well who is very religious and who is not so religious. One thing he realized in Athens was, they are “very religious” (v22b). This is the first door to create the connection to Greek philosophy. In verse 16 said, the city was full of idols. Idols may be in various shapes and designs or may have all kinds of gods in the marketplace. But in one place, there is an UNKNOWN GOD. it could be meaning, other gods they do not know yet or new gods or maybe the highest God. But Paul was using this spot as the Gospel of Jesus. In verse 23 he said, Unknown GOD, that I am going to proclaim to you. This caught people’s attention. Since the people of Athens were already in thirst of learning or expecting or experiencing about gods, it is not so hard to take their attention for Paul. Another evidence is in verse 16, when Paul started speaking, what they spoke out was ‘’He seems to be advocating foreign gods’’. When we are trying to understand something, we speak first with what we have inside, this is the same thing that happens here as well.
When looking at this part in Acts 17 we can see that this story is about the speech that Pauls gives in this chapter to the Athenians as an example of how to meet our culture where they are at and take biblical principles to lead them to the truth. When reading this blog post and understanding what is happening one thing to look at is how Paul is functioning in the “marketplace of ideas”. When we see him giving his sermon in this part we can see that is he maintaining a singular focus and consistent message throughout his missionary journey. Throughout his journey throughout his mission, he does not choke under pressure as some would like to call it, he maintains everything he is willing to say and do and preaches to people all over the place no matter how they might react. One way that Paul in this part of Acts 17 connects to Greek philosophy but still remains distinct from them is the fact that Greek philosophy is still following the Christian doctrine of God which is something that Paul does in his sermons, but he doesn’t completely follow the way that Greek philosophy is without going away from how Paul normally does sermons. This is an interesting chapter in Acts because it is giving the message of other people and philosophers knowing who Paul is and how he is presenting a new type of teaching that many do not know of and find interesting or don’t like.
Paul appeals to people in the marketplace and in the synagogue trying to find people willing to hear his Gospel message (Acts 17:17). Polhill mentions that Paul had traveled to Athens alone, and was only enticing others through matters of persuasion (2008, p. 2310). Unlike other places that he traveled on his missionary journeys, Paul did not work any miracles while in Athens, he was using his experience and the Word of God alone (Polhill, 2310). It is interesting to note that in verse 19, the philosophers ask Paul what new teaching he is presenting to the people (Acts17). They almost seem interested in what Paul was preaching about, and adopting it as one of their own beliefs, “We wish to know what these things mean” (Acts 17:20). So Paul uses their own beliefs to teach them about the ways of God. He explains that unlike the Gods of Athens, the one true God cannot be contained within the walls of a temple (Acts 17:24). He then quotes local philosophers in their own writing to help them grasp the concepts of the Gospel better. Paul explains that God cannot be crafted by human hands because he himself crafted our hands and the creator must be greater than the created(Acts 17:29).
Paul’s methodology of ministerying is truly fascinating and inspiring. Paul was not throwing jabs at the Greek for their idolatry in a way that was overly offensive or that would completely close them off from listening to Paul, but rather used their world to bring them into his. By citing their own poets and philosophers, which was not saying he agreed with them (Polhill, 2122), and on their “territory” it allowed for them to not be so defensive toward Paul but it helped them to better understand what he was saying. It was interesting to see how Paul also used one of their gods, the “unknown god” to start the conversation, again not agreeing with their idolatry, but using what they were familiar with to slowly incorporate the truth of the real God who was not enclosed in a temple with images connecting it to the Areopagus, where they were currently standing. This serves as a good reminder as to how we should be ministering as well. The Gospel is never meant to be forced onto others so we should meet people where they are, not joining them in their sin but reaching for them where they are so that the Gospel can be better received and understood.