Acts · Chapter 17

V. 1. And taking their journey through Amphipolis and Apollonia-St. Luke seems to have been left at Philippi; and to have continued in those parts, travelling from place to place among the Churches, till St. Paul returned thither. For here he leaves off speaking of himself as one of St. Paul's company; neither does he resume that style, till we find them together there, Acts 20:5,6. After this he constantly uses it to the end of the history. Amphipolis and Apollonia were cities of Macedonia.

Verse 1. Passed through Amphipolis] This city was the metropolis of the first division of Macedonia, as made by Paulus Æmilius: see the note on Acts 16:10. It was builded by Cimon, the Athenian general, who sent 10,000 Athenians thither as a colony. It stood in an island in the river Strymon, and had its name of Amphipolis because included between the two grand branches of that river where they empty themselves into the sea, the river being on both sides of the city.

Apollonia] This was another city of Macedonia, between Amphipolis and Thessalonica. It does not appear that St. Paul stopped at any of these cities: and they are only mentioned by the historian as places through which the apostles passed on their way to Thessalonica. It is very likely that in these cities there were no Jews; and that might have been the reason why the apostles did not preach the Gospel there, for we find them almost constantly beginning with the Jews; and the Hellenist Jews, living among the Gentiles, became the medium through which the Gospel of Christ was conveyed to the heathen world.

Thessalonica] This was a celebrated city of Macedonia, situated on what was called the Thermaic Gulf. According to Stephanus Byzantinus, it was embellished and enlarged by Philip, king of Macedon, who called it Thessalonica, the victory of Thessalia, on account of the victory he obtained there over the Thessalians; but, prior to this, it was called Thermæ. But Strabo, Tzetzes, and Zonaras, say that it was called Thessalonica, from Thessalonica, wife of Cassander, and daughter of Philip. It is now in possession of the Turks, and is called Salonichi, which is a mere corruption of the original name.

A synagogue of the Jews.] hJ sunagwgh, THE synagogue; for the article here must be considered as emphatic, there probably being no other synagogue in any other city in Macedonia. The Jews in different parts had other places of worship called proseuchas. as we have seen, Acts 16:13. At Thessalonica alone they appear to have had a synagogue.

Verse 1. Now when they, &c. — It appears by Luke’s phraseology here, that he was left at Philippi; for here he ceases to speak of himself as one of Paul’s company, saying, not when WE, but when they had passed, &c. Nor does he resume his former manner of writing until Acts 20:5, 6. It is therefore more than probable, that when Paul, Silas, and Timothy departed from Philippi, after having gathered a church there, Luke remained with the new converts until the apostle, in his way from Corinth to Syria the second time, came to Philippi and took him with them. Had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia — The apostle having, as we have seen, successfully planted the gospel in Philippi, departed with his assistants, Silas and Timothy; and passing first through Amphipolis, a city built in an island formed by two branches of the river Strymon, (from whence it had its name,) and a colony of the Athenians, and then through Apollonia, a colony of the Corinthians and Corcyreans, near the sea-side; they came to Thessalonica — Now the metropolis of all the countries comprehended in the Roman province of Macedonia. For it was the residence both of the proconsul and questor; so that, being the seat of government, it was constantly filled with strangers, who attended the courts of judicature, or who solicited offices. And as most of the Greeks about this time were extremely addicted to philosophy, so great a city as Thessalonica could not be destitute of men of learning, who were well qualified to judge of the gospel and its evidences. Moreover, its situation, at the bottom of the Thermaic gulf, rendering it fit for commerce, many of its inhabitants were merchants, who carried on an extensive trade with foreign countries; and who, as the apostle observes, (1 Thessalonians 1:9,) published in these distant countries the conversion of the Thessalonians, and the miracles by which they had been converted. The Jews, likewise, resorted to this city in such numbers as to form a numerous congregation, and had, as we here read, a synagogue; whereas, it does not appear that they had one in any other city of Macedonia. And, probably, the reason why the apostle made no stay at the two fore-mentioned cities was, that there was no synagogue in either of them, and perhaps even no Jews, whom he was wont first to address wherever he came. It appears, therefore, from the above account of Thessalonica, that it was a very proper theatre whereon to display the light of the gospel. Through the advantages of its situation this city still subsists under the name of Salonichi, and is a place of great resort and trade, but it is in the possession of the Turks.

Verse 1. When they had passed through Amphipolis. Boiste adds the Roman name Emboli. It was built by Simon, the Athenian commander. It stood on an island formed in the river Strymon, and was called Amphipolis because the river runs on both sides of the city. It was the chief city of Lower Macedonia; and by some called Chrysopolis. Apollonia was taken in their journey.

They came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the jews. The ancient name was Therma, from which the bay took its name. Salonica is the abbreviate of its ancient name. See the introduction to the first epistle addressed to this church.

1. Now—Our apostle leaving Luke at Philippi, banished but triumphant, attended by Silas and Timothy, takes the high Egnatian Road westward. In accordance with his plan, rather to plant the Gospel in the greater capitals of the world, he rapidly passes the lesser towns of Amphipolis and Apollonia, lying on the great way. From Philippi to Amphipolis was thirty-three miles; from Amphipolis to Apollonia thirty miles; and from Apollonia to Thessalonica thirty-seven miles. Resting by nights and travelling rapidly by day, the apostle might have been three days upon his journey from Philippi to Thessalonica. Thessalonica—No city on the great Egnatian Way surpassed THESSALONICA in importance. Under its ancient name of Therma it was the passage way of the great army of Xerxes in his invasion of Greece. It received its new name, Thessalonica, from a sister of Alexander the Great, on being rebuilt by her husband, and this name it still retains in the abbreviated form of Saloniki. The apostle found it the most populous city of Macedonia, and until the founding of Constantinople it was virtually the capital of Northern, if not of entire, Greece. A synagogue—Rather, the synagogue. For at Philippi, Amphipolis, and Apollonia there were probably only proseuchae, and here was the synagogue of this region of country. Paul’s own account in his epistles to the Thessalonians interestingly reveals what his entrance was after he had been shamefully entreated at Philippi. He used no flattering words, no cloak of covetousness. Labouring night and day, probably at his handicraft of tent-making, he refused to be chargeable unto any. Holily, and justly, and unblamably living himself, he could enjoin holy living upon others with a boundless authority.

V. 2. And Paul, according to his custom-Of doing all things, as far as might be, in a regular manner,

went in to them three Sabbath days-Not excluding the days between.

Verse 2. As his manner was] He constantly offered salvation first to the Jews; and for this purpose attended their Sabbath-days’ meetings at their synagogues.

Verses 2, 3. And Paul, as his manner was — Of doing all things, as far as might be, in a regular way; went in unto them — Entered their assembly; and three sabbath days reasoned with them — If any reader wishes to know more particularly the manner of the apostle’s reasoning with the Jews, and the proofs which he brought from their own Scriptures, in support of the facts which he affirmed, he will find an excellent example thereof in the sermon which Paul preached in the synagogue of Antioch in Pisidia, chap. 13:16-41; where see the notes. Opening and alleging — Dianoigwn kai paratiqemenov, explaining and evidently showing, that is, showing by clear and incontestable arguments: for the word signifies placing a thing before the eyes of spectators; that Christ must needs have suffered — That is, that it was necessary, according to the whole tenor of the prophecies, that the Messiah should suffer, and that no one could be the Messiah who did not suffer; and have risen again from the dead — The Scriptures having also clearly predicted that event; and that this Jesus whom I preach unto you is Christ — Having exactly fulfilled all these predictions of the Scriptures concerning the Messiah, and answered all the characters drawn in them of him.

Verse 3. Opening and alleging] paratiqemnov, Proving by citations. His method seems to have been this: 1st. He collected the scriptures that spoke of the Messiah. 2d. He applied these to Jesus Christ, showing that in him all these scriptures were fulfilled, and that he was the Saviour of whom they were in expectation. He showed also that the Christ, or Messiah, must needs suffer-that this was predicted, and was an essential mark of the true Messiah. By proving this point, he corrected their false notion of a triumphant Messiah, and thus removed the scandal of the cross.

Verses 2, 3. And Paul, as his manner was — Of doing all things, as far as might be, in a regular way; went in unto them — Entered their assembly; and three sabbath days reasoned with them — If any reader wishes to know more particularly the manner of the apostle’s reasoning with the Jews, and the proofs which he brought from their own Scriptures, in support of the facts which he affirmed, he will find an excellent example thereof in the sermon which Paul preached in the synagogue of Antioch in Pisidia, chap. 13:16-41; where see the notes. Opening and alleging — Dianoigwn kai paratiqemenov, explaining and evidently showing, that is, showing by clear and incontestable arguments: for the word signifies placing a thing before the eyes of spectators; that Christ must needs have suffered — That is, that it was necessary, according to the whole tenor of the prophecies, that the Messiah should suffer, and that no one could be the Messiah who did not suffer; and have risen again from the dead — The Scriptures having also clearly predicted that event; and that this Jesus whom I preach unto you is Christ — Having exactly fulfilled all these predictions of the Scriptures concerning the Messiah, and answered all the characters drawn in them of him.

Ver. 3. Opening and alleging that Christ must needs have suffered. The order of the remaining words in the Greek is hyperbatic: “and that this same is the Christ, even Jesus whom we preach to you,” Addressing the jews, who had the oracles of God, and rested all their hopes on the promises of the Messiah, they proved that Jesus was the Christ by the literal accomplishment of prophecy. In numerous circumstances he suffered what the prophets had foretold. — Equal emphasis is laid on the time of his appearing. The sceptre was departed from Judah; the weeks of Daniel were accomplished. Yea, the Lord himself had said, “The time is fulfilled, the kingdom of God is at hand.” To which Paul accedes by saying, “when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son.” Above all, the glory of his resurrection, of which Paul himself by vision was made a witness, and an apostle of the Lord. With great power, the grace and unction of the Holy Spirit, those things were attested, and the fruit followed in the calling and conversion of the gentiles.

3. Opening—Unfolding two great points in order; namely, there was, according to the Scriptures, to be a suffering, dying, and risen Messiah; and, second, that our Jesus has perfectly filled out that prophetic idea, so that Jesus is truly the long expected Christ-Messiah. To the Jews a glorious Messiah was far more welcome than a suffering. (See note on Matthew 11:3.) A conquering Messiah is, indeed, far most copiously described by the prophets, but a suffering Messiah is shadowed by the entire system of piacular sacrifices.

V. 4. Of the principal women, not a few-Our free thinkers pique themselves upon observing, that women are more religious than men; and this, in compliment both to religion and good manners, they impute to the weakness of their understandings. And indeed as far as nature can go, in imitating religion by performing the outward acts of it, this picture of religion may make a fairer show in women than in men, both by reason of their more tender passions, and their modesty, which will make those actions appear to more advantage. But in the case of true religion, which always implies taking up the cross, especially in time of persecution, women lie naturally under a great disadvantage, as having less courage than men. So that their embracing the Gospel was a stronger evidence of the power of him whose strength is perfected in weakness, as a stronger assistance of the Holy Spirit was needful for them to overcome their natural fearfulness.

Verse 4. The devout Greeks] That is, Gentiles who were proselytes to the Jewish religion, so far as to renounce idolatry, and live a moral life, but probably had not received circumcision.

Verse 4. And some of them believed — Notwithstanding Paul’s arguments were all taken out of the Scriptures, his discourse did not make such an impression on the Jews as might have been expected; for only a few of them believed, and consorted with or adhered to, Paul and Silas. Of the religious proselytes, indeed, a great multitude were converted, among whom were many women of the first distinction in the city. Our freethinkers pique themselves upon observing, that women are more religious than men; and this, in compliment both to religion and good manners, they impute to the weakness of their understandings. And indeed, as far as nature can go in imitating religion by performing the outward acts of it, this picture of religion may make a fairer show in women than in men, both by reason of their more tender passions and their modesty, which will make those actions appear to more advantage. But in the case of true religion, which always implies taking up the cross, especially in time of persecution, women lie naturally under a great disadvantage, as having less courage than men. So that their embracing the gospel in such circumstances, was a stronger evidence of the power of Him whose strength is perfected in weakness, as a greater assistance of the Holy Spirit was needful for them to overcome their natural fearfulness. This is Luke’s account of the success of the gospel at Thessalonica: but we learn from Paul himself, (1 Thessalonians 1:9,) that multitudes of the idolaters also believed, being greatly struck with the miracles which he wrought, and with the miraculous gifts which he conferred on the believers. We may therefore suppose, that when he found the Jews averse to his doctrine he left the synagogue, and preached to the idolatrous Gentiles, with whom he had great success, on account of his disinterestedness, as well as of his miracles. For neither he nor any of his assistants, all the time they were in Thessalonica, took the least reward, either in money or goods, from the disciples; but wrought with their hands, and by the profits of their labours maintained themselves, without being burdensome to any person, 1 Thessalonians 2:9. None of the Thessalonians, therefore, could suspect that either Paul or his assistants had come to make game of them, by converting them to the Christian faith.

Ver. 4. And of the chief women not a few believed in the Lord. The Greek is, the first women, that is, as Jerome reads, mulieres nobiles, noble women; for during the Macedonian empire innumerable families had been ennobled. Tronto, in his letter to the bishop of Rhone, says of the Grecian converts, that ladies in whose veins the noblest blood did run, would not disdain to visit the poor and afflicted sisters. — Dr. Cave’s Primitive Christianity.

4. Some of them—Of Jews a small minority; of the Gentiles a multitude became Christians; so that at Thessalonica there was mainly a Gentile Church. “Ye turned from idols,” says he to them, (1 Thessalonians 1:9,) “to serve the living God.” Devout Greeks—Literally, worshipping Greeks. (See note on Acts 13:16.) Chief women—(See note on Acts 13:50.) From their gallery or separating lattice these eminent ladies could hear the apostle’s Gospel, and whether Jew or Gentile, like the certain women of Luke 8:2, 3, (where see notes,) they accepted the crucified Messiah. Yet while the apostle thus demonstrated a suffering Messiah, he must, as a counterpart, have drawn pictures of the Messiah on his throne of glory (Matthew 25:31) so vivid as to leave a most solemn expectation of an immediate second advent on the minds of the young Church. (1 Thessalonians 4:13-17.) Of this error, the pernicious effect then, as in all ages, even our own, was great. There were some who neglected the duties of this life, (2 Thessalonians 3:6-12.) and the apostle was obliged to write his second epistle to them in order expressly to correct the conception that that day was at hand. (2 Thessalonians 2:10.)

Verse 5. The Jews which believed not, moved with envy, took unto them] Instead of this sentence, the most correct MSS. and versions read simply, proslabomenoi de oi ioudaioi. But the Jews taking, &c., leaving out the words, zhlwsantev, apeiqountev, which believed not, moved with envy: these words do not appear to be genuine; there is the strongest evidence against them, and they should be omitted. Certain lewd fellows of the baser sort] This is not a very intelligible translation. The original is, twn agoraiwn tinav andoav ponhrouv. The word agoraioi, which we translate the baser sort, is by Hesychius explained, oi en agora anastrefomenoi, those who transact business in courts of justice. The same word is used by the Jews in Hebrew letters to signify judges; and twayrwga גוים lv agorioth shel goyim, signifies judges of the Gentiles. These were probably a low kind of lawyers, what we would call pettifoggers, or attorneys without principle, who gave advice for a trifle, and fomented disputes and litigations among the people. The Itala version of the Codex Bezæ calls them quosdam forenses, certain lawyers. As the Jews, from their small number, could not easily raise up a mob, they cunningly employed those unprincipled men, who probably had a certain degree of juridical credit and authority, to denounce the apostles as seditious men; and this was, very likely, the reason why they employed those in preference to any others. They were such as always attended forensic litigations, waiting for a job, and willing to defend any side of a question for money. They were wicked men of the forensic tribe. Gathered a company, and set all the city on an uproar] And, after having made this sedition and disturbance, charged the whole on the peaceable and innocent apostles! This is precisely the same way that persecution against the truth and followers of Christ is still carried on. Some wicked man in the parish gets a wicked attorney and a constable to head a mob, which they themselves have raised; and, having committed a number of outrages, abusing men and women, haul the minister of Christ to some magistrate who knows as little of his office as he cares for the Gospel; they there charge the outrages which themselves have committed on the preacher and his peaceable hearers; and the peacemaker, appointed by a good king, according to the wise and excellent regulations of a sound constitution, forgetting whose minister he is, neither administers justice nor maintains truth; but, espousing the part of the mob, assumes, ex officio, the character of a persecutor. The preacher is imprisoned, his hearers fined for listening to that Gospel which has not only made them wise unto salvation, but also peaceable and orderly citizens, and which would have had the same effect on the unprincipled magistrate, the parish squire, and the mob, had they heard it with the same reverence and respect. Had I not witnessed such scenes, and such prostitution of justice, I could not have described them.

Assaulted the house of Jason] This was the place where the apostles lodged; and therefore his goods were clear spoil, and his person fair game. This is a case which frequently occurs where the Gospel is preached in its spirit and power. And, even in this moat favoured kingdom, the most scandalous excesses of this kind have been committed, and a justice of the peace has been found to sanction the proceedings; and, when an appeal has been made to the laws, a grand jury has been found capable of throwing out the true bill!

Verses 5-7. But the Jews which believed not, &c. — Although many Jews at Thessalonica received and heartily embraced the truth, there were many who rejected it, and that, as it afterward appeared, with much malignity of heart. For the great success which Paul had in converting the idolatrous Gentiles, raised the envy and indignation of the unbelieving Jews to such a pitch, that, transported with a blind and furious zeal, they hired (twn agoraiwn tinav andrav ponhrouv) certain dissolute fellows who frequented the market-place, and were prepared to do any thing, however bad, for a small reward. These gathered a company — Collected a mob; and soon set all the city in an uproar — Threw it into the greatest confusion; and assaulted the house of Jason — Where Paul and his assistants lodged; and sought to bring them out to the people — Whom they had incensed and enraged against them, and by whom they hoped to see them pulled in pieces. And when they found them not — As they expected, in the house; (the apostles, it seems, having been advised to withdraw, as being most obnoxious;) they drew Jason — A converted Jew; and certain brethren — Who were with him; unto the rulers — To whom they represented them as very criminal, in having received and harboured dangerous persons, not fit to be tolerated, enemies to the public peace, who threw every thing into disorder wherever they came: crying, These that have turned the world upside down — With their new doctrine; are come hither also — To create the same disturbance among us; whom Jason hath received — Hath sheltered under his roof, and so hath made himself responsible for all the mischief they may do here; and these all do contrary to the decrees of Cesar — Not to any particular decree, for there was as yet no law of the empire against Christianity; but contrary to Cesar’s power in general to make decrees; saying, that there is another king — Not only a king of the Jews, as Christ was himself charged before Pilate with saying; but a universal Monarch, a Lord of all, as Peter called him in the first sermon he preached to the Gentiles, Acts 10:36; for doubtless they alluded to the Christian doctrine concerning the Lordship, or universal dominion of Jesus, which they pretended was inconsistent with the universal lordship of Cesar. It is true, the Roman government, both while it was a commonwealth, and after it came into the hands of the Cesars, was very jealous of any governor under their dominion taking upon him the title of king, and there was an express law against it; but Christ’s kingdom was not of this world. His followers said, indeed, that Jesus was a king, but not an earthly king: not a rival with Cesar, nor one whose ordinances interfered with the decrees of Cesar; but who made it a law of his kingdom, to render unto Cesar the things that were Cesar’s. There was nothing in the doctrine of Christ that tended to the dethroning of princes, or the depriving of them of any of their prerogatives, as they knew very well; and it was against their consciences that they laid any thing of this kind to the charge of Christ’s disciples. And of all people, it ill became the Jews to do it, who hated Cesar and his government, and sought the ruin both of him and it; and who expected a Messiah that should be a temporal prince, and overturn the thrones of kingdoms; and were therefore opposing our Lord Jesus because he did not appear under that character.

5. Envy—At seeing the adherence of persons of rank becoming Christian, by which the Jewish influence was undermined. Lewd fellows—Literally, marketers; vagabonds who hung around the markets or forums, serving for pay in mobs, as in the present instance. Gathered a company— Significantly expressed by a single Greek compound, oclopoihsantev, mob-making. Jason—Probably a Greek form of Joshua or Jesus. To the people—More probably, to the demus, public assembly, or town-meeting.

Verse 6. These that have turned the world upside down are come hither also] The very character our forefathers had for preaching that Gospel, in every part of the land, by which the nation has been illuminated, the mob disciplined into regularity and order, and the kingdom established in the hands of the best of monarchs.

Verses 5-7. But the Jews which believed not, &c. — Although many Jews at Thessalonica received and heartily embraced the truth, there were many who rejected it, and that, as it afterward appeared, with much malignity of heart. For the great success which Paul had in converting the idolatrous Gentiles, raised the envy and indignation of the unbelieving Jews to such a pitch, that, transported with a blind and furious zeal, they hired (twn agoraiwn tinav andrav ponhrouv) certain dissolute fellows who frequented the market-place, and were prepared to do any thing, however bad, for a small reward. These gathered a company — Collected a mob; and soon set all the city in an uproar — Threw it into the greatest confusion; and assaulted the house of Jason — Where Paul and his assistants lodged; and sought to bring them out to the people — Whom they had incensed and enraged against them, and by whom they hoped to see them pulled in pieces. And when they found them not — As they expected, in the house; (the apostles, it seems, having been advised to withdraw, as being most obnoxious;) they drew Jason — A converted Jew; and certain brethren — Who were with him; unto the rulers — To whom they represented them as very criminal, in having received and harboured dangerous persons, not fit to be tolerated, enemies to the public peace, who threw every thing into disorder wherever they came: crying, These that have turned the world upside down — With their new doctrine; are come hither also — To create the same disturbance among us; whom Jason hath received — Hath sheltered under his roof, and so hath made himself responsible for all the mischief they may do here; and these all do contrary to the decrees of Cesar — Not to any particular decree, for there was as yet no law of the empire against Christianity; but contrary to Cesar’s power in general to make decrees; saying, that there is another king — Not only a king of the Jews, as Christ was himself charged before Pilate with saying; but a universal Monarch, a Lord of all, as Peter called him in the first sermon he preached to the Gentiles, Acts 10:36; for doubtless they alluded to the Christian doctrine concerning the Lordship, or universal dominion of Jesus, which they pretended was inconsistent with the universal lordship of Cesar. It is true, the Roman government, both while it was a commonwealth, and after it came into the hands of the Cesars, was very jealous of any governor under their dominion taking upon him the title of king, and there was an express law against it; but Christ’s kingdom was not of this world. His followers said, indeed, that Jesus was a king, but not an earthly king: not a rival with Cesar, nor one whose ordinances interfered with the decrees of Cesar; but who made it a law of his kingdom, to render unto Cesar the things that were Cesar’s. There was nothing in the doctrine of Christ that tended to the dethroning of princes, or the depriving of them of any of their prerogatives, as they knew very well; and it was against their consciences that they laid any thing of this kind to the charge of Christ’s disciples. And of all people, it ill became the Jews to do it, who hated Cesar and his government, and sought the ruin both of him and it; and who expected a Messiah that should be a temporal prince, and overturn the thrones of kingdoms; and were therefore opposing our Lord Jesus because he did not appear under that character.

Ver. 6. These that have turned the world upside down, are come hither also. All the outrages of mobs and tumults were laid at the christians’ door: and yet in a better sense the charge was true. They had illuminated the public mind, they had persuaded men to leave their sins, to forsake the temples of idolatry, and seek their happiness in God alone. What a revolution!

6. Found them not—Probably, anticipating the mob, Paul and his attendants withdrew to some other house. Rulers of the city—Politarchs. Among the instances of Luke’s accuracy are the various names he gives of the public officials in the various localities of the world. At Cyprus there is a proconsul, (see note on Acts 13:7;) at Jerusalem the Roman officer is a chiliarch, (note on Acts 21:31;) at Ephesus there are Asiarchs, (note on Acts 19:31;) at Philippi there are pretors and lictors, (note on Acts 16:19-35;) and here, most remarkable of all, there are politarchs. This word occurs nowhere else in ancient literature; and yet we have a providential proof that it is just the word that Luke should have used. The great Egnatian Way cuts Thessalonica in two; and over this street there still stands an arch bearing an ancient inscription, containing the names of the seven politarchs at the time of its erection. The time was probably near the day of Paul’s visit there; and, singular to say, three of the recorded names happen to be the same as those of three of Paul’s fellow-travellers— Sopater, Gaius, and Secundus. Upside down—There is more truth in this hyperbole than they suppose. The world is wrong-side up, and needs to be turned upside down to be brought right-side up.

Verse 7. These all do contrary to the decrees of Cæsar] Persecutors always strive to affect the lives of the objects of their hatred, by accusing them of sedition, or plots against the state.

That there is another king, one Jesus.] How malevolent was this saying! The apostles proclaimed Jesus as king-that is true; but never once insinuated that his kingdom was of this world. The reverse they always maintained.

Verses 5-7. But the Jews which believed not, &c. — Although many Jews at Thessalonica received and heartily embraced the truth, there were many who rejected it, and that, as it afterward appeared, with much malignity of heart. For the great success which Paul had in converting the idolatrous Gentiles, raised the envy and indignation of the unbelieving Jews to such a pitch, that, transported with a blind and furious zeal, they hired (twn agoraiwn tinav andrav ponhrouv) certain dissolute fellows who frequented the market-place, and were prepared to do any thing, however bad, for a small reward. These gathered a company — Collected a mob; and soon set all the city in an uproar — Threw it into the greatest confusion; and assaulted the house of Jason — Where Paul and his assistants lodged; and sought to bring them out to the people — Whom they had incensed and enraged against them, and by whom they hoped to see them pulled in pieces. And when they found them not — As they expected, in the house; (the apostles, it seems, having been advised to withdraw, as being most obnoxious;) they drew Jason — A converted Jew; and certain brethren — Who were with him; unto the rulers — To whom they represented them as very criminal, in having received and harboured dangerous persons, not fit to be tolerated, enemies to the public peace, who threw every thing into disorder wherever they came: crying, These that have turned the world upside down — With their new doctrine; are come hither also — To create the same disturbance among us; whom Jason hath received — Hath sheltered under his roof, and so hath made himself responsible for all the mischief they may do here; and these all do contrary to the decrees of Cesar — Not to any particular decree, for there was as yet no law of the empire against Christianity; but contrary to Cesar’s power in general to make decrees; saying, that there is another king — Not only a king of the Jews, as Christ was himself charged before Pilate with saying; but a universal Monarch, a Lord of all, as Peter called him in the first sermon he preached to the Gentiles, Acts 10:36; for doubtless they alluded to the Christian doctrine concerning the Lordship, or universal dominion of Jesus, which they pretended was inconsistent with the universal lordship of Cesar. It is true, the Roman government, both while it was a commonwealth, and after it came into the hands of the Cesars, was very jealous of any governor under their dominion taking upon him the title of king, and there was an express law against it; but Christ’s kingdom was not of this world. His followers said, indeed, that Jesus was a king, but not an earthly king: not a rival with Cesar, nor one whose ordinances interfered with the decrees of Cesar; but who made it a law of his kingdom, to render unto Cesar the things that were Cesar’s. There was nothing in the doctrine of Christ that tended to the dethroning of princes, or the depriving of them of any of their prerogatives, as they knew very well; and it was against their consciences that they laid any thing of this kind to the charge of Christ’s disciples. And of all people, it ill became the Jews to do it, who hated Cesar and his government, and sought the ruin both of him and it; and who expected a Messiah that should be a temporal prince, and overturn the thrones of kingdoms; and were therefore opposing our Lord Jesus because he did not appear under that character.

7. Decrees of Cesar—Paul’s unfolding the Messiah in his royal character as son of David and eternal king of Israel enabled the Jews to set Jesus against Cesar. It is the same deception as the Jews used in regard to Jesus before Pilate, and with much the same effect. (See notes on Matthew 27:11, 30; John 18:34-37; 19:12-13.)

Verse 8. And they troubled the people and the rulers] It is evident that there was no disposition in either the people or the rulers to persecute the apostles. But these wicked Jews, by means of the unprincipled, wicked lawyers, those lewd fellows of the baser sort, threw the subject into the form of law, making it a state question, in which form the rulers were obliged to notice it; but they showed their unwillingness to proceed in a matter which they saw proceeded from malice, by letting Jason and his companions go off on bail.

Verses 8-10. And they troubled the people and the rulers — As the charge was formed in such a manner that their neglecting it might render them obnoxious to the Romans, both the multitude and the magistrates of the city were alarmed when they heard these things. They were not willing, however, to proceed to extremities against an inhabitant of the place, merely for harbouring persons who, whatever might be alleged against them, were in a manner strangers to him; and, therefore, when they had taken security of Jason, and the other — Brethren who were brought before them, that they would behave as good subjects; they let them go — Dismissed them for that time. This liberal conduct of the rulers of Thessalonica restrained the malice of the Jews for the present. But the brethren — Fearing some new tumult might arise, thought it prudent to send Paul and Silas — And probably Timothy also, verse 15; away by night to Berea — A populous city in the neighbourhood. Luke has not told us what time Paul and his assistants spent at Thessalonica. But there are circumstances mentioned in the apostle’s epistles from which we may infer, that they spent some months in planting a church there; such as that, during his abode at Thessalonica, he received money twice from the Philippians, (Philippians 4:15,) and communicated the spiritual gifts to the brethren in plenty, (1 Thessalonians 5:19,) and appointed proistamenouv, presidents, or rulers, statedly to exercise the ministry among them, (1 Thessalonians 5:12,) having formed them into a regular church; all which implies that he abode a considerable time in this city.

8. Troubled… people… rulers—”Judices metuebant tumultum, populus metuebat Romanos,” says Kuinoel: “The politarchs feared a tumult, the people feared the Romans.” Thessalonica is a free city by Roman permission; that is, she is allowed to be a little self-governed republic, electing her own magistrates and passing her own laws, provided there be no sign of rebellion against Rome. A rebellious movement might cost her her freedom, and ruin of unknown extent besides.

Verse 9. Taken security] labontev to ikanon, Having taken what was sufficient, or satisfactory. Sufficient for the present, to prove that the apostles were upright, peaceable, and loyal men; and that Jason and his friends were the like, and would be, at any time, forthcoming to answer for their conduct. Perhaps this is the sense of the phrase in the text.

Verses 8-10. And they troubled the people and the rulers — As the charge was formed in such a manner that their neglecting it might render them obnoxious to the Romans, both the multitude and the magistrates of the city were alarmed when they heard these things. They were not willing, however, to proceed to extremities against an inhabitant of the place, merely for harbouring persons who, whatever might be alleged against them, were in a manner strangers to him; and, therefore, when they had taken security of Jason, and the other — Brethren who were brought before them, that they would behave as good subjects; they let them go — Dismissed them for that time. This liberal conduct of the rulers of Thessalonica restrained the malice of the Jews for the present. But the brethren — Fearing some new tumult might arise, thought it prudent to send Paul and Silas — And probably Timothy also, verse 15; away by night to Berea — A populous city in the neighbourhood. Luke has not told us what time Paul and his assistants spent at Thessalonica. But there are circumstances mentioned in the apostle’s epistles from which we may infer, that they spent some months in planting a church there; such as that, during his abode at Thessalonica, he received money twice from the Philippians, (Philippians 4:15,) and communicated the spiritual gifts to the brethren in plenty, (1 Thessalonians 5:19,) and appointed proistamenouv, presidents, or rulers, statedly to exercise the ministry among them, (1 Thessalonians 5:12,) having formed them into a regular church; all which implies that he abode a considerable time in this city.

9. Taken security—The security was probably a pledge or bail of money, forfeitable if any disturbance occurred. And as the Jews could raise the needed disturbance whenever the apostle again attempted to preach, it was clear that his operations in Thessalonica were at an end. This SECOND EUROPEAN CHURCH has had a distinguished history during the Christian ages. For centuries Thessalonica was the bulwark against the Turkish assaults, and the lamp whence went forth a Christianizing light over the northern barbarians. The eminence of her bishops, her Christian literature, and her theological science, acquired her the title of “The Orthodox City.” The Third Church in Europe—Berea, 10-14.

Verse 10. Sent away Paul and Silas by night] Fearing some farther machinations of the Jews and their associates.

Berea] This was another city of Macedonia, on the same gulf with Thessalonica; and not far from Pella, the birth place of Alexander the Great.

Verses 8-10. And they troubled the people and the rulers — As the charge was formed in such a manner that their neglecting it might render them obnoxious to the Romans, both the multitude and the magistrates of the city were alarmed when they heard these things. They were not willing, however, to proceed to extremities against an inhabitant of the place, merely for harbouring persons who, whatever might be alleged against them, were in a manner strangers to him; and, therefore, when they had taken security of Jason, and the other — Brethren who were brought before them, that they would behave as good subjects; they let them go — Dismissed them for that time. This liberal conduct of the rulers of Thessalonica restrained the malice of the Jews for the present. But the brethren — Fearing some new tumult might arise, thought it prudent to send Paul and Silas — And probably Timothy also, verse 15; away by night to Berea — A populous city in the neighbourhood. Luke has not told us what time Paul and his assistants spent at Thessalonica. But there are circumstances mentioned in the apostle’s epistles from which we may infer, that they spent some months in planting a church there; such as that, during his abode at Thessalonica, he received money twice from the Philippians, (Philippians 4:15,) and communicated the spiritual gifts to the brethren in plenty, (1 Thessalonians 5:19,) and appointed proistamenouv, presidents, or rulers, statedly to exercise the ministry among them, (1 Thessalonians 5:12,) having formed them into a regular church; all which implies that he abode a considerable time in this city.

Ver. 10, 11. At Berea — they were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in searching the scriptures; for all divines have encouraged their hearers to read the bible. Antichristian Rome forbade the holy scriptures to the laity, lest their images and priestly domination should become exposed to vulgar contempt. The word noble, used to designate noble birth, means here nobility and enlargedness of mind.

10. Paul and Silas—Timothy, as the youngest and least obnoxious, seems to have briefly remained at Thessalonica; but he soon reappears and remains at Berea, verse 14. Berea—Paul forsakes the Egnatian Road, retiring southwest-ward and seaward to the beautiful village of Berea, about forty-two miles distant, named from its abundance of water streams. It is still a fine town of eighteen or twenty thousand inhabitants under Turkish rule. He finds a Jewish synagogue, and, what he had never found before, save at the single town of Lystra, a body of Jews who would examine the ward of God to see if it predicted the Jesus-Messiah.

V. 11. These were more ingenuous-Or generous. To be teachable in the things of God is true generosity of soul. The receiving the word with all readiness of mind, and the most accurate search into the truth, are well consistent.

Verse 11. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica] hsan eugenesteroi, Were of a better race, extraction, or birth, than those at Thessalonica; but the word refers more to their conduct, as a proof of their better disposition, than to their birth, or any peculiar lineal nobility. It was a maxim among the Jews, that “none was of a noble spirit who did not employ himself in the study of the law.” It appears that the Bereans were a better educated and more polished people than those at Thessalonica; in consequence far from persecuting: 1. They heard the doctrine of the Gospel attentively. 2. They received this doctrine with readiness of mind: when the evidence of its truth appeared to them sufficiently convincing, they had too much dignity of mind to refuse their assent, and too much ingenuousness to conceal their approbation. 3. They searched the Scriptures, i.e. of the Old Testament, to see whether these thing were so: to see whether the promises and types corresponded with the alleged fulfilment in the person, works, and sufferings of Jesus Christ. 4. They continued in this work; they searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Verses 11-14. These were more noble, &c. — Greek, eugenesteroi, more ingenuous, or generous; of a more excellent disposition, more open to conviction, as being less blinded by prejudice. To be teachable in the things of God, is true nobleness and generosity of soul. Than those in Thessalonica — The unbelieving Jews there; in that they received the word with all readiness of mind — When it was proved to them from the Scriptures to be the word of God. And searched the Scriptures daily — Using great candour and impartiality in the search; whether these things were so — Namely, the things which Paul preached concerning the sufferings and resurrection of the Messiah. Here we see that receiving the word with readiness, and the most accurate search into the truth, are things well consistent the one with the other. Therefore many of them believed — Finding how exact a correspondence there was between the words of these Christian preachers and those of their own prophets, to which they referred. Also of honourable women — Women of considerable rank; which were Greeks — That is, proselytes, as the word is frequently used by Luke; and of men not a few — Thus a numerous church was gathered in Berea likewise, consisting both of the Jews and of the Gentiles, but especially of the latter. But — An unhappy opposition soon arose, from the malice of their persecutors: for, when the Jews of Thessalonica understood that the word of God was preached at Berea — With such promising success, not content with what they had done to oppose it at home; they came thither also, and stirred up the people — Greek, saleuontev touv oclouv, agitating the multitudes, or, raising a storm among them; the expression properly signifying to agitate the sea violently. It admirably illustrates the rage and fury of a seditious multitude. They doubtless represented Paul and his associates as factious and turbulent persons, to whom it was dangerous to give any the least shelter or countenance. The brethren, therefore, anxious for Paul’s safety, sent him away to go as it were to the sea — Or by sea, to some of the southern cities of Greece. It seems they chose to direct him the road which led to the sea, that if he had not an opportunity of embarking, or did not think proper to do it, his malicious enemies might, at least, be discouraged from any further attempt to pursue him, which they might probably have done, if they had known he would have travelled by land. But Silas and Timotheus, whose characters were not so public, or their persons so obnoxious, did not go with him from Berea; but continued there a while longer, to settle the newly-planted church, and to instruct them more fully in the doctrine of the gospel.

Ver. 10, 11. At Berea — they were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in searching the scriptures; for all divines have encouraged their hearers to read the bible. Antichristian Rome forbade the holy scriptures to the laity, lest their images and priestly domination should become exposed to vulgar contempt. The word noble, used to designate noble birth, means here nobility and enlargedness of mind.

11. More noble—The great body of Jews rejected Christ, not only from belief; but even from real examination. It was contempt by anticipation precluding investigation. The Bereans were more noble than this in character and conduct.

V. 12. Many of the-Of the Jews.

And of the Grecian women-Who were followed by their husbands.

Verse 12. Therefore many of them believed] From the manner in which they heard, received, and examined the word preached to them, it was not likely they could be deceived. And, as it was the truth that was proclaimed to them, it is no wonder that they apprehended, believed, and embraced it. Of honourable women which were Greeks] Probably mere heathens are meant; and these were some of the chief families in the place. Thus we find that the preaching of Paul at Berea was made the instrument of converting both Jews and Gentiles.

Verses 11-14. These were more noble, &c. — Greek, eugenesteroi, more ingenuous, or generous; of a more excellent disposition, more open to conviction, as being less blinded by prejudice. To be teachable in the things of God, is true nobleness and generosity of soul. Than those in Thessalonica — The unbelieving Jews there; in that they received the word with all readiness of mind — When it was proved to them from the Scriptures to be the word of God. And searched the Scriptures daily — Using great candour and impartiality in the search; whether these things were so — Namely, the things which Paul preached concerning the sufferings and resurrection of the Messiah. Here we see that receiving the word with readiness, and the most accurate search into the truth, are things well consistent the one with the other. Therefore many of them believed — Finding how exact a correspondence there was between the words of these Christian preachers and those of their own prophets, to which they referred. Also of honourable women — Women of considerable rank; which were Greeks — That is, proselytes, as the word is frequently used by Luke; and of men not a few — Thus a numerous church was gathered in Berea likewise, consisting both of the Jews and of the Gentiles, but especially of the latter. But — An unhappy opposition soon arose, from the malice of their persecutors: for, when the Jews of Thessalonica understood that the word of God was preached at Berea — With such promising success, not content with what they had done to oppose it at home; they came thither also, and stirred up the people — Greek, saleuontev touv oclouv, agitating the multitudes, or, raising a storm among them; the expression properly signifying to agitate the sea violently. It admirably illustrates the rage and fury of a seditious multitude. They doubtless represented Paul and his associates as factious and turbulent persons, to whom it was dangerous to give any the least shelter or countenance. The brethren, therefore, anxious for Paul’s safety, sent him away to go as it were to the sea — Or by sea, to some of the southern cities of Greece. It seems they chose to direct him the road which led to the sea, that if he had not an opportunity of embarking, or did not think proper to do it, his malicious enemies might, at least, be discouraged from any further attempt to pursue him, which they might probably have done, if they had known he would have travelled by land. But Silas and Timotheus, whose characters were not so public, or their persons so obnoxious, did not go with him from Berea; but continued there a while longer, to settle the newly-planted church, and to instruct them more fully in the doctrine of the gospel.

12. Therefore—In consequence of a candid heart and an examining energy many believed. A large Church was arising in a small place. Berea was beautifully promising to be a fair Christian city.

Verse 13. The Jews of Thessalonica-stirred up the people.] With what implacable malice did these men persecute the Gospel! And in the same spirit they continue to the present day, though it is evidently the sole cause of their wretchedness.

Verses 11-14. These were more noble, &c. — Greek, eugenesteroi, more ingenuous, or generous; of a more excellent disposition, more open to conviction, as being less blinded by prejudice. To be teachable in the things of God, is true nobleness and generosity of soul. Than those in Thessalonica — The unbelieving Jews there; in that they received the word with all readiness of mind — When it was proved to them from the Scriptures to be the word of God. And searched the Scriptures daily — Using great candour and impartiality in the search; whether these things were so — Namely, the things which Paul preached concerning the sufferings and resurrection of the Messiah. Here we see that receiving the word with readiness, and the most accurate search into the truth, are things well consistent the one with the other. Therefore many of them believed — Finding how exact a correspondence there was between the words of these Christian preachers and those of their own prophets, to which they referred. Also of honourable women — Women of considerable rank; which were Greeks — That is, proselytes, as the word is frequently used by Luke; and of men not a few — Thus a numerous church was gathered in Berea likewise, consisting both of the Jews and of the Gentiles, but especially of the latter. But — An unhappy opposition soon arose, from the malice of their persecutors: for, when the Jews of Thessalonica understood that the word of God was preached at Berea — With such promising success, not content with what they had done to oppose it at home; they came thither also, and stirred up the people — Greek, saleuontev touv oclouv, agitating the multitudes, or, raising a storm among them; the expression properly signifying to agitate the sea violently. It admirably illustrates the rage and fury of a seditious multitude. They doubtless represented Paul and his associates as factious and turbulent persons, to whom it was dangerous to give any the least shelter or countenance. The brethren, therefore, anxious for Paul’s safety, sent him away to go as it were to the sea — Or by sea, to some of the southern cities of Greece. It seems they chose to direct him the road which led to the sea, that if he had not an opportunity of embarking, or did not think proper to do it, his malicious enemies might, at least, be discouraged from any further attempt to pursue him, which they might probably have done, if they had known he would have travelled by land. But Silas and Timotheus, whose characters were not so public, or their persons so obnoxious, did not go with him from Berea; but continued there a while longer, to settle the newly-planted church, and to instruct them more fully in the doctrine of the gospel.

13. Stirred up the people—Paul would gladly now have returned to visit his dear Thessalonian Church, but “Satan” instigating his Jewish foes, “hindered” him, and he diverges still farther to the southeast.

Verse 14. To go as it were to the sea] This passage is generally understood to mean that the disciples took Paul towards the sea, as if he had intended to embark, and return to Troas, but with the real design to go to Athens. But it is more likely that his conductors, in order to his greater safety, left the public or more frequented road, and took him coastwise to Athens. Or, by taking a vessel at that part of the sea nearest to Berea, they might have coasted it to Athens, which was quite a possible case; and, as we do not hear of his stopping at any place on his journey to preach, it is very probable that he went by sea to this city. Though sleights and feints may be allowable in cases of life and death, yet there does not appear an absolute necessity for any in this case. And, as the text does not necessarily point any out, so we need not have recourse to any. I take it for granted, therefore, that Paul went by sea to Athens.

Silas and Timotheus abode there still.] The persecution, it seems, was directed principally against Paul. Lo! he stayeth his rough wind on the day of his east wind. Silas and Timotheus, holy men, were left behind to water the seed which Paul had planted.

Verses 11-14. These were more noble, &c. — Greek, eugenesteroi, more ingenuous, or generous; of a more excellent disposition, more open to conviction, as being less blinded by prejudice. To be teachable in the things of God, is true nobleness and generosity of soul. Than those in Thessalonica — The unbelieving Jews there; in that they received the word with all readiness of mind — When it was proved to them from the Scriptures to be the word of God. And searched the Scriptures daily — Using great candour and impartiality in the search; whether these things were so — Namely, the things which Paul preached concerning the sufferings and resurrection of the Messiah. Here we see that receiving the word with readiness, and the most accurate search into the truth, are things well consistent the one with the other. Therefore many of them believed — Finding how exact a correspondence there was between the words of these Christian preachers and those of their own prophets, to which they referred. Also of honourable women — Women of considerable rank; which were Greeks — That is, proselytes, as the word is frequently used by Luke; and of men not a few — Thus a numerous church was gathered in Berea likewise, consisting both of the Jews and of the Gentiles, but especially of the latter. But — An unhappy opposition soon arose, from the malice of their persecutors: for, when the Jews of Thessalonica understood that the word of God was preached at Berea — With such promising success, not content with what they had done to oppose it at home; they came thither also, and stirred up the people — Greek, saleuontev touv oclouv, agitating the multitudes, or, raising a storm among them; the expression properly signifying to agitate the sea violently. It admirably illustrates the rage and fury of a seditious multitude. They doubtless represented Paul and his associates as factious and turbulent persons, to whom it was dangerous to give any the least shelter or countenance. The brethren, therefore, anxious for Paul’s safety, sent him away to go as it were to the sea — Or by sea, to some of the southern cities of Greece. It seems they chose to direct him the road which led to the sea, that if he had not an opportunity of embarking, or did not think proper to do it, his malicious enemies might, at least, be discouraged from any further attempt to pursue him, which they might probably have done, if they had known he would have travelled by land. But Silas and Timotheus, whose characters were not so public, or their persons so obnoxious, did not go with him from Berea; but continued there a while longer, to settle the newly-planted church, and to instruct them more fully in the doctrine of the gospel.

14. As it were—Not that there was any deception, but real doubt whether they should take to the sea or not. Silas and Timothy remain to cherish the infant Church. Yet a charge is left for them to follow, as soon as may be, the apostle to Athens. This they failed to do. Paul had to stand up single and alone in Athens, but was joined by Silas and Timothy at Corinth, (Acts 18:5.) Meantime the loving conductors of Paul see him safe in Athens.

Christianity offered to Athens, 15-34.

Sailing from Dium the apostle would look a regretful farewell upon the distant mountain tops of Thessalonica; and, more near, the snowy Mount Olympus, the mythical home of the Homeric gods, would recede from sight. He would sail by Thermopylae, where Leonidas, with his three hundred, died for Grecian liberty; and Marathon, where Miltiades repelled the invading Persian. Finally, after probably about three days’ sail, he sweeps round into the Piraeus, the celebrated harbour of Athens, and debarks to visit her streets. To the cultured mind few passages in the history of the early Church are more interesting or full of suggestions than this contact point between Christianity and classicism. It would have been beyond Luke’s powers to have fabricated so natural a history of so striking an occurrence. A romancer heroizing Paul would have made him more brilliantly successful.

As Paul enters the city from the Piraeus through the gateway, he finds the street lined with marble images, carved by the hand of the rarest genius, idealized into the forms of imaginary gods, Jupiter, Apollo, Minerva, Mercury, and the Muses. He walks the main street to the Agora, forum, or “market,” verse 17.

Standing in the Agora. and facing northward, Paul sees before him, in a sort of semicircle, the pnyx or slope of the town-meeting, the Mars’ Hill or Areopagus, and the tall Acropolis or state-citadel: and behind him the Museum.

The AGORA was margined with colonnades and porticoes, which were adorned with mythological images and statues of the historical great men of Athens, such as Solon, Conon, and Demosthenes. The AREOPAGUS was crowned with the temple of Mars, from whom its height was named. But it was upon the summit of the ACROPOLIS that the genius of Athens had lavished the utmost prodigality of art. Crowning all was the giant image of Athene (Minerva) in full armour, formed of the brazen spoils of the battle of Marathon, holding aloft a brilliant spear and shield, standing in majesty as the patron goddess, from whose Greek appellation, Athene, the city derived its name.

It was the providential mission of majestic Rome to furnish to the world the idea of a well ordered STATE, in which nations should be organized, law be rendered supreme, and order and security reign, down even to the humblest individual. It was the mission of Greece, and especially of Athens, to furnish the ideal of grace, beauty, and intellectual civilization, by which man is to be truly humanized to his noblest character. It was the mission of Israel to maintain the truths of conscience, the divine law, religion, GOD. Of these three ideas, the political, the esthetical, and the Infinite, the three representative cities were Rome, Athens, and Jerusalem. Accordingly, throughout the New Testament, we find the stern pressure of the Roman power beneficent as well as despotic. But this power is to be softened and subdued by the esthetic; and both are to be subdued, permeated, and spiritualized by the power of the INFINITE; and of that INFINITE we now behold Paul standing forth the representative in the Agora of Athens, as he soon will in the Pretorium of Rome.

Verse 15. Brought him unto Athens] This was one of the most celebrated cities in the world, whether we consider its antiquity, its learning, its political consequence, or the valour of its inhabitants. This city, which was the capital of Attica, and the seat of the Grecian empire was founded by Cecrops, about A.M. 2447, before Christ 1557, and was called by him Cecropia. About thirteen or fourteen hundred years before Christ, in the reign either of Erechtheus, or Erichthonius, it was called Athens, from aqhnh, a name of Minerva, to whom it was dedicated, and who was always considered the protectress of the city. The whole city at first was built upon a hill or rock, in the midst of a spacious plain; but, in process of time, the whole plain was covered with buildings which were called the lower city; while the ancient was called Acropolis, or the upper city. In its most flourishing state this city was not less than one hundred and seventy-eight stadia, or twenty-two Roman miles in circumference. The buildings of Athens were the most superb, and best executed, in the world; but every thing is now in a state of ruin. Mr. Stuart, in his three folio vols. of the Antiquities of Athens, has given correct representations of those that remain, with many geographical notices of much importance. The greatest men that ever lived, scholars, lawyers, statesmen, and warriors, were Athenians. Its institutions, laws, and literature, were its own unrivalled boast, and the envy of the world. The city still exists; the Acropolis in a state of comparative repair. It is now in the hands of the Greeks; but the Turks, who held it till lately, have turned the celebrated Parthenon, or temple of Minerva, into a mosque. The inhabitants are reckoned at about one thousand. Christianity, planted here by St. Paul, still subsists; and about two-thirds of the inhabitants of Athens are Christians, who have several churches or oratories here, and it is the residence of a Greek bishop, who is a metropolitan. He who considers the ancient glory of this city, whether in its heathen or Christian antiquity, cannot but sigh over its present state.

Verse 15. They that conducted Paul brought him — By land, ewv, as far as Athens — That celebrated, unequalled seat of learning among the Greeks. It is true, Athens had now passed the zenith of its political splendour, and had been declining in power and glory ever since the Romans, after conquering Greece, fixed the seat of their government at Corinth. Nevertheless, its fame for learning was still as great as ever. For, at the time Paul visited that city, it was full of philosophers, rhetoricians, orators, painters, statuaries, and of young persons who came to learn philosophy and the arts. But this sort of people, being generally very idle, were great talkers, and had an insatiable curiosity. So that the character which Luke has given of the Athenians, and strangers there, (verse 21,) is perfectly just. And receiving commandment unto Silas, &c., that they should come to him with all speed — Probably that they might bring him information of the state of the new converts he had left behind him at Thessalonica and Berea. Or, perhaps, he wished to be joined by them before he began his ministry at Athens, which yet, observing the wretched state of the city, he was in haste to do. Whether Silas came to him while he was at Athens, is uncertain. Timothy, however, came and informed him, that the idolaters in Thessalonica, displeased to see so many of their countrymen deserting the temples and altars of their gods, had joined the Jews in persecuting the disciples, 1 Thessalonians 2:14. On hearing this, Paul thought it good to be left at Athens alone, 1 Thessalonians 3:1; and sent Timothy back to Thessalonica, to establish and comfort the brethren concerning their faith. While Paul “continued in this renowned city, the centre of polite learning, philosophy, and the fine arts, and, as it were, the university of the Roman empire and of the world, he took little notice of the sculpture and edifices, the fragments of which, to this day, are considered as the most perfect models in their kind; or of their paintings and exhibitions, and other curiosities of this sort.” And yet “Paul is generally allowed to have been a man of fine taste and cultivated genius; but his thoughts were too much occupied about more sublime and interesting subjects, to make observations on these elegant or magnificent trifles.” — Scott. For,

V. 16. While Paul was waiting for the-Having no design, as it seems, to preach at Athens, but his zeal for God drew him into it unawares, without staying till his companions came.

Verse 16. He saw the city wholly given to idolatry.] kateidwlon, Full of idols, as the margin has it, and very properly. Whoever examines the remains of this city, as represented by Mr. Stuart in his Antiquities, already referred to, will be satisfied of the truth of St. Luke’s remark: it was full of idols. Bishop Pearce produces a most apposite quotation from Pausanias, which confirms the observation: ouk hn allacou tosauta idein eidwla. There was no place where so many idols were to be seen. PAUS. in Attic. cap. xvii. 24.

PETRONIUS, who was contemporary with St. Paul, in his Satyr. cap. xvii., makes Quartilla say of Athens: Utique nostra regio tam PRÆSENTIBUS PLENA EST NUMINIBUS, ut facilius possis DEUM quam HOMINEM invenire. Our region is so full of deities that you may more frequently meet with a god than a man.

Verses 16, 17. While he waited for them at Athens — Namely, for Silas and Timothy; his spirit was stirred in him — Greek, parwxuneto, was disquieted, vexed, filled with grief and indignation; when he saw the city (a city which was thought to be more enlightened than any other, and in which learning and arts were carried to greater perfection than anywhere else in the world) wholly given to idolatry — Greek, kateidwlon, full of idols, enslaved to idolatry in the most gross and shameful manner. That this was the case, all ancient writers attest. Pausanias says that “there were more images in Athens than in all Greece besides;” and that “they worshipped the gods,” or expressed more piety to them “than all Greece:” and presently adds, as an evidence of their piety, that “they had altars (aidouv, fhmhv, kai ormhv) erected to shame, fame, and desire;” and again, that “they exceeded all in their zeal for the gods.” Sophocles bears the same testimony, observing, “This city exceeds all others in worshipping and honouring the gods.” Hence Ælian called Athens the altar of Greece; and Xenophon said, that “it had twice as many sacred festivals as any other city.” And no wonder, for the Athenians always imported the deities and superstitions of every nation along with their arts and learning; and, as Strabo says, “their hospitality to strangers extended to the gods too, being very ready to receive any strange objects or forms of worship.” So that, as Petronius humorously says, “It was easier to find a god than a man there.” Here then we have a full proof of the insufficiency of science and philosophy to guide men in matters of religion. “The barbarous Scythians, the wild Indians, nay, the stupid Hottentots,” as Mr. Scott observes, “have never deviated further from truth, or sunk into grosser darkness, in respect to God and religion, than the ingenious and philosophical Athenians did!” The apostle, therefore, though, it seems, he had resolved not to begin preaching till Timothy and Silas arrived, yet, seeing the city sunk so low in these various, complicated, and abominable idolatries, could forbear no longer; and therefore, as there was a synagogue of the Jews in Athens, he went to it without delay, and disputed with the Jews and the devout persons — Whom he found assembled there: thus offering the gospel to them, as his manner was, before he preached it to the Gentiles. But not content with this, he afterward discoursed in the market-place daily with those that met with him — Who were chiefly, doubtless, Athenian idolaters. See Dr. Hammond.

16. Paul waited… at Athens—Having left Silas and Timothy, and dismissed his Berean conductors, the apostle treads the streets a pensive solitaire. He who could quote, even here, the appropriate passage from the Greek poets, was doubtless not blind to the perfection with which art had wrought poetry in marble. But he comes with the firmness of a conqueror, not to be subdued by the beauty of his foe. He is the missionary of the Infinite, and he must not be seduced out of his mission by the fascinations of the esthetic. Under all this exterior of gaiety he knows there lurks a sadness, a sensualism, and a despair; for Greece, in forgetting God, has lost her assurance of life and immortality. Groping in vain for truth, she tries in vain to satisfy herself with beauty and voluptuousness. Stirred in him— Literally, was sharpened. He was impatient at the evidences afforded on every side that the true God was utterly excluded from Athens by a pantheon of false gods, and he was stimulated to assail the system of falsehood by the revelation of the truth. Given to idolatry—Kateidwlon, an expressive term; literally, under-idoled. The soil of the city underlay the images like a stratum. In Athens, it was said, you could oftener find a god than a man. It was almost as thickly peopled with marble statues as with living inhabitants.

Verse 17. Disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews] Proving that Jesus was the Messiah: and with the devout persons, probably heathens, proselyted to the Jewish religion. And in the market: I suppose the agora here means some such place as our exchange, where people of business usually met, and where the philosophers conversed and reasoned. The agora was probably like the Roman forum, and like places of public resort in all countries, where people of leisure assembled to converse, hear the news, &c.

Verses 16, 17. While he waited for them at Athens — Namely, for Silas and Timothy; his spirit was stirred in him — Greek, parwxuneto, was disquieted, vexed, filled with grief and indignation; when he saw the city (a city which was thought to be more enlightened than any other, and in which learning and arts were carried to greater perfection than anywhere else in the world) wholly given to idolatry — Greek, kateidwlon, full of idols, enslaved to idolatry in the most gross and shameful manner. That this was the case, all ancient writers attest. Pausanias says that “there were more images in Athens than in all Greece besides;” and that “they worshipped the gods,” or expressed more piety to them “than all Greece:” and presently adds, as an evidence of their piety, that “they had altars (aidouv, fhmhv, kai ormhv) erected to shame, fame, and desire;” and again, that “they exceeded all in their zeal for the gods.” Sophocles bears the same testimony, observing, “This city exceeds all others in worshipping and honouring the gods.” Hence Ælian called Athens the altar of Greece; and Xenophon said, that “it had twice as many sacred festivals as any other city.” And no wonder, for the Athenians always imported the deities and superstitions of every nation along with their arts and learning; and, as Strabo says, “their hospitality to strangers extended to the gods too, being very ready to receive any strange objects or forms of worship.” So that, as Petronius humorously says, “It was easier to find a god than a man there.” Here then we have a full proof of the insufficiency of science and philosophy to guide men in matters of religion. “The barbarous Scythians, the wild Indians, nay, the stupid Hottentots,” as Mr. Scott observes, “have never deviated further from truth, or sunk into grosser darkness, in respect to God and religion, than the ingenious and philosophical Athenians did!” The apostle, therefore, though, it seems, he had resolved not to begin preaching till Timothy and Silas arrived, yet, seeing the city sunk so low in these various, complicated, and abominable idolatries, could forbear no longer; and therefore, as there was a synagogue of the Jews in Athens, he went to it without delay, and disputed with the Jews and the devout persons — Whom he found assembled there: thus offering the gospel to them, as his manner was, before he preached it to the Gentiles. But not content with this, he afterward discoursed in the market-place daily with those that met with him — Who were chiefly, doubtless, Athenian idolaters. See Dr. Hammond.

17. Synagogue—Paul was not the first Jew in Athens. And wherever there were ten Jews there was likely to be a synagogue. To the synagogue the apostle goes to offer Christ before he presents him to the agora; “to the Jew first,” even in Athens, “and also to the Gentile.” Devout persons— Athenians inclined to renounce idolatry and adore the true Jehovah. Them that met with him—To three classes then did Paul open his mission: to the Jews, to the monotheists, and to the accidental Athenians in the agora. It was peculiarly to this last class and in the same agora that Socrates unfolded those doctrines for which he drank the fatal hemlock. In the market—In the part of the market or agora nearest the Acropolis was the famous stoa or porch, (called the poikilh stoa. or Variegated Porch,) from which the Stoic sect of philosophers was named.

V. 18. Some of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers-The Epicureans entirely denied a providence, and held the world to be the effect of mere chance; asserting sensual pleasure to be man's chief good, and that the soul and body died together. The Stoics held, that matter was eternal; that all things were governed by irresistible fate; that virtue was its own sufficient reward, and vice its own sufficient punishment. It is easy to see, how happily the apostle levels his discourse at some of the most important errors of each, while, without expressly attacking either, he gives a plain summary of his own religious principles.

What would this babbler say?-Such is the language of natural reason, full of, and satisfied with itself. Yet even here St. Paul had some fruit; though nowhere less than at Athens. And no wonder, since this city was a seminary of philosophers, who have ever been the pest of true religion. He seemeth to be a proclaimer-This he returns upon them at the 23d verse; Acts 17:23

of strange gods-Such as are not known even at Athens.

Because he preached to them Jesus and the resurrection-A god and a goddess. And as stupid as this mistake was, it is the less to be wondered at, since the Athenians might as well count the resurrection a deity, as shame, famine, and many others.

Verse 18. Certain philosophers of the Epicureans] These were the followers of Epicurus, who acknowledged no gods except in name, and absolutely denied that they exercised any government over the world or its inhabitants; and that the chief good consisted in the gratification of the appetites of sense. These points the Epicureans certainly held; but it is not clear that Epicurus himself maintained such doctrines.

And of the Stoics] These did not deny the existence of the gods; but they held that all human affairs were governed by fate. They did not believe that any good was received from the hands of their gods; and considered, as Seneca asserts, that any good and wise man was equal to Jupiter himself. Both these sects agreed in denying the resurrection of the body; and the former did not believe in the immortality of the soul.

EPICURUS, the founder of the Epicurean sect, was born at Athens, about A.M. 3663, before Christ 341.

ZENO, the founder of the Stoic sect, was born in the isle of Cyprus, about thirty years before Christ. His disciples were called Stoics from the stoa, a famous portico at Athens, where they studied. Besides these two sects, there were two others which were famous at this time; viz. the Academics and the Peripatetics. The founder of the first was the celebrated PLATO; and the founder of the second, the no less famous ARISTOTLE. These sects professed a much purer doctrine than the Epicureans and Stoics; and it does not appear that they opposed the apostles, nor did they enter into public disputations with them. Against the doctrines taught by the Epicureans and Stoics, several parts of St. Paul’s discourse, in the following verses, are directly pointed.

What will this babbler say?] The word spermologov, which we translate babbler, signifies, literally, a collector of seeds, and is the “name of a small bird the lives by picking up seeds on the road.” The epithet became applied to persons who collected the sayings of others, without order or method, and detailed them among their companions in the same way. The application of the term to prating, empty, impertinent persons, was natural and easy, and hence it was considered a term of reproach and contempt, and was sometimes used to signify the vilest sort of men. A setter forth of strange gods] xenwn daimoniwn, Of strange or foreign demons. That this was strictly forbidden, both at Rome and Athens, see Clarke on “Acts 16:21”.

There was a difference, in the heathen theology, between qeov, god, and daimwn, demon: the qeoi, were such as were gods by nature: the daimonia, were men who were deified. This distinction seems to be in the mind of these philosophers when they said that the apostles seemed to be setters forth of strange demons, because they preached unto them Jesus, whom they showed to be a man, suffering and dying, but afterwards raised to the throne of God. This would appear to them tantamount with the deification of heroes, &c., who had been thus honoured for their especial services to mankind. Horace expresses this in two lines, 2 Epist. i. 5:- Romulus, et Liber pater, et cum Castore Pollux,

Post ingentia facta, deorum in templa recepti.

“Romulus, father Bacchus, with Castor and Pollux, for their eminent services, have been received into the temples of the gods.”

Verse 18. Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans and of the Stoics encountered him — Greek, suneballon autw, opposed themselves to him. The Epicureans entirely denied a providence, and held the world to be the effect of mere chance; asserting sensual pleasure to be man’s chief good, and that the soul and body died together. The Stoics held that matter was eternal; that all things were governed by irresistible fate; that virtue was its own sufficient reward, and vice its own sufficient punishment. It is easy to see how happily the apostle levels his discourse at some of the most important errors of each sect, while, without expressly attacking either, he gives a plain summary of his own religious principles. Some said, What will this babbler say? — Such is the language of natural reason, full of, and satisfied with, itself. The expression, rendered babbler, spermolgov, (which properly signifies a contemptible person, that picks up scattered seed in the market, or elsewhere, and which Dr. Doddridge translates, retailer of scraps; and Mr. Fleming, holder forth;) admirably expresses the contempt which these philosophers had of this unknown foreigner, who pretended to teach all the several professors of their learned and illustrious body. Yet even here Paul had some fruit, though nowhere less than at Athens. And no wonder, since this city was a seminary of philosophers, who have ever been the pest of true religion. Others said, He seemeth to be a setter forth — Kataggeleuv, a proclaimer (this expression he returns to them at verse 23) of strange gods — Such as are not known even at Athens. The original expression, Xenwn daimoniwn, signifies strange, or foreign demons. By demons, however, they did not understand devils, or evil beings, as we do; but rather men, who had lived on earth, and were afterward deified; distinguishing them from the qeoi, or gods, who, they thought, were such by nature. Because he preached to them Jesus and the resurrection — The former of which, through their negligence in attending they ridiculously took for a deified man, and the other for a goddess. And, as stupid as this mistake was, it is the less to be wondered at, since the Athenians might as well count the resurrection a deity, as shame, famine, and desire; or as the fever, and some other things too scandalous to be here named, were accounted deities among the Romans.

Ver. 18. Certain philosophers of the Epicureans. Epicurus, from whom this sect claimed patronage, lived in Athens three hundred years before Christ. He is said to have been a man of temperance, who died at the age of ninety two. It was otherwise with this sect. Horace the poet calls them “Epicurus’s hogs.” He taught the materiality of the soul, and by consequence denied its immortality. He also denied a providence, which is in fact to deny the being of a God. He recommended in secular affairs, moderation of the passions, and a degree of abstemiousness in order to enjoy pleasure with the greater zest. If those doctrines were true, St. Paul says, “Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die.” Plutarch wrote against them.

The Stoics encountered him. They are so called from stoa stoa, a porch, or portico, in which Zeno their founder held his academy. They ascribed all secondary causes to the great first cause, that is, God. They held that all occurrences were necessitated events; they were ordained so to occur, and could not occur otherwise. All things were therefore a concatenation, which could not be broken or changed, no not even by the supreme Being himself. This they called fate, equally binding on Jupiter, as on man. They equalized all vices and all virtues, in such sort that to kill an ox, or to kill a man, were actions in themselves morally the same.

18. Philosophers—Socrates was the first who turned the study of men from mere physics to mind and morals. His more legitimate followers were Plato and Aristotle, the former of whom endeavoured to place man’s immortality and the law of immutable right and truth upon a firm basis of positive reason. Of this class of philosophers none seem to have encountered the apostle.

Epicureans—The essential principle of Epicurus was that man should aim at the greatest possible amount of happiness. This maxim is capable of the highest and best meaning. And it is said that Epicurus used it to show that the highest pleasure required the most perfect virtue. But as Epicurus admitted no future state, the maxim in most men’s minds took an individual application. Each one said, “I have but one life to live, and I must, by whatever means, or at whosever expense, get the most enjoyment out of it for myself.” Hence, sensuality and selfishness, tending to utter beastliness, were the natural result. This philosophy is, in its essence, being revived at the present day by such men as Comte, of France, and John Stuart Mill, of England. Such philosophers may, like Epicurus, give a high version of this philosophy, and may sustain it by their own exemplary conduct; but its prevalence ever marks a sensual age. Sensual men will ever feel a tendency to adopt the doctrine; the doctrine will ever exert an influence to make men sensual.

Stoics—The Stoics, reversing the Epicurean maxim, forbid all regard for pleasure, and require us to act solely for the absolute right. He who so acted, discarding all passion or selfishness, was a wise man, a king, a god. This was a noble philosophy, and some of the noblest men of antiquity belonged to this sect. But, knowing nothing but the energy of human nature to rely upon, it placed a greater strain on fallen humanity than it was able to bear. In endeavouring to make men morally perfect it made them perfectly miserable. While Stoicism would make men perfect by crucifying all man’s passions, Christianity would make them so, through a divine aid, by harmonizing the passions with the right, the true, and the good. Thus it attains for man a higher happiness than Epicurus knew, and a perfect righteousness, a holiness, and a blessedness unknown to Stoicism. But it was in their doctrine of God and a future state that these philosophers came into collision with the preaching of Paul. The Stoics were pantheists, the Epicureans were atheists, and neither knew any future state. Pantheism teaches that the universe, the great whole, the cosmos, is God. Atheism admits, of course, the existence of the cosmos, but denies the existence of any God. In asserting the existence of a true, living, personal God, who exists in entire independence of the cosmos, and able to live without the cosmos, yet author and creator of the cosmos, Paul’s Christianity was at exterminating war with both. Yet pantheism and atheism are at bottom one. Both alike teach that the cosmos, passing through changes and evolutions by laws inherent within itself, is all the God there is. Pantheism avers that there is no God but cosmos, and atheism only denies that besides the cosmos there is any God. With regard to a future state both Epicureans and Stoics maintained that, whether pleasure or duty is our law, all our calculations are limited to this life. Hence, both these sects were at issue with every step of the apostle’s argument. And when Paul uttered the word resurrection, they were as prompt in their rejection of further discourse as were the Jerusalemite Jews when he uttered the word Gentiles, Acts 22:22.

Some said—We suppose that this first contemptuous question comes from the haughty Stoics. Babbler—In the Greek the term spermologov signifies, literally, a seed-picker, an epithet applied to birds. It may here mean figuratively a talker who picks up a smatter of petty subtleties to retail. The term was often applied also to loungers and vagrants, who lived about the agora, like birds, on what they could pick up, and so it may have been applied to Paul.

Strange gods—The very same term, foreign gods, was used in the legal indictment against Socrates. Some have supposed that the plural gods was here used because in the phrase Jesus and the (anastasis) resurrection they mistook anastasis for a goddess. Hackett, Lechler, and others, deny that the Athenians could have made such a mistake. And certainly they could not have made it after having heard the speech of Paul. They might, however, have caught such a notion previously, when, by their own account, they but half understood him.

V. 19. The Areopagus, or hill of Mars, (dedicated to Mars, the heathen god of war,) was the place where the Athenians held their supreme court of judicature. But it does not appear he was carried thither as a criminal. The original number of its judges was twelve; but afterward it increased to three hundred. These were generally men of the greatest families in Athens, and were famed for justice and integrity.

Verse 19. They took him, and brought him unto Areopagus] The Areopagus was a hill not far from the Acropolis, already described, where the supreme court of justice was held; one of the most sacred and reputable courts that had ever existed in the Gentile world. It had its name, areiov pagov, Areopagus, or the Hill of Mars, or Ares, from the circumstance, according to poetic fiction, of Mars being tried there, by a court of twelve gods, for the murder of Halirrhothius, son of Neptune: the meaning of which is, that Ares, a Thessalian prince, having slain Halirrhothius, the son of a neighbouring prince, for having violated his daughter Alcippe, was here tried by twelve judges, by whom he was honourably acquitted: in the Athenian laws the death of the ravisher was the regular forfeiture for his crime. The justice administered in this court was so strict and impartial, that, it was generally allowed, both the plaintiff and defendant departed satisfied with the decision. “Innocence, when summoned before it, appeared without apprehension; and the guilty, convicted and condemned, retired with out daring to murmur.” The place in which the judges sat was uncovered; and they held their sittings by night, to the end that nothing might distract their minds from the great business on which they were to decide; and that the sight of the accused might not affect them either with pity or aversion. In reference to this, all pleaders were strictly forbidden to use any means whatever to excite either pity or aversion, or to affect the passions; every thing being confined to simple relation, or statement of facts. When the two parties were produced before the court, they were placed between the bleeding members of victims slain on the occasion, and were obliged to take an oath, accompanied by horrible imprecations on themselves and families, that they would testify nothing but truth. These parties called to witness the eumenides, or furies, the punishers of the perjured in the infernal world; and, to make the greater impression on the mind of the party swearing, the temple dedicated to these infernal deities was contiguous to the court, so that they appeared as if witnessing the oaths and recording the appeal made to themselves. When the case was fully heard, the judges gave their decision by throwing down their flint pebbles, on two boards or tables, one of which was for the condemnation, the other for the acquittal, of the person in question.

Verses 19-21. And — The crowd increasing to a greater number than could conveniently hear him, in the place where they then were; they took and brought him unto Areopagus — Or, the hill of Mars, dedicated to Mars, the heathen god of war, the place where the Athenians held their supreme court of judicature, of which the original number of judges was twelve, but it was afterward increased to three hundred, who were generally men of the greatest families in Athens, and were famed for justice and integrity. Paul, however, was certainly not carried thither to be tried as a criminal, but to be heard discoursing concerning his new doctrine: for they said, May we know what this new doctrine is? For thou bringest certain strange things to our ears — Exceedingly different from what we have ever received from any of those many professors, of various learning, which this city has produced: we would know, therefore, what these things mean — And wish to hear them from thine own mouth, rather than by the uncertain report of others. This course, it must be observed, the Athenians took with Paul, not from the love of truth, but from mere curiosity: for, as the historian proceeds to observe, all the Athenians, and strangers sojourning there — And catching their distemper; spent their time in nothing else but either to tell — To others; or to hear — For themselves; some new thing — Greek, ti kainoteron, literally, some newer thing. New things quickly grew cheap, and they wanted those that were newer still. The apostle, therefore, “being thus called to declare the new doctrine whereof he spake, to an assembly consisting of senators, philosophers, rhetoricians, and statesmen, willingly embraced the opportunity; and, in a most eloquent discourse, prepared his illustrious auditors for receiving that doctrine which appeared to them so strange, by showing them the absurdity of the commonly-received idolatry, and by speaking on that delicate subject with an address, and temper, and strength of reasoning, which would have done honour to the greatest orators of Greece or Rome.” — Macknight.

Ver. 19. They brought him unto Areopagus, the senate house, which stood above the city on Mars’ hill.

19. Took him—Not violence, but guidance. Areopagus—Capriciously rendered by our translators Mars’ hill, in ver. 22. The term is compounded of Areion, belonging to Mars, and pagov, hill, and the place was so named because, according to mythology, on that height the god Mars, having slain the son of Neptune, pleaded his case before the twelve great gods. Here the most ancient and reverend court known in Greece, consisting of the weightiest characters of the state, held its solemn sessions by night alone. Among its duties was the sacred one of judging the lawfulness of any religious rite or dogma. Paul was not arraigned before the court, but only invited by Athenian curiosity to speak in the place. Yet certainly one of the Areopagite judges was present, and, perhaps, others, in their judicial seats. May we know—Literally, can we know, a most respectful form of request.

Verse 20. Thou bringest-strange things to our ears] The doctrine of the apostles was different from any they had ever heard: it was wholly spiritual and divine; thus it was strange: it was contrary to their customs and manners; and thus it was strange also. As it spoke much of the exaltation and glory of Jesus Christ, they supposed him to be a setter forth of strange gods: and, therefore, on the authority of the laws, which forbade the introduction of any new deities, or modes of worship, he was called before the Areopagus.

Verses 19-21. And — The crowd increasing to a greater number than could conveniently hear him, in the place where they then were; they took and brought him unto Areopagus — Or, the hill of Mars, dedicated to Mars, the heathen god of war, the place where the Athenians held their supreme court of judicature, of which the original number of judges was twelve, but it was afterward increased to three hundred, who were generally men of the greatest families in Athens, and were famed for justice and integrity. Paul, however, was certainly not carried thither to be tried as a criminal, but to be heard discoursing concerning his new doctrine: for they said, May we know what this new doctrine is? For thou bringest certain strange things to our ears — Exceedingly different from what we have ever received from any of those many professors, of various learning, which this city has produced: we would know, therefore, what these things mean — And wish to hear them from thine own mouth, rather than by the uncertain report of others. This course, it must be observed, the Athenians took with Paul, not from the love of truth, but from mere curiosity: for, as the historian proceeds to observe, all the Athenians, and strangers sojourning there — And catching their distemper; spent their time in nothing else but either to tell — To others; or to hear — For themselves; some new thing — Greek, ti kainoteron, literally, some newer thing. New things quickly grew cheap, and they wanted those that were newer still. The apostle, therefore, “being thus called to declare the new doctrine whereof he spake, to an assembly consisting of senators, philosophers, rhetoricians, and statesmen, willingly embraced the opportunity; and, in a most eloquent discourse, prepared his illustrious auditors for receiving that doctrine which appeared to them so strange, by showing them the absurdity of the commonly-received idolatry, and by speaking on that delicate subject with an address, and temper, and strength of reasoning, which would have done honour to the greatest orators of Greece or Rome.” — Macknight.

20. Strange things—A new form of religion from the East! Something from Syria that even the Jews of Athens do not recognise!

V. 21. And the strangers sojourning there-And catching the distemper of them.

Some new thing-The Greek word signifies some newer thing. New things quickly grew cheap, and they wanted those that were newer still.

Verse 21. All the Athenians and strangers which were there] As Athens was renovated for its wisdom and learning, it became a place of public resort for philosophers and students from different parts of the then civilized world. The flux of students was in consequence great; and these, having much leisure time, would necessarily be curious to know what was passing in the world, and would frequently assemble together, in places of public resort, to meet with strangers just come to the city; and either, as St. Luke says, to tell or hear some new thing.

“The Athenian writers give the same account of their fellow citizens. DEMOSTHENES, in his reply to Epist. Philippi, represents the Athenians as punqanomenoi kata thn agoran, ei ti legetai newteron; inquiring, in the place of public resort, if there are any NEWS. We find, likewise, that when Thucydides, iii. 38, had said, meta kainothtov men logou apatasqai aristoi, Ye are excellent in suffering yourselves to be deceived by NOVELTY of speech, the old scholiast makes this remark upon it, (almost in the words of St. Luke,) tauta prov touv. aqhnoiouv ainittetai, ouden ti meletwntav, plhn legein ti kai akouein kainon; He here blames the Athenians, who made it their only business to tell and hear something that was NEW.”-Bp. Pearce. This is a striking feature of the city of London in the present day. The itch for news, which generally argues a worldly, shallow, or unsettled mind, is wonderfully prevalent: even ministers of the Gospel, negligent of their sacred function, are become in this sense Athenians; so that the book of God is neither read nor studied with half the avidity and spirit as a newspaper. These persons, forgetful not only of their calling, but of the very spirit of the Gospel, read the account of a battle with the most violent emotions; and, provided the victory falls to their favourite side, they exult and triumph in proportion to the number of thousands that have been slain! It is no wonder if such become political preachers, and their sermons be no better than husks for swine. To such the hungry sheep look up, and are not fed. God pity such miserable Athenians, and direct them to a more suitable employment!

Verses 19-21. And — The crowd increasing to a greater number than could conveniently hear him, in the place where they then were; they took and brought him unto Areopagus — Or, the hill of Mars, dedicated to Mars, the heathen god of war, the place where the Athenians held their supreme court of judicature, of which the original number of judges was twelve, but it was afterward increased to three hundred, who were generally men of the greatest families in Athens, and were famed for justice and integrity. Paul, however, was certainly not carried thither to be tried as a criminal, but to be heard discoursing concerning his new doctrine: for they said, May we know what this new doctrine is? For thou bringest certain strange things to our ears — Exceedingly different from what we have ever received from any of those many professors, of various learning, which this city has produced: we would know, therefore, what these things mean — And wish to hear them from thine own mouth, rather than by the uncertain report of others. This course, it must be observed, the Athenians took with Paul, not from the love of truth, but from mere curiosity: for, as the historian proceeds to observe, all the Athenians, and strangers sojourning there — And catching their distemper; spent their time in nothing else but either to tell — To others; or to hear — For themselves; some new thing — Greek, ti kainoteron, literally, some newer thing. New things quickly grew cheap, and they wanted those that were newer still. The apostle, therefore, “being thus called to declare the new doctrine whereof he spake, to an assembly consisting of senators, philosophers, rhetoricians, and statesmen, willingly embraced the opportunity; and, in a most eloquent discourse, prepared his illustrious auditors for receiving that doctrine which appeared to them so strange, by showing them the absurdity of the commonly-received idolatry, and by speaking on that delicate subject with an address, and temper, and strength of reasoning, which would have done honour to the greatest orators of Greece or Rome.” — Macknight.

21. Strangers—Including the students of philosophy, who at this age resorted to Athens as the most enlightened school of the world. Hear some new thing—Long anterior to Luke, Demosthenes, the great orator, rebuked the Athenians for lounging in the agora with their eternal “What is the news?” when they should have been marching against their dangerous enemy, Philip of Macedon.

V. 22. 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!

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.] kata panta wv deisidaimonesterouv umav qewrw; 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 “Acts 17:34”

Verse 22. Then Paul stood (Greek, staqeiv, 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, kata panta wv deisidaimonesterouv, 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,

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.) Paul’s Speech at the Areopagus, 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 deidw, to fear or reverence, and daimwn, god, demi-god, or supernatural being, good or bad. The Greek compound has not Qeov, 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.

V. 23. I found an altar-Some suppose this was set up by Socrates, to express in a covert way his devotion to the only true God, while he derided the plurality of the heathen gods, for which he was condemned to death: and others, that whoever erected this altar, did it in honour to the God of Israel, of whom there was no image, and whose name Jehovah was never made known to the idolatrous Gentiles.

Him proclaim I unto you-Thus he fixes the wandering attention of these blind philosophers; proclaiming to them an unknown, and yet not a new God.

Verse 23. Beheld your devotions] sebasmata, The objects of your worship; the different images of their gods which they held in religious veneration, sacrificial instruments, altars, &c., &c.

TO THE UNKNOWN GOD.] AGNWSTO QEW. That there was an altar at Athens thus inscribed, we cannot doubt after such a testimony; though St. Jerome questions it in part; for he says St. Paul found the inscription in the plural number, but, because he would not appear to acknowledge a plurality of gods, he quoted it in the singular: Verum, quia Paulus non pluribus Diis indigebat ignotis, sed uno tantum ignoto Deo, singulari verbo usus est. Epist. ad Magn. This is a most foolish saying: had Paul done so, how much would such a begging of the question have prejudiced his defence in the minds of his intelligent judges! Œcumenius intimates that St. Paul does not give the whole of the inscription which this famous altar bore; and which he says was the following: qeoiv asiav kai eurwphv kai aibuhv, qew agnwstw kai xenw, To the gods of Asia, and Europe, and Africa: TO THE UNKNOWN and strange GOD. Several eminent men suppose that this unknown god was the God of the Jews; and, as his name hwhy was considered by the Jews as ineffable, the qeov agnwstov may be considered as the anonymous god; the god whose name was not known, and must not be pronounced. That there was such a god acknowledged at Athens we have full proof. Lucian in his Philopatris, cap. xiii. p. 769, uses this form of an oath: nh ton agnwston ton en aqhnaiv, I swear by the UNKNOWN GOD at ATHENS. And again, cap. xxix. 180: hmeiv de ton en aqhnaiv agnwston efeurontev kai proskunhsantev, ceirav eiv ouranon ekteinantev, toutw eucaristhsomen wv kataxiwqentev, &c. We have found out the UNKNOWN god at ATHENS-and worshipped him with our hands stretched up to heaven; and we will gave thanks unto him, as being thought worthy to be subject to this power. Bp. Pearce properly asks, Is it likely that Lucian, speaking thus, (whether in jest or in earnest,) should not have had some notion of there being at Athens an altar inscribed to the unknown God? Philostratus, in vit. Apollon. vi. 3, notices the same thing, though he appears to refer to several altars thus inscribed: kai tauta aqhnhsi, ou kai agnwstwn qeon bwmoi idruntai, And this at ATHENS, where there are ALTARS even to the UNKNOWN GODS. Pausanias, in Attic. cap. 1. p. 4, edit. Kuhn., says that at Athens there are bwmoi qewn twn onomazomenwn agnwstwn, altars of gods which are called, The UNKNOWN ones. Minutius Felix says of the Romans, Aras extruunt etiam ignotis numinibus. “They even build altars to UNKNOWN DIVINITIES.” And Tertullian, contra Marcion, says, Invenio plane Diis ignotis aras prostitutas: sed Attica idolatria est. “I find altars allotted to the worship of unknown gods: but this is an Attic idolatry.” Now, though in these last passages, both gods and altars are spoken of in the plural number; yet it is reasonable to suppose that, on each, or upon some one of them, the inscription agnwstw qew, To the unknown god, was actually found. The thing had subsisted long and had got from Athens to Rome in the days of Tertullian and Minutius Felix. See Bp. Pearce and Dr. Cudworth, to whose researches this note is much indebted.

Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship] There is here a fine paronomasia, or play on the words. The apostle tells them that (on their system) they were a very religious people-that they had an altar inscribed, agnwstw qew, to the unknown God: him therefore, says he, whom, agnountev, ye unknowingly worship, I proclaim to you. Assuming it as a truth, that, as the true God was not known by them, and that there was an altar dedicated to the unknown god, his God was that god whose nature and operations he now proceeded to declare. By this fine turn he eluded the force of that law which made it a capital offense to introduce any new god into the state, and of the breach of which he was charged, Acts 17:18; and thus he showed that he was bringing neither new god nor new worship among them; but only explaining the worship of one already acknowledged by the state, though not as yet known.

Verse 23. As I passed by — Or, passed along the streets of your city; and beheld your devotions — Greek, ta sebasmata umwn, the objects of your worship, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD — Because Paul here tells the Athenians, that the true God was he whom they ignorantly worshipped under this title, some learned men have supposed that the altar he speaks of was raised to the God of the Jews; concerning whose power, in the destruction of the Egyptians and Canaanites, the ancient Athenians had received some obscure reports; and that, because the Jews carefully concealed his name, and had no image of him, the Athenians erected no statue to him, but worshipped him under the appellation of THE UNKNOWN GOD. Others think this altar was erected by Socrates, to express his devotions to the only true God, (while he derided the plurality of the heathen gods, for which he was condemned to death,) of whom the Athenians had no idea, and whose nature, he insinuated by this inscription, was far above the reach of human comprehension. See Dr. Wellwood’s Introduction to his translation of The Banquet of Xenophon. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship — Greek, on oun agnoountev eusebeite, whom therefore ye worship, or, toward whom ye are piously disposed, not knowing him; him declare I — Greek, touton egw kataggellw, him proclaim I, unto you — Thus he fixes the wandering attention of these blind philosophers; proclaiming to them an unknown, and yet not a new God; and alluding to their words, (verse 20,) he seemeth to be a proclaimer of strange gods.

Ver. 23. I found an altar with this inscription, Agnwstw Qew, to the unknown God. How this would rivet their attention, and touch their pride of science. What, with all their philosophy, ignorant of the God that made them; who had corrected their sins with afflictions, and given them abundant harvests! The inscription was in the plural number, but Paul turns it to the singular. Diis Asiæ, et Europæ, et Africæ, Diis ignotis et peregrinis: gods of Asia, and Europe, and Africa, gods of unknown and strange nations. Laertius reports, and no one discredits him, that once when the Athenians were afflicted with a plague, and when all the gods of the country were fatigued with sacrifices, that Epimenides persuaded them to erect this altar to the unknown gods, who had visited them with this pestilence, praying that they would accept their sacrifices, and avert the calamity. — This was a happy exordium for Paul: he had not been idle at Athens. This God, being the Maker of all worlds, and the giver of all good, expects a higher worship than that of gifts, and gifts which he himself has first given. He expects us to seek him with our whole heart, and feel after him; feel, as Paul says, the mighty working of his power; the peace, the joy, the love of God shed abroad in the heart.

23. Devotions—The Greek word signifies rather the apparatus of worship, such as temples, altars, and the like. An altar—Amid the countless monuments of idolatry a single altar, alone, seemed to turn from all the deities of the Pantheon, and long for the unknown Infinite. From this pregnant text Paul can deduce God and Christ. “We should make use,” says Stier, “of that modicum of truth that lies concealed in error.” The unknown God—Rather, to an unknown God, or to God unknown. How, it is asked, could the apostle truly say that the unknown God was in fact Jehovah? For to him, a preacher of truth and righteousness, no rhetorical license can be allowed. We are told that there were at Athens altars erected to unknown gods. Thus Philostratus says, Aqhnhsin ou kai agnwstwn qewn bwmoi idruntai—At Athens, where are built altars to unknown gods. And Pausanias says, in his description of Attica, that altars of unknown gods were in the Phaleric harbour of Athens. The language does not unequivocally decide whether each single altar was devoted to a single unknown god, or to several, or all. But, first, we learn by these passages, at any rate, that the Athenians did erect altars to unknown divine power; and, second, we may then fairly allow the apostle’s word to decide for the singular. We also plentifully know that paganism often felt an anxiety as to what god it had offended, or ought to thank for some providential flavour. So the prayer of Horace: “O deorum quiequid in coelo regit,” (Epist. 5:1,) “O whichever of the gods rules in the sky!” And this passage, addressing a single unknown god, confirms the singular interpretation of the above two Greek quotations. To Horace the apostle might have most truly responded, “Whom you, unknowing him, worship, Him declare I unto you.” Ignorantly—Unknowing; namely, the God worshipped. In unfolding here the sublimity of the divine attributes there seems to us a triad which has escaped the notice of commentators. From God’s illimitable nature he argues the insufficiency of temples, (verse 24;) from God’s self-sufficiency, the needlessness of offerings, and so of altars, (verse 25;) from the infinite spirituality, the folly of idol statuary, (26-29.) These are attacks on the threefold concrete forms of paganism.

V. 24. God who made the world-Thus is demonstrated even to reason, the one true, good God; absolutely different from the creatures, from every part of the visible creation.

Verse 24. God that made the world, &c.] Though the Epicureans held that the world was not made by God, but was the effect of a fortuitous concourse of atoms, yet this opinion was not popular; and the Stoics held the contrary: St. Paul assumes, as an acknowledged truth, that there was a God who made the world and all things. 2. That this God could not be confined within temples made with hands, as he was the Lord or governor of heaven and earth. 3. That, by fair consequence, the gods whom they worshipped, which were shut up in their temples could not be this God; and they must be less than the places in which they were contained. This was a strong, decisive stroke against the whole system of the Grecian idolatry.

Verses 24-26. God that made the world — Thus is demonstrated, even to reason, the one, true, good God; absolutely different from the creatures, from every part of the visible creation. Seeing he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands — God hath no need of temples to dwell in, seeing he hath made the world, and is the Lord, or possessor, of the universe. Ye, therefore, greatly err in thinking, that by erecting magnificent temples and images, and by consecrating them, ye draw God down into them, and prevail with him to reside among you in an especial manner. That vulgar notion is unworthy of men whose minds are improved by science, and who, from God’s having made the world, ought to know that his presence is not confined to temples made by men. Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing — Or, person, the word tinov equally taking in both: that is, Neither is the true God worshipped with sacrifices and meats prepared by men’s hands, if these things are offered to him, as though he needed to be fed with the fruits of the earth, and with the flesh of beasts, and refreshed with the steams of sacrifices and incense: seeing he giveth to all — That live and breathe, whether men or beasts; life — For in him we live; and breath — In him we move; and all things — For in him we are: whence it is evident that men can contribute nothing to his life or happiness. And hath made of one blood all nations of men — Hath from one man and woman multiplied the human race, so as to form those different nations which cover the face of the whole earth; and hath everywhere made a liberal provision for them, of all the necessaries of life. How then can ye fancy that he himself needs to be lodged, and clothed, and fed by men! By speaking thus, the apostle also showed them, in the most unaffected manner, that though he was a Jew, he was not enslaved to any narrow views, but looked on all mankind as his brethren. And hath determined the times before appointed — Hath also assigned to each of these nations their times of existence; and the bounds of their habitations — By mountains, seas, rivers, and the like; that is, the particular countries they were or are to inhabit, according as he had before appointed these things. By all which he shows, that he governs the world by a most wise providence, contrary to what you Epicureans teach, and also that his government is most free, contrary to the doctrine of the Stoics.

24. God—A personal being; not a blind force or law of nature; not the sum total of nature’s laws personified; but One who exists independently of nature. Made the world—The world not being a part of Him. nor emanating necessarily from him, nor he from the world; but he being the voluntary Creator of the world. Dwelleth not in temples—He is limitless, though a person; and, therefore, can be circumscribed within no temples.

V. 25. Neither is he served as though he needed any thing-or person-The Greek word equally takes in both.

To all-That live and breathe;-in him we live;

and breathe-In him we move. By breathing life is continued. I breathe this moment: the next is not in my power:

and all things-For in him we are. So exactly do the parts of this discourse answer each other.

Verse 25. Neither is worshiped with men’s hands] This is an indirect stroke against making of images, and offering of sacrifices: he is not worshipped with human hands, as if he needed any thing, or required to be represented under a particular form or attitude; nor has he required victims for his support; for it is impossible that he should need any thing who himself gives being, form, and life, to all creatures. Giveth-life, and breath, and all things] These words are elegantly introduced by St. Paul: God gives life, because he is the fountain of it: he gives breath, the faculty of breathing or respiration, by which this life is preserved; and though breathing or respiration, be the act of the animal, yet the pnohn, the faculty of breathing, and extracting from the atmosphere what serves as a pabulum of life, is given by the influence of God, and the continued power thus to respire, and extract that pure oxygen gas which is so evident a support of animal life, is as much the continued gift of God as life itself is. But, as much more is necessary to keep the animal machine in a state of repair, God gives the ta panta, all the other things which are requisite for this great and important purpose, that the end for which life was given may be fully answered. St. Paul also teaches that Divine worship is not enacted and established for GOD, but for the use of his creatures: he needs nothing that man can give him; for man has nothing but what he has received from the hand of his Maker.

Verses 24-26. God that made the world — Thus is demonstrated, even to reason, the one, true, good God; absolutely different from the creatures, from every part of the visible creation. Seeing he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands — God hath no need of temples to dwell in, seeing he hath made the world, and is the Lord, or possessor, of the universe. Ye, therefore, greatly err in thinking, that by erecting magnificent temples and images, and by consecrating them, ye draw God down into them, and prevail with him to reside among you in an especial manner. That vulgar notion is unworthy of men whose minds are improved by science, and who, from God’s having made the world, ought to know that his presence is not confined to temples made by men. Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing — Or, person, the word tinov equally taking in both: that is, Neither is the true God worshipped with sacrifices and meats prepared by men’s hands, if these things are offered to him, as though he needed to be fed with the fruits of the earth, and with the flesh of beasts, and refreshed with the steams of sacrifices and incense: seeing he giveth to all — That live and breathe, whether men or beasts; life — For in him we live; and breath — In him we move; and all things — For in him we are: whence it is evident that men can contribute nothing to his life or happiness. And hath made of one blood all nations of men — Hath from one man and woman multiplied the human race, so as to form those different nations which cover the face of the whole earth; and hath everywhere made a liberal provision for them, of all the necessaries of life. How then can ye fancy that he himself needs to be lodged, and clothed, and fed by men! By speaking thus, the apostle also showed them, in the most unaffected manner, that though he was a Jew, he was not enslaved to any narrow views, but looked on all mankind as his brethren. And hath determined the times before appointed — Hath also assigned to each of these nations their times of existence; and the bounds of their habitations — By mountains, seas, rivers, and the like; that is, the particular countries they were or are to inhabit, according as he had before appointed these things. By all which he shows, that he governs the world by a most wise providence, contrary to what you Epicureans teach, and also that his government is most free, contrary to the doctrine of the Stoics.

25. As though he needed any thing—A fatal blow at the whole system of pagan rituals, which assumed that its sacrifices and incense gratified the appetites and senses of the human-like deities.

V. 26. He hath made of one blood the whole nation of men-By this expression the apostle showed them in the most unaffected manner, that though he was a Jew, he was not enslaved to any narrow views, but looked on all mankind as his brethren:

having determined the times-That it is God who gave men the earth to inhabit, Paul proves from the order of times and places, showing the highest wisdom of the Disposer, superior to all human counsels. And the bounds of their habitation-By mountains, seas, rivers, and the like.

Verse 26. Hath made of one blood] In AB, some others, with the Coptic, Æthiopic, Vulgate, Itala, Clement, and Bede, the word aimatov, blood, is omitted. He hath made of one (meaning Adam) all nations of men; but aima, blood, is often used by the best writers for race, stock, kindred: so Homer, Iliad, vi. ver. 211:

tauthv toi genehv te kai aimatov eucomai einai.

I glory in being of that same race and blood.

So Virgil, Æn. viii. ver. 142, says;

Sic genus amborum scindit se SANGUINE ab uno.

Thus, from one stock, do both our stems divide.

See many examples of this form in Kypke. The Athenians had a foolish notion that they were self-produced, and were the aboriginals of mankind. Lucian ridicules this opinion, aqhnaioi fasi touv prwtouv anqrwpouv ek thv attikhv anafonai, kaqaper ta lacana. The Athenians say that the first men sprung up in Attica, like radishes. Luc. Philo-pseud. 3.

To dwell on all the face of the earth] God in his wisdom produced the whole human race from one man; and, having in his providence scattered them over the face of the earth, by showing them that they sprang from one common source, has precluded all those contentious wars and bloodshed which would necessarily have taken place among the nations of the world, as each in its folly might have arrogated to itself a higher and more excellent origin than another.

And hath determined the times before appointed] Instead of protetagmenouv kairouv, the times before appointed, ABDE, and more than forty others, with both the Syriac, all the Arabic, the Coptic, Æthiopic, MS. Slavonian, Vulgate, and Itala, read prostetagmenouv kairouv, the appointed times. The difference between the two words is this: protassein signifies to place before others; but prostassein is to command, decree, appoint. The prostetagmenoi kairoi, are the constituted or decreed times; that is, the times appointed by his providence, on which the several families should go to those countries where his wisdom designed they should dwell. See Genesis 10:5-32; and see Pearce and Rosenmuller.

And the bounds of their habitations] Every family being appointed to a particular place, that their posterity might possess it for the purposes for which infinite wisdom and goodness gave them their being, and the place of their abode. Every nation had its lot thus appointed by God, as truly as the Israelites had the land of Canaan. But the removal of the Jews from their own land shows that a people may forfeit their original inheritance, and thus the Canaanites have been supplanted by the Jews; the Jews by the Saracens; the Saracens by the Turks; the Greeks by the Romans; the Romans by the Goths and Vandals; and so of others. See the notes on Genesis 11:1-32.

Verses 24-26. God that made the world — Thus is demonstrated, even to reason, the one, true, good God; absolutely different from the creatures, from every part of the visible creation. Seeing he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands — God hath no need of temples to dwell in, seeing he hath made the world, and is the Lord, or possessor, of the universe. Ye, therefore, greatly err in thinking, that by erecting magnificent temples and images, and by consecrating them, ye draw God down into them, and prevail with him to reside among you in an especial manner. That vulgar notion is unworthy of men whose minds are improved by science, and who, from God’s having made the world, ought to know that his presence is not confined to temples made by men. Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing — Or, person, the word tinov equally taking in both: that is, Neither is the true God worshipped with sacrifices and meats prepared by men’s hands, if these things are offered to him, as though he needed to be fed with the fruits of the earth, and with the flesh of beasts, and refreshed with the steams of sacrifices and incense: seeing he giveth to all — That live and breathe, whether men or beasts; life — For in him we live; and breath — In him we move; and all things — For in him we are: whence it is evident that men can contribute nothing to his life or happiness. And hath made of one blood all nations of men — Hath from one man and woman multiplied the human race, so as to form those different nations which cover the face of the whole earth; and hath everywhere made a liberal provision for them, of all the necessaries of life. How then can ye fancy that he himself needs to be lodged, and clothed, and fed by men! By speaking thus, the apostle also showed them, in the most unaffected manner, that though he was a Jew, he was not enslaved to any narrow views, but looked on all mankind as his brethren. And hath determined the times before appointed — Hath also assigned to each of these nations their times of existence; and the bounds of their habitations — By mountains, seas, rivers, and the like; that is, the particular countries they were or are to inhabit, according as he had before appointed these things. By all which he shows, that he governs the world by a most wise providence, contrary to what you Epicureans teach, and also that his government is most free, contrary to the doctrine of the Stoics.

26. Made of one blood—The apostle does not here explicitly declare that all men have descended from one pair of parents; though, in the opinion of the best philosophers, he states a fact which implies it. He asserts the unity of the living nature (for “the blood is the life”) of men. One of the greatest proofs of the oneness of man’s nature is the power of intermingling the blood in generation. It is a general, if not universal, test of a species that the sexual union be fertile. All the varieties of man are by this test proved to be the same species; and all other earthly beings are by the same test excluded from humanity. Anatomically, “the missing link” between man and brute has, up to this date, never been discovered; and, spiritually, even Professor Huxley declares that the difference “is practically infinite.” Times… bounds—God has not abandoned man, like a pile of crawling maggots, to pure random. He has preconstructed for his race a scheme and a history, with predetermined periods of time and boundaries in space.

V. 27. If haply-The way is open; God is ready to be found. But he will lay no force upon man;

they might feel after him-This is in the midst between seeking and finding. Feeling being the lowest and grossest of all our senses, is fitly applied to the low knowledge of God;

though he be not far from every one of us-We need not go far to seek or find him. He is very near us; in us. It is only perverse reason which thinks he is afar off.

Verse 27. That they should seek the Lord] This is a conclusion drawn from the preceding statement. God, who is infinitely great and self-sufficient, has manifested himself as the maker of the world, the creator, preserver, and governor of men. He has assigned them their portion, and dispensed to them their habitations, and the various blessings of his providence, to the end that they should seek him in all his works. Feel after him] yhlafhseian auton, That they might grope after him, as a person does his way who is blind or blindfolded. The Gentiles, who had not a revelation, must grope after God, as the principle of spiritual life, that they might find him to be a Spirit, and the source of all intellectual happiness; and the apostle seems to state that none need despair of finding this fountain of goodness, because he is not far from every one of us.

Verses 27, 28. That they should seek, &c. — As if he had said, This most wise and free government of the nations of men, God carries on through all ages for this purpose, that they may be led to seek the Lord — That is, to seek the knowledge, fear, and love of him; to seek his favour, his Spirit, and communion with him: if haply — The way is open; God is ready to be found; but he will lay no force upon any man; they might feel after him — Feeling is the lowest and grossest of all our senses, and is therefore applied to that low kind of the knowledge of God which some of the heathen possessed, and which is first attained before higher discoveries of him are made. Though he be not — Kai toi ge, and truly indeed he is not, far from any one of us — Therefore, though he be not the object of men’s senses, we need not go far to seek or find him. He is very near us; yea, in us. It is only blind, perverse reason which thinks he is far off. For in him — Not in ourselves; we live, move, and have our being — This denotes his necessary, intimate, and most efficacious presence. The structure of our bodies, and the union of our souls to these exquisite pieces of material mechanism, together with the noble faculties of our minds, wherein we resemble God, and the admirable end for which this wonderful composition of soul and body is formed, afford to every man, not only an idea, but a proof of the Deity supporting and animating him: so that no words can better express, than these of the apostle do, the continual and necessary dependance of all created beings, in their existence and all their operations, on the first, the universal, and almighty Cause, which the truest philosophy, as well as divinity teaches. As certain also of your own poets have said — Aratus, whose words these are, and who also added another sentence, equally just and striking, namely, We are his offspring, especially in respect of intelligence, and other mental powers, similar to his, with which we are endowed. This poet, Aratus, was an Athenian, who lived almost three hundred years before this time. The words are also to be found, with the alteration of one letter only, in the hymn of Cleanthes to the Supreme Being, one of the purest and finest pieces of natural religion in the whole world of pagan antiquity.

27. That—Man is created a social being that he maybe a religious being. He is enabled to form into peoples and nations that he may organically adore the God of all.

V. 28. In him-Not in ourselves, we live, and move, and have our being-This denotes his necessary, intimate, and most efficacious presence. No words can better express the continual and necessary dependence of all created beings, in their existence and all their operations, on the first and almighty cause, which the truest philosophy as well as divinity teaches. As certain also of your own poets have said-Aratus, whose words these are, was an Athenian, who lived almost three hundred years before this time. They are likewise to be found, with the alteration of one letter only, in the hymn of Cleanthes to Jupiter or the supreme being, one of the purest and finest pieces of natural religion in the whole world of Pagan antiquity.

Verse 28. For in him we live, and move, and have our being] He is the very source of our existence: the principle of life comes from him: the principle of motion, also, comes from him; one of the most difficult things in nature to be properly apprehended; and a strong proof of the continual presence and energy of the Deity.

And have our being] kai esmen, And we are: we live in him, move in him, and are in him. Without him we not only can do nothing, but without him we are nothing. We are, i.e. we continue to be, because of his continued, present, all-pervading, and supporting energy. There is a remarkable saying in Synopsis Sohar, p. 104. “The holy blessed God never does evil to any man. He only withdraws his gracious presence from him, and then he necessarily perisheth.” This is philosophical and correct. As certain also of your own poets] Probably he means not only Aratus, in whose poem, entitled Phænomena, the words quoted by St. Paul are to be found literatim, tou gar kai genov esmen; but also Cleanthus, in whose Hymn to Jupiter the same words (ek sou gar genov esmen) occur. But the sentiment is found in several others, being very common among the more enlightened philosophers. By saying your own poets, he does not mean poets born at Athens, but merely Grecian poets, Aratus and Cleanthus being chief.

We are also his offspring.] tou gar kai genov esmen The Phænomena of Aratus, in which these words are found, begins thus:- Ek Diov arcwmesqa, ton oudepotJ andrev ewmen

Arrhton, mestai de diov pasai men aguiai,

Pasai dJ anqrwpwn agorai, mesth de qalassa,

Kai lemenev, panth de diov kecrhmeqa pantev,

TOU GAR KAIGENOS ESMEN, odJ hpiov anqrwpoisi

Dexia shmainei. k. t. l.

With Jove we must begin; nor from him rove;

Him always praise, for all is full of Jove!

He fills all places where mankind resort,

The wide-spread sea, with every shelt’ring port.

Jove’s presence fills all space, upholds this ball;

All need his aid; his power sustains us all.

For we his offspring are; and he in love

Points out to man his labour from above:

Where signs unerring show when best the soil,

By well-timed culture, shall repay our toil, &c., &c. Aratus was a Cilician, one of St. Paul’s own countrymen, and with his writings St. Paul was undoubtedly well acquainted, though he had flourished about 300 years before that time.

Verses 27, 28. That they should seek, &c. — As if he had said, This most wise and free government of the nations of men, God carries on through all ages for this purpose, that they may be led to seek the Lord — That is, to seek the knowledge, fear, and love of him; to seek his favour, his Spirit, and communion with him: if haply — The way is open; God is ready to be found; but he will lay no force upon any man; they might feel after him — Feeling is the lowest and grossest of all our senses, and is therefore applied to that low kind of the knowledge of God which some of the heathen possessed, and which is first attained before higher discoveries of him are made. Though he be not — Kai toi ge, and truly indeed he is not, far from any one of us — Therefore, though he be not the object of men’s senses, we need not go far to seek or find him. He is very near us; yea, in us. It is only blind, perverse reason which thinks he is far off. For in him — Not in ourselves; we live, move, and have our being — This denotes his necessary, intimate, and most efficacious presence. The structure of our bodies, and the union of our souls to these exquisite pieces of material mechanism, together with the noble faculties of our minds, wherein we resemble God, and the admirable end for which this wonderful composition of soul and body is formed, afford to every man, not only an idea, but a proof of the Deity supporting and animating him: so that no words can better express, than these of the apostle do, the continual and necessary dependance of all created beings, in their existence and all their operations, on the first, the universal, and almighty Cause, which the truest philosophy, as well as divinity teaches. As certain also of your own poets have said — Aratus, whose words these are, and who also added another sentence, equally just and striking, namely, We are his offspring, especially in respect of intelligence, and other mental powers, similar to his, with which we are endowed. This poet, Aratus, was an Athenian, who lived almost three hundred years before this time. The words are also to be found, with the alteration of one letter only, in the hymn of Cleanthes to the Supreme Being, one of the purest and finest pieces of natural religion in the whole world of pagan antiquity.

Ver. 28. For we are also his offspring. The apostle not only disavows the charge of being a setter-forth of strange gods, but also of strange doctrine, for he here literally quotes the words of Aratus, their own poet. I give this from Dr. Cudworth’s true intellectual system, with the old English version, which how uncouth soever the verse may be, will please, as giving the true sense of the Greek.

Ek Diov arcwmesqa, ton oudepot’ andrev ewmen

Arrhton: mestai de Diov pasai men aguiai,

Pasai d’ anqrwpwn agorai mesth de qalassa

Kai limenev: panta de Diov kecrhmeqa pantev.

Tou gar kai genov esmen.

Let us begin our work with Jove, of whom

We men are never silent, and of whom

All things are full, he passing through, and being In every place, whose kind and bounteous hand

We all make use of, and enjoy, for we

His offspring also are.

This Aratus the poet was a native of Solene, not far from Tarsus. He flourished in the year of Rome 472. His poem, The Phænomena, was translated into Latin by many of the learned Romans.

28. In him we live—We are surrounded by his pervading Spirit as by an atmosphere; yet, contrary to pantheism, distinct from him. As—This as refers not to the last clause, but back to verse 26, so as to include the whole thought that God has so formed man as that man should realize him. His offspring—And so cognate with him, and thereby competent to appreciate him. We are the offspring of God only, however, in our spiritual nature. And yet we are so spirit as to be like God, yet not identical with him; there being between the spirit of man and the spirit of God, not only an ineffable sameness, but an ineffable difference. Your own poets—And here the poets, speaking from our higher and more spiritual nature, are the best authority. More than one Greek poet had expressed this sentiment. The very words are contained in the Hymn of Cleanthes, one of the most sublime, and absolutely the most Christianlike production of pagan antiquity. Nearly the same words are found in Aratus, a poet, born, like the apostle, in Cilicia.

V. 29. We ought not to think-A tender expression especially in the first per son plural. As if he had said, Can God himself be a less noble being than we who are his offspring? Nor does he only here deny, that these are like God, but that they have any analogy to him at all, so as to be capable of representing him.

Verse 29. Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, &c.] This inference of the apostle was very strong and conclusive; and his argument runs thus: “If we are the offspring of God, he cannot be like those images of gold, silver, and stone, which are formed by the art and device of man; for the parent must resemble his offspring. Seeing, therefore, that we are living and intelligent beings, HE from whom we have derived that being must be living and intelligent. It is necessary, also, that the object of religious worship should be much more excellent than the worshipper; but a man is, by innumerable degrees, more excellent than an image made out of gold, silver, or stone; and yet it would be impious to worship a man: how much more so to worship these images as gods! Every man in the Areopagus must have felt the power of this conclusion; and, taking it for granted that they had felt it, he proceeds:-

Verse

Verse 29. For as much then as we are the offspring of God — We, with all the powers and faculties of our rational nature, and since these bear but a very imperfect and distant resemblance of those original, consummate, and infinite glories which shine forth in him; we ought not surely to think — A tender expression; especially in the first person plural: that the Godhead is like unto gold and silver. &c., graven by art and man’s device — For such things, conveying no idea of mind, if they be likenesses of God, they represent him as being mere matter, void of intelligence; but if he be so, how could he give intelligence, and all the other faculties of mind to us? As if he had said, Can God himself be a less noble Being than we who are his offspring? Nor does he only deny here that these images are like God, but he denies, also, that they have any analogy to him at all, so as to be capable of representing him in any degree or respect.

29. Forasmuch—The apostle then draws his inference: if we are God’s offspring, as spirits, and of spirits there can be neither picture nor image, we ought so to appreciate the omnipotent Spirit as to see that he cannot be represented by base marble or metal, with which he is in absolute contrast. Graven—Carved or sculptured. The Greek word is a noun in apposition with the preceding norms: “gold, silver, or stone, the shapement of man’s art and device.”

V. 30. The times of ignorance-What! does he object ignorance to the knowing Athenians? Yes, and they acknowledge it by this very altar. God overlooked-As one paraphrases, "The beams of his eye did in a manner shoot over it." He did not appear to take notice of them, by sending express messages to them as he did to the Jews. But now-This day, this hour, saith Paul, puts an end to the Divine forbearance, and brings either greater mercy or punishment. Now he commandeth all men every where to repent-There is a dignity and grandeur in this expression, becoming an ambassador from the King of heaven. And this universal demand of repentance declared universal guilt in the strongest manner, and admirably confronted the pride of the haughtiest Stoic of them all. At the same time it bore down the idle plea of fatality. For how could any one repent of doing what he could not but have done?

30. The times of this ignorance God winked at] He who has an indisputable right to demand the worship of all his creatures has mercifully overlooked those acts of idolatry which have disgraced the world and debased man; but now, as he has condescended to give a revelation of himself, he commands, as the sovereign, all men every where, over every part of his dominions, to repent, metanoein, to change their views, designs, and practices; because he hath appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness; and, as justice will then be done, no sinner, no persevering idolater, shall escape punishment. The word uperidein, which we translate, to wink at, signifies simply to look over; and seems to be here used in the sense of passing by, not particularly noticing it. So God overlooked, or passed by, the times of heathenish ignorance: as he had not given them the talent of Divine revelation, so he did not require the improvement of that talent; but now, as he had given them that revelation, he would no longer overlook, or pass by, their ignorance or its fruits.

Verses 30, 31. And the times of this ignorance — What! Does he object ignorance to the learned and knowing Athenians? Yes, and they acknowledged it by this very altar; God winked at — Greek, uperidwn, having overlooked, bearing with it, as if he did not take notice of it: that is, in his great long-suffering, he suffered mankind to go on in their course of ignorance and idolatry, without interrupting them in it, by sending express messages to them, by divinely-commissioned instructers, as he did to the Jews; because he meant to show them experimentally the insufficiency of their own reason in matters of religion; but now — This day, this hour, saith Paul, puts an end to the divine forbearance, and brings either greater mercy or punishment. Now he commandeth all men everywhere to repent — Of their ignorance, idolatry, and wickedness. There is a dignity and grandeur in this language of the apostle becoming an ambassador from the King of heaven. And this universal demand of repentance declared universal guilt in the strongest manner: and admirably confronted the pride of the haughtiest Stoic of them all. At the same time it bore down the idle plea of fatality. For how could any one repent of doing what he could not but have done. Because he hath appointed a day, &c. — To persuade them more effectually to repent, God hath set before mankind the greatest of all motives, that of a future judgment. He hath appointed a day — A great and awful day in which he will judge the world — Even the whole world; in righteousness — And will pass a final sentence of happiness or misery on each, according to his true character and behaviour. How fitly does the apostle speak thus in their supreme court of justice! By that man whom he hath ordained — For that important purpose. Thus he speaks, suiting himself to the capacity of his hearers. Whereof he hath given assurance, &c., in that he hath raised him from the dead — The resurrection of Jesus from the dead hath put the resurrection and judgment of all men beyond dispute: 1st, Because it hath confirmed the doctrine of Christ, one important branch of which was, that he would raise the dead and judge all mankind. 2d, Because God raised him from the dead, as on divers other accounts, so especially that he might judge mankind by him. We are by no means to imagine that this was all which the apostle intended to have said. But the indolence of some of his hearers, and the petulancy of others, cut him short. For when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked — Made a jest of it, as a despicable and incredible tale, not worthy to be any longer heard; thereby interrupting him. These were probably the Epicureans, who took offence at that which is a principal object of faith, from the pride of reason. And having once stumbled at this, they disbelieved all the rest; and so went down to righteous condemnation, under the guilt of having rejected a gospel, the proof of which they might have learned in one single day, but would not give themselves the trouble of examining: and this is the condemnation to which many among us are exposed. And others — More candid; said, We will hear thee again on this matter — And having said this, they put an end to the apostle’s discourse, and to the assembly, without allowing him an opportunity of showing how the resurrection of Jesus renders the resurrection and judgment of mankind probable; or of explaining the other fundamental doctrines of the gospel.

Ver. 30. The times of this ignorance God winked at. The period of that judicial blindness mentioned by the apostle, Romans 1:24-28, during which the gentile nations, however enlightened as to sciences, were awfully ignorant of God, and worshipped they knew not what. During this period the Lord had been instructing the world by his wonderful displays of judgment and mercy to the jewish nation. The gentiles were in this respect left to themselves. They had neither prophets, nor revelations, nor judgments, corresponding with their state of ignorance and crime. Yet they were favoured with all the blessings of nature and of providence, as if the God of nature were not aware of their wickedness. St. Paul seems to have in view the words of Solomon: Wisdom 11:23. “Thou lookest another way, and beholdest not the sins of men that they may repent.”

30. This ignorance—The ignorance expressed in verse 23, and exemplified in the idolatrous scene around him. Winked at—The Greek word signifies overlooked, that is, permitted to pass on as a temporary dispensation. But now—The proclamation of the Gospel terminates the period of excusable ignorance. Knowledge, to whomsoever it comes, creates new obligations and destroys ancient excuses. Repent—Of an ignorance of God and a base idolatry now not only indefensible, but inexcusable.

V. 31. He hath appointed a day in which he will judge the world-How fitly does he speak this, in their supreme court of justice? By the man-So he speaks, suiting himself to the capacity of his hearers. Whereof he hath given assurance to all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead-God raising Jesus demonstrated hereby, that he was to be the glorious Judge of all. We are by no means to imagine that this was all which the apostle intended to have said, but the indolence of some of his hearers and the petulancy of others cut him short.

Verse 31. He hath appointed a day] He has fixed the time in which he will judge the world, though he has not revealed this time to man. By that man whom he hath ordained] He has also appointed the judge, by whom the inhabitants of the earth are to be tried.

Whereof he hath given assurance] pistin parascwn pasin, Having given to all this indubitable proof, that Jesus Christ shall judge the world, by raising him from the dead. The sense of the argument is this: “Jesus Christ, whom we preach as the Saviour of men, has repeatedly told his followers that he would judge the world; and has described to us, at large, the whole of the proceedings of that awful time, Matthew 25:31, &c.; John 5:25. Though he was put to death by the Jews, and thus he became a victim for sin, yet God raised him from the dead. By raising him from the dead, God has set his seal to the doctrines he has taught: one of these doctrines is, that he shall judge the world; his resurrection, established by the most incontrovertible evidence, is therefore a proof, an incontestable proof, that he shall judge the world, according to his own declaration.”

Verses 30, 31. And the times of this ignorance — What! Does he object ignorance to the learned and knowing Athenians? Yes, and they acknowledged it by this very altar; God winked at — Greek, uperidwn, having overlooked, bearing with it, as if he did not take notice of it: that is, in his great long-suffering, he suffered mankind to go on in their course of ignorance and idolatry, without interrupting them in it, by sending express messages to them, by divinely-commissioned instructers, as he did to the Jews; because he meant to show them experimentally the insufficiency of their own reason in matters of religion; but now — This day, this hour, saith Paul, puts an end to the divine forbearance, and brings either greater mercy or punishment. Now he commandeth all men everywhere to repent — Of their ignorance, idolatry, and wickedness. There is a dignity and grandeur in this language of the apostle becoming an ambassador from the King of heaven. And this universal demand of repentance declared universal guilt in the strongest manner: and admirably confronted the pride of the haughtiest Stoic of them all. At the same time it bore down the idle plea of fatality. For how could any one repent of doing what he could not but have done. Because he hath appointed a day, &c. — To persuade them more effectually to repent, God hath set before mankind the greatest of all motives, that of a future judgment. He hath appointed a day — A great and awful day in which he will judge the world — Even the whole world; in righteousness — And will pass a final sentence of happiness or misery on each, according to his true character and behaviour. How fitly does the apostle speak thus in their supreme court of justice! By that man whom he hath ordained — For that important purpose. Thus he speaks, suiting himself to the capacity of his hearers. Whereof he hath given assurance, &c., in that he hath raised him from the dead — The resurrection of Jesus from the dead hath put the resurrection and judgment of all men beyond dispute: 1st, Because it hath confirmed the doctrine of Christ, one important branch of which was, that he would raise the dead and judge all mankind. 2d, Because God raised him from the dead, as on divers other accounts, so especially that he might judge mankind by him. We are by no means to imagine that this was all which the apostle intended to have said. But the indolence of some of his hearers, and the petulancy of others, cut him short. For when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked — Made a jest of it, as a despicable and incredible tale, not worthy to be any longer heard; thereby interrupting him. These were probably the Epicureans, who took offence at that which is a principal object of faith, from the pride of reason. And having once stumbled at this, they disbelieved all the rest; and so went down to righteous condemnation, under the guilt of having rejected a gospel, the proof of which they might have learned in one single day, but would not give themselves the trouble of examining: and this is the condemnation to which many among us are exposed. And others — More candid; said, We will hear thee again on this matter — And having said this, they put an end to the apostle’s discourse, and to the assembly, without allowing him an opportunity of showing how the resurrection of Jesus renders the resurrection and judgment of mankind probable; or of explaining the other fundamental doctrines of the gospel.

31. A day—See note on John 11:24. That man—Crowning the scheme of human history is this judgment-day, at which man, the image and offspring of God, is by man to be judged. Ordained—As the God of all ages has appointed the day, so he, the God of all nations, hath ordained the man. Assurance to all—As the day and the man are great world-wide facts, so of them God has sent forth a world-wide announcement. From the dead—That a common man should be raised from the dead is not credible, for God would not do such a thing. But that a wonderful man, an exceptional man, a miraculous man, the race-born Son of man, ordained by God and set forth by him, should be raised, is credible. And when God has done such a thing, then he furnishes men good reason to believe when he declares that the man raised from the dead will judge the world in righteousness.

These Athenians now hear the fact that a man was raised from the dead, separate from all its miraculous and divine connexions, just as incredulously as we would hear that a man was raised from the dead in some neighbouring country town. They listen to it as a thing not to be listened to. And so, in their peremptory haste, they sink the topmost man of the human race, the topmost event of human history, and the topmost day of human existence, into the ordinary, and so into the false.

V. 32. Some mocked-Interrupting him thereby. They took offence at that which is the principal motive of faith, from the pride of reason. And having once stumbled at this, they rejected all the rest.

Verse 32. When they heard of the resurrection, &c.] Paul undoubtedly had not finished his discourse: it is likely that he was about to have proclaimed salvation through Christ crucified; but, on hearing of the resurrection of the body, the assembly instantly broke up; the Epicureans mocking, ecleuazon, began to laugh; and the Stoics saying they would take another opportunity to hear him on that subject. And thus the assembly became dissolved before the apostle had time to finish his discourse, or to draw all the conclusions he had designed from the premises he had laid down. St. Stephen’s discourse was interrupted in a similar manner. See Acts 7:54, and the note there.

32. Some mocked… others said—The whole assembly forthwith divides itself into two classes. The first mocks, but seems inclined to stay. The second smoothly excuses itself and departs, postponing the further hearing indefinitely. Of the two—the uncivil ones who stay, and the civil ones who go—the apostle prefers the latter, and departs also. He soon departs for Corinth, with what feelings Luke does not intimate. But certain it is, from his own account, that for some reason he entered Corinth under a sense of most profound humiliation, 1 Corinthians 2:1-3. He felt at Thessalonica the treatment he had experienced at Philippi; did he feel at Corinth the pressure of his failure at Athens?

V. 33. So Paul departed-Leaving his hearers divided in their judgment.

Verse 33. So Paul departed from among them.] He could not be convicted of having done any thing contrary to the law; and, when the assembly broke up, he was permitted to go about his own business.

Verses 33, 34. So Paul departed from among them — Leaving his hearers divided in their judgment, and the generality of them in that deplorable state of ignorance, folly, and superstition, in which he found them; being himself astonished, no doubt, that men who professed wisdom were so little able to discern truth. Howbeit, certain men clave unto him — And inquired further into the evidence of that extraordinary doctrine which he taught concerning Jesus and his resurrection; the consequence of which was, that they believed the gospel, and made a public and courageous confession of it. Among whom was Dionysius the Areopagite — One of the judges of that court; and a woman named Damaris — One of considerable rank and character in the city; and others with them — Whose names it is not necessary here to mention. These, it seems, were the only persons Paul met with in this famous mart of learning, capable of seeing and acknowledging the absurdity of the prevailing idolatry! It is not said that Paul wrought any miracles at Athens; and the little success with which he preached, gives reason to suppose that he wrought none. Doubtless, this was by divine appointment, and probably to try what reception the gospel would meet with from learned and inquisitive men, when offered to them merely on the footing of its own reasonableness. The truth is, if such an experiment was anywhere to be made, in order to confute those in after times who should affirm that the general reception of the gospel, in the first stage, was owing not to miracles, but to the absurdities of heathenism, and to the reasonableness of the gospel doctrine, Athens surely was the place where the trial could be made with most advantage, and Paul’s oration in the Areopagus was the discourse which should have convinced reasonable men. Nevertheless, at Athens, where the human faculties were carried to the greatest perfection, the apostle was not able to convince his hearers of the folly of idolatry, nor of the reasonableness of worshipping and serving the one living and true God, by purity of mind and goodness of life!

V. 34. Among whom was even Dionysius the Areopagite-One of the judges of that court: on whom some spurious writings have been fathered in later ages, by those who are fond of high sounding nonsense.

Verse 34. Certain men clave unto him] Became affectionately united to him, and believed the doctrines he had preached.

Dionysius the Areopagite] There can be no doubt that this man was one of the judges of this great court, but whether the president or otherwise we cannot tell. Humanly speaking, his conversion must have been an acquisition of considerable importance to the Christian religion; for no person was a judge in the Areopagus who had not borne the office of archon, or chief governor of the city; and none bore the office of judge in this court who was not of the highest reputation among the people for his intelligence and exemplary conduct. In some of the popish writers we find a vast deal of groundless conjecture concerning Dionysius, who, they say, was first bishop of Athens, and raised to that dignity by Paul himself; that he was a martyr for the truth; that Damaris was his wife, &c., &c., concerning which the judicious Calmet says, Tout cela est de peu d’ autorite. “All this has little foundation.”

1. IN addition to what has been said in the notes on this subject, I may add, the original word deisidaimonesterov, from deidw, I fear, and daimwn, a demon, signifies, “greatly addicted to the worship of the invisible powers;” for, as the word daimwn signifies either a good or evil spirit, and deidw, I fear, signifies not only to fear in general, but also to pay religious reverence, the word must be here taken in its best sense; and so undoubtedly St. Paul intended it should; and so, doubtless, his audience understood him; for it would have been very imprudent to have charged them with superstition, which must have been extremely irritating, in the very commencement of a discourse in which he was to defend himself, and prove the truth of the Christian religion. He stated a fact, acknowledged by the best Greek writers; and he reasoned from that fact. The fact was that the Athenians were the most religious people in Greece, or, in other words, the most idolatrous: that there were in that city more altars, temples, sacrifices, and religious services, than in any other place. And independently of the authorities which may be quoted in support of this assertion, we may at once perceive the probability of it from the consideration that Athens was the grand university of Greece: that here philosophy and every thing relating to the worship of the gods was taught; and that religious services to the deities must be abundant. Look at our own universities of Oxford and Cambridge; here are more prayers, more religious acts and services, than in any other places in the nation, and very properly so. These were founded to be seminaries of learning and religion; and their very statutes suppose religion to be essential to learning; and their founders were in general religious characters, and endowed them for religious purposes. These, therefore, are not superstitious services; for, as superstition signifies “unnecessary fears or scruples in religion; observance of unnecessary and uncommanded rites or practices,”-JOHNSON, it cannot be said of those services which are founded on the positive command of God, for the more effectual help to religious feelings, or as a preventive of immoral practices. I consider the Athenians, therefore, acting in conformity to their own laws and religious institutions; and Paul grants that they were much addicted to religious performances: this he pays as a compliment, and then takes occasion to show that their religion was defective: they had not a right object of devotion; they did not know the true God; the true God was to them the unknown God; and this an altar in their own city acknowledged. He therefore began to declare that glorious Being to them whom they ignorantly worshipped. As they were greatly addicted to religious services, and acknowledged that there was a Being to them unknown, and to whom they thought it necessary to erect an altar, they must, consistently with their character as a religious people, and with their own concession in the erection of this altar, hear quietly, patiently, and candidly, a discourse on that God whose being they acknowledged, but whose nature they did not know. Thus St. Paul, by acknowledging their religious disposition, and seizing the fact of the altar being inscribed to the unknown God, assumed a right which not a philosopher, orator, or judge in the Areopagus could dispute, of bringing the whole subject of Christianity before them, as he was now brought to his trial, and put on his defense. The whole of this fine advantage, this grand stroke of rhetorical prudence, is lost from the whole account, by our translation, ye are in all things too superstitious, thus causing the defendant to commence his discourse with a charge which would have roused the indignation of the Greeks, and precluded the possibility of their hearing any thing he had to say in defense of his conduct.

2. That the original word, on the right interpretation of which I have laid so much stress, is taken in a good sense, and signifies religious worship and reverence, I shall show by several proofs; some of which may be seen in Mr. Parkhurst, under the word deisidaimonia, which Suidas explains by eulabeia peri to qeion, reverence towards the Deity. And Hesychius, by foboqeia, the fear of God. “In this good sense it is often used by Diodorus Siculus. Herodotus says of Orpheus, he led men, eiv deisidaimonian, to be religious; and exhorted them, epi to eusebein, to piety; where it is manifest that deisidaimonia must mean religion, and not superstition. But, what is more to the present purpose, the word is used by Josephus, not only where a heathen calls the pagan religion deisidaimoniav, (Antiq. lib. xix. cap. 5. s. 3,) or where the Jewish religion is spoken of by this name, in several edicts that were made in its favour by the Romans, (as in Antiq. lib. xiv. cap. 10, s. 13, 14, 16, 18, 19,) but also where the historian is expressing his own thoughts in his own words: thus, of King Manasseh, after his repentance and restoration, he says, espoudazen pash peri auton (qeon) th deisidaidaimonia crhsqai, he endeavoured to behave in the MOST RELIGIOUS manner towards God. Antiq. lib. x. cap. 3, s. 2. And, speaking of a riot that happened among the Jews on occasion of a Roman soldier’s burning the book of the law, he observes that the Jews were drawn together on this occasion, th deisidaimonia, by their religion, as if it had been by an engine; organw tini.-Deuteronomy Bell. lib. ii. cap. 12, s. 2.” It would be easy to multiply examples of this use of the word; but the reader may refer, if necessary, to Wetstein, Pearce, and others.

3. That the Athenians were reputed, in this respect, a devout people, the following quotations may prove. Pausanias, in Attic. cap. xvii. p. 39, edit. Kuhn., says that the Athenians were not only more humane, alla kai ev qeouv eusebein, but more devout towards the gods; and again he says, dhla te enargwv, osoiv pleon ti eterwn eusebeiav metestin, it appears plainly how much they exceed others in the worship of the gods; and, in cap. xxiv. p. 56, he says, aqhnioiv perissoteron ti, h toiv alloiv, ev ta qeia esti spoudhv, that the Athenians are abundantly more solicitous about Divine matters than others. And Josephus seals this testimony by the assertion, contr. Apion, ii. 10: aqhnaiouv eusebestatouv twn eJllhnwn pantev legousi; Every body says that the Athenians are the most religious people of all the Greeks.-See Bp. Pearce. From all these authorities it is palpable that St. Paul must have used the term in the sense for which I have contended.

4. In the preceding notes, I have taken for granted that Paul was brought to the Areopagus to be tried on the charge of setting forth strange gods. Bp. Warburton denies that he was brought before the Areopagus on any charge whatever; and that he was taken there that the judges might hear him explain his doctrine, and not to defend himself against a charge which he does not once notice in the whole of his discourse. But there is one circumstance that the bishop has not noticed, viz. that St. Paul was not permitted to finish his discourse, and therefore could not come to those particular parts of the charge brought against him which the bishop thinks he must have taken up most pointedly, had he been accused, and brought there to make his defense. The truth is, we have little more than the apostle’s exordium, as he was evidently interrupted in the prosecution of his defense. As to the supposition that he was brought by philosophers to the Areopagus, that they might the better hear him explain his doctrine, it appears to have little ground; for they might have heard him to as great advantage in any other place: nor does it appear that this court was ever used, except for the solemn purposes of justice. But the question, whether Paul was brought to the Areopagus that he might be tried by the judges of that court, Bishop Pearce answers with his usual judgment and discrimination. He observes: 1. “We are told that one effect of his preaching was, that he converted Dionysius the Areopagite, Acts 17:34; and this seems to show that he, who was a judge of that court, was present, and, if so, probably other judges were present also. 2. If they who brought Paul to Areopagus wanted only to satisfy their curiosity, they had an opportunity of doing that in the market, mentioned Acts 17:17. Why then did they remove him to another place? 3. When it is said that they brought Paul to Areopagus, it is said that they took him, epilabomenoi autoi, or rather, they laid hold on him, as the Greek word is translated, Luke 23:26; 20:20, 26, and as it ought to have been here, in Acts 21:30, 33, and especially in this latter verse. 4. It is observable that Paul, in his whole discourse at the Areopagus, did not make the least attempt to move the passions of his audience, as he did when speaking to Felix, Acts 24:25, and to Agrippa, Acts 26:29; but he used plain and grave reasonings to convince his hearers of the soundness of his doctrine.

“Now, we are told by Quinctilian, in Inst. Orat. ii. 16, that Athenis actor movere affectus vetabatur: the actor was forbidden to endeavour to excite the passions. And again, in vi. 1, that Athenis affectus movere etiam per præconem prohibebatur orator: among the Athenians, the orator was prohibited by the public crier to move the passions of his auditory. And this is confirmed by Philostratus in procem. lib. i. de Vit. Sophist.; and by Athenæus, in Deipnosoph. xiii. 6. If, therefore, it was strictly forbidden at Athens to move the affections of the courts of justice, especially in that of the Areopagus, we see a good reason why Paul made no attempt in that way; and, at the same time, we learn how improperly the painters have done all they could, when they represent Paul speaking at Athens, endeavouring both by his looks and gestures to raise those several passions in his hearers which their faces are meant to express.”

I have only to add here, that, though St. Paul did not endeavour to excite any passions in his address at the Areopagus, yet each sect of the philosophers would feel themselves powerfully affected by every thing in his discourse which tended to show the emptiness or falsity of their doctrines; and, though he attempted to move no passions, yet, from these considerations, their passions would be strongly moved. And this is the idea which the inimitable Raphael took up in his celebrated cartoon on this subject, and which his best copier, Mr. Thomas Holloway, has not only engraved to the life, but has also described in language only inferior to the cartoon itself; and, as it affords no mean comment on the preceding discourse, my readers will be pleased to find it here. By the cartoons of Raphael, we are to understand certain Scripture pieces painted by Raphael d’Urbino, and now preserved in the palace at Hampton court. They are allowed to be the chefs d’œuvre in their kind. They have been often engraved, but never so as to give an adequate representation of the matchless originals, till Mr. Thomas Holloway, who has completely seized the spirit of the artist, undertook this most laborious work, in which he has been wholly engaged for several years; and in which he has, for some time past, associated with himself Messrs. Slann and Webb, two excellent artists, who had formerly been his own pupils. The cartoon to which I have referred has been some time finished, and delivered to the subscribers; and with it that elegant description, from which the following is a copious extract:-

“The eye no sooner glances on this celebrated cartoon than it is immediately struck with the commanding attitude of the speaker, and the various emotions excited in his hearers.

“The interest which the first appearance of St. Paul at Athens had occasioned, was not calculated to subside on a sudden; his doctrines were too new, and his zeal too ardent. From the multitude it ascended to the philosophers. The Epicureans and Stoics particularly assailed him. Antecedently to the scene described in the picture, among the various characters already encountered by the apostle, many undoubtedly, in their speculations upon Divine subjects, had often imagined a sublimer religion than that commonly acknowledged: such, therefore, would make it their business to hear him again. Others, to whom truth was of less value than the idle amusement of vain disquisition, felt no other motive than curiosity. By far the greater part, however, obstinately bigoted to their particular tenets, and abhorring innovation, regarded him as impious, or a mere babbler: these also wished to hear him again, but with no other than the insidious view, that, by a more regular and explicit profession of his doctrines, he might expose his own absurdities, or render himself obnoxious to the state. The drapery accords with the majesty of the figure; and the light is so managed, especially on the arms and hands, as greatly to assist the energy of the action.

“The painter has proceeded, from the warmth of full conviction, through various gradations, to the extremes of malignant prejudice, and invincible bigotry.

“In the foreground, on the right, is Dionysius, who is recorded to have embraced the new religion. With the utmost fervour in his countenance, and with a kind of sympathetic action and unconscious eagerness, he advances a step nearer. His eye is fixed on the apostle: he longs to tell him his conversion, already perhaps preceded by conviction wrought in his mind by the reasonings of the sacred teacher on previous occasions, in the synagogue, and in the forum or marketplace. He appears not only touched with the doctrine he receives, but expresses an evident attachment to his instructer: he would become his host and protector.

“This figure is altogether admirable. The gracefulness of the drapery and of the hair; the masculine beauty of the features; the perspective drawing of the arms; the life and sentiment of the hands, the right one especially, are inimitable.

“Behind is Damaris, mentioned with him as a fellow believer. This is the only female in the composition; but the painter has fully availed himself of the character, in assisting his principle of contrast; an excellence found in all the works of Raphael. Her discreet distance, her modest deportment, her pious and diffident eye, discovering a degree of awe, the decorum and arrangement of her train, all interest the mind in her favour.

“Next to these, but at come distance, is a Stoic. The first survey of this figure conveys the nature of his peculiar philosophy-dignity and austerity. Raphael has well understood what he meant in this instance to illustrate. His head is sunk in his breast; his arms are mechanically folded; his eyes, almost shut, glance towards the ground: he is absorbed in reflection. In spite of his stoicism, discomposure and perplexity invade his soul, mixed with a degree of haughty mortification.

“Sir Joshua Reynolds has observed that ‘the same idea is continued through the whole figure, even to the drapery, which is so closely muffled about him that even his hands are not seen;’ and that, ‘by this happy correspondence between the expression of the countenance and the disposition of the parts, the figure appears to think from head to foot.’

“Behind the Stoic are two young men, well contrasted in expression: anger in the elder, and in the other, youthful pride, half abashed, are finely discriminated.

“Beyond, in the same continued half circle with the Stoic, is perhaps exhibited the most astonishing contrast ever imagined; that of inexorable sternness, and complete placidity.

“Of the two figures, the first is denominated a Cynic, who, disappointed in his expectation of the ridiculous appearance which he conceived the apostle, when confronted, would make among them, abandons his mind to rage. His formidable forehead concentrates its whole expression: with a fixed frown and threatening eye, he surveys the object of his indignation. He alone would engage to confute him, or punish his temerity. His eager impatience and irritation are not discovered in his features only; he raises his heel from the ground, and leans with a firmer pressure on his crutch, which seems to bend beneath him.

“Pass from him to the more polished Epicurean. This figure exhibits perfect repose of body and mind: no passions agitate the one; no action discomposes the other. His hands, judiciously concealed beneath beautiful drapery, shows there can be no possible motion or employment for them. His feet seem to sleep upon the ground. His countenance, which is highly pleasing, and full of natural gentleness, expresses only a smile of pity at the fancied errors of the apostle, mingled with delight derived from his eloquence. He waits, with an inclined head, in passive and serene expectation. If a shrewd intelligence is discovered in his eyes, it is too gentle to disturb the general expression of tranquillity. “Behind are two other young men: the first discovers a degree of superciliousness with his vexation; his companion is more disgusted, and more morose.

“These, and the two young figures previously described, are not introduced merely to fill up the group; they may be intended as pupils to the philosophers before them, though by some considered as young Romans, who have introduced themselves from ennui or curiosity.

“Beyond is a character in whose mind the force of truth and eloquence appears to have produced conviction; but pride, vanity, or self-interest, impel him to dissemble. His finger, placed upon the upper lip, shows that he has imposed silence upon himself. “In the centre is seated a group from the academy. The skill of Raphael in this instance is eminent. These figures are not only thrown into shade, to prevent their interference with the principal figure; but, from their posture, they contribute to its elevation, and at the same time vary the line of the standing group. “It seems as if the old philosopher in profile, on the left, had offered some observations on the apostle’s address; and that he was eagerly listening to the reply of his sage friend, in whose features we behold more of the spirit of mild philosophy. The action of his fingers denotes his habit of reasoning, and regularity of argument. The middle figure behind appears to be watching the effect which his remarks would produce.

“The action of the young man, pointing to the apostle, characterizes the keen susceptibility and impetuosity of his age. His countenance expresses disgust, approaching to horror. The other young man turns his head round, as though complaining of unreasonable interruption. The drapery of both the front figures in this group is finely drawn: the opening action of the knees in the one is beautifully followed and described by the folds; in the other, the compression, in consequence of the bent attitude, is equally executed; the turn of the head gives grace and variety to the figure. “The head introduced beyond, and rather apart, is intended to break the two answering lines of the dark contour of the apostle’s drapery, and the building in the background.

“In the group placed behind the apostle, the mind is astonished at the new character of composition. The finest light imaginable is thrown upon the sitting figure; and, as necessary, a mass of shade is cast upon the two others.

“It is difficult to ascertain what or whom Raphael meant by that corpulent and haughty personage wearing the cap. His expression, however, is evident: malice and vexation are depicted in his countenance; his stride, and the action of his hand, are characteristic of his temperament.

“The figure standing behind is supposed to be a magician. His dark hair and beard, which seem to have been neglected, and the keen mysterious gaze of his eye, certainly exhibit a mind addicted to unusual studies. Under him, the only remaining figure is one who listens with malignant attention, as though intending to report every thing. He has the aspect of a spy. His eye is full of danger to the apostle; and he crouches below that he may not be disturbed by communication.

“If this figure be considered with reference to Dionysius, it may be remarked that Raphael has not only contrasted his characters, but even the two ends of his picture. By this means the greatest possible force is given to the subject. At the first survey, the subordinate contrasts may escape the eye, but these greater oppositions must have their effect.

“When, from this detailed display of the cartoon, the eye again glances over the whole subject, including the dignity of the architecture; the propriety of the statue of Mars, which faces his temple; the happy management of the landscape, with the two conversation figures; the result must be an acknowledgment that in this one effort of art is combined all that is great in drawing, in expression, and in composition.” Holloway’s description of Raphael’s Cartoon of Paul preaching at Athens.

ACTS

Verses 33, 34. So Paul departed from among them — Leaving his hearers divided in their judgment, and the generality of them in that deplorable state of ignorance, folly, and superstition, in which he found them; being himself astonished, no doubt, that men who professed wisdom were so little able to discern truth. Howbeit, certain men clave unto him — And inquired further into the evidence of that extraordinary doctrine which he taught concerning Jesus and his resurrection; the consequence of which was, that they believed the gospel, and made a public and courageous confession of it. Among whom was Dionysius the Areopagite — One of the judges of that court; and a woman named Damaris — One of considerable rank and character in the city; and others with them — Whose names it is not necessary here to mention. These, it seems, were the only persons Paul met with in this famous mart of learning, capable of seeing and acknowledging the absurdity of the prevailing idolatry! It is not said that Paul wrought any miracles at Athens; and the little success with which he preached, gives reason to suppose that he wrought none. Doubtless, this was by divine appointment, and probably to try what reception the gospel would meet with from learned and inquisitive men, when offered to them merely on the footing of its own reasonableness. The truth is, if such an experiment was anywhere to be made, in order to confute those in after times who should affirm that the general reception of the gospel, in the first stage, was owing not to miracles, but to the absurdities of heathenism, and to the reasonableness of the gospel doctrine, Athens surely was the place where the trial could be made with most advantage, and Paul’s oration in the Areopagus was the discourse which should have convinced reasonable men. Nevertheless, at Athens, where the human faculties were carried to the greatest perfection, the apostle was not able to convince his hearers of the folly of idolatry, nor of the reasonableness of worshipping and serving the one living and true God, by purity of mind and goodness of life!

Ver. 34. Dionysius the Areopagite, one of the senators or judges. He was made bishop of the little flock in Athens, for the apostles often ordained the firstfruits of their ministry to the pastoral office, that the flock might not be dispersed. He is thought to have suffered martyrdom in the year 95, when Trajan persecuted the church.

Of this illustrious man antiquity has left us some notices. He is named by Suidas, Syncellus, Nicephorus, and others. He went from Athens to Heliopolis in Egypt, to complete his studies. He heard Paul about the year 50 in the Areopagus, and was ordained with the apostle’s own hands. By the persuasion of St. Clement he left Athens, and travelled into Gaul. He finally preached the gospel in Paris; from him St. Dennis, a town near Paris, derives its name. The Celestial Hierarchy, and other writings ascribed to him, are by many accounted spurious. Baronius, Annal. Ecclesiastes page 109. Against these records of the cardinal, our Dr. Cave opposes, that the Dennis of Paris was a later Dionysius, whose writings were of the fourth century. To this opinion the Catholics will by no means accede, as the south of France and Spain received the gospel from the christians dispersed when Stephen was stoned.

Our venerable Bede, in his commentary on the Acts, says that he was made bishop of Corinth, as Eusebius affirms: book 6. Report, he adds, constantly affirms that he came to Paris, and received the crown of martyrdom. But as to the books ascribed to him by Jerome, in his catalogue of illustrious men, Cajetan thinks that they were the production of a later Dionysius.

34. Dionysius—One eminent man, and one woman sufficiently notable to be named, with a few others nameless, who appear not to have been organized into a Church, were the converts of that day. Unreliable tradition, however, makes Dionysius a future bishop of Athens, and a volume of mythical theology, by some unknown writer, is falsely ascribed to his authorship.

Opposite as were the tempers and causes which produced the rejection of Jesus by the Jews and the Athenians, they were at bottom the same— traditional prepossession. What the Temple, and Moses, and the Old Testament were to the Jew, that the Acropolis, the tutelar Athene, and philosophy, were to the Athenian—a binder of his whole soul to the proud past, filling him with contempt for the innovator. Alike against the Temple and the Acropolis the apostle pronounced the divine protest, and left his irrevocable words of destruction upon both, to be fulfilled by time and Providence.

It was Athens, not Paul, that suffered that day the real defeat. She lost an honourable record in Christian history. She lost the honour of being the Fourth Great European Church. Though repeatedly passed, she was, probably, never revisited by the apostle. She was addressed by no apostolic epistle, received no honourable New Testament mention. When we speak of the Greek Church, we think not so readily of Athens as of Antioch, of Corinth, of Constantinople, or even of St. Petersburg.