The Discourse
An Epitome and Paraphrase
“He carried within him the lively consciousness, that he brought to the central point of Grecian society, an element of life which as infinitely transcended its highest imaginations, as the Eternal went beyond the loveliest scenes of a perishable world, and in this consciousness he moved as a spiritual potentate — as a mature man among a crowd of children to whom he undertook to explain their presentiments, and to express them in words.” — Olshamen on the Acts, iv. 550.
“It is surely of no slight importance that the history of the first age of Christianity should present us with one undoubted instance of a character, which unites all the freedom and vigour of a Great Reformer, with all the humbleness, and holiness, and self-denial of a great Apostle.” — Dean Stanleys Essays on the Apostolic Age, p. 173.
“Overpowering at times must have been the thought, that he, a poor earthen vessel, was charged with this ministration of glory: but no less inspiring that Voice behind the Veil in these great cities of the Roman Empire, ‘Be not afraid, for I am with ihQQ.’”’ — Archdeacon Norris, p. 92.
“Paul alone, against all Athens.” — ^engre?.
Zi)m IPauI 0tooti in tlje milMst of iHars’ i)iU, anti isaiTJ, e mm of atijenjEf, 31 perceive tfjat in all tljings 2^ are too mptistitious* JFor 80 31 pa00eti br, anti beJjein gour tietotion0, 31 founti an altar to it t!ji0 in0cription, tJDo ti?e Qlnfenoton ©oUf SSiljom tfjcrefore 2^ icno rantlH tDor0f)ip,!)im Declare 31 unto pou* 60X1 tfjat matie tfje tooriu anti all ti)ins0 ti?erein, 0eeinc tfjat e 10 Horti of ijeaben an”D earti?, ntoellet!? not in temple0 matie toitf) |)anTJ0; neit!)er 10 toor0!?ippeti to it men’0 |)anti0, 80 tl?cuel) f)e neetieti anptinc, 0eeinc fje citjetf) to all life, anU breatf), anB all ti)inc0; anl3 i?atf) maUe of one blooti all nation0 of men for to titoell on all tfje face of ti?e eartf), ann iati) lieterminetJ t!?e time0 before appointeD, anti tfje bountJ0 of tieir ijabitation; tat teg 0!)oufti 0ee& tfje iLorti, if ijapig tijep micljt feel after |)im, anti finU l)im, t!)ou0i) ije be not far from eberr one of U0: for in f)im toe litie, antJ motje, anti ijate our being; a0 certain al0o of rour oton poet0 i?at)e 0aiti, jFor toe are al0o i)10 off0pring» jFora0mucf) tijen 80 toe are tlje off0pring of (Soti, toe ougt not to tf)ink t!jat te ©otiijeati is like unto golti, or 0iltier, or 0tone,- cratcn b art anti man’0 tiebice* 3nti tlje time0 of tl)10 ignorance cSoti toin&eti at; hut noto com mantlet!) all men etjertofjere to repent: becau0e e Ijatfj appointeti a tiap, in tf)e tuljic!) l)t toill jutige tfje toorlti in rig!)teou0ne00 bg t|)at man tofjom ije ijati? ortiaineti; toijereof i?e Ijat gitien a00urance unto all men, in tijat Ije i?ati? rai0eti |)im from t|je tieati*
(Ads xvii. 22-31.)
Thus spake St. Paul in the exquisite musical tongue of his auditors. Commencing with the usual method of direct address — the formula of their own Orators — Demosthenes included — “Ye men of Athens!”
An unfortunate rendering in our authorised version, has altogether marred the point and meaning of the first sentence of his prologue — “I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.” One so wise and skilled, or rather so judicious an interpreter of the human heart, would never have been guilty of the mistake of charging that sensitive throng of citizens with an excess of superstition — an undue attachment to the rites of their religion. Such a sweeping charge would at once have roused their prejudices and passions, and forfeited to the speaker the favoured and favouring opportunity of securing their attention — if not their sympathy and interest. Though no craven, but speaking out of the fulness of his magnanimous heart, the occasion, he too well knew, demanded prudence. These stern censors of the stone seats were not to be trifled with. An incautious, indiscreet word, might have provoked the doom of Socrates. Had he displayed the character of bigot or fanatic: — had he assumed a defiant attitude, —
1 It is somewhat singular, that the translation should be retained in the English Revised Version. It will be found, however, that among the emendations of the American Committee the preferred rendering is given — “very religious.”
had he slighted their holy mysteries or indulged in covert blasphemy against the Gods of Hellas, he would not have been tolerated for a moment. But he evidently combined the art of the practised orator with the more delicate tact of common sense. He became, says Neander, “a heathen to the heathen.” He who wrote the Epistle to Philemon could well be trusted in courtesy and conciliation. “When I consider,” says the Lord Shaftesbury of a former century, “this Apostle as appearing before the witty Athenians, ... I see how handsomely he accommodateth himself to the apprehension and temper of those politer people.^ So far from incurring their censure, he adroitly makes their very idolatries the basis, not of denunciation but of commendation. ‘’Like a skilful tactician,” it has been well said, “he seizes the point of unity, before he advances to the marks of difference.^ The word of the original Greek {heLaiSalfKov) is almost intransferable in our language. It has no exact equivalent in English. Enough to state, that its purport was almost in direct contrast to what our accepted translation conveys. It was the speaker’s object, let us repeat, in this exordium, to accord to his hearers
1 Characteristics, vol. i. p. 30. 2 Growth of the Spirit of Christianity, vol. i. p. 105. the unmistakable external evidences of their ‘religiousness.’ The familiar “Si monumentum requiris, circumspice:” might appropriately have fallen from St. Paul’s lips as he gazed around on the visible embodiment of these their religious instincts and cravings. “I perceive” (if we may transcribe a few of the suggested paraphrases) “that in all things ye are exceedingly devout” — “devout overmuch” — “To have an exceeding veneration for religion” [Alford) — “Scrupulously religious” — “Carrying your religious veneration very far” {Dr. Porter) — “Too prone to the abject fear of invisible power” (Principal Candlish) — “Carefulness in religion” {Dean Howson) — “Much given to the worship of the gods:” “more god-fearing than others” — “Ye are devout above other cities, and scrupulous in your religious rites.” Perhaps Dean Plumptre’s “devotee,” comes as near as any. -^ ‘In one sense,’ if we may venture to pursue and expand the Apostle’s appeal,
1 The same writer adds — “The Deisidaimon was a believer in omens. Nikias, the Athenian general, ever oppressed with a sense of the jealousy of the gods, and counterordering the strategic movements, because there was an eclipse of the moon (Thucyd. vii. 50), is a conspicuous instance of the Deisidaimon, in high places.”
Older than any of these authorities just quoted, Chrysostom, not only supports the complimentary allusion; but cites the words in illustration of the Apostle’s subsequent exhortation to the Colossians: “Walk in wisdom towards them that are without, redeeming the time. Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man.” — If orris on the Ads, p. 87.
THE DISCOURSE. 8i
* I may well enlist your sympathies, as our aspirations seem so far to be in the same direction. We are at one in yearning after that divine something, mightier than yourselves, you profess to have found in your divinities and idols. Be patient with me, as I endeavour to unfold mysteries, — truths undreamt of In your ethical systems, — themes which your poets have never sung and your sculptors have failed and must ever fail to mould in their plastic art or breathing marble, and which your wisest men who boast of the heavendescent of their philosophy could never reach. You worship in your own way: but you fail to worship the true God whom I adore. Above all you fail to worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness.’
He proceeds to the ground on which he bases his indictment. As his divine Master before him, took the water of the well of Samaria or the lighting of the Great Candelabra in the Temple-courts — as emblems of Himself, and illustrators of His doctrine, — “the Well of living water” and ‘’the Light of the world; “— so the Apostle here takes an inscription seen on one of their altars, as the keynote and ‘apology’ for the statement which follows: —” As I passed by, and beheld your
1 Howson in loc,
F devotions “(or far better rendered ‘’ contemplated your sacred things; — the places and objects of your worship”)^ ‘’ I found an Altar with this inscription, ‘To the Unknown God ‘” (v. 23).^
At what part of the city he had seen this incompleted dedication we are not informed; whether on his way up the long mural avenue from the outer Pirsean Gate, or in the course of his subsequent explorations in the streets or gardens. Enough to say that his eye had fallen on some such porphyry or marble pediment; and that the significant Cryptograph formed a befitting text for his present discourse.
There have been many opinions and surmises among commentators as to the purport of this singular negative inscription. There is no doubt the preponderance of authorities accept the explanation of Pausanias, that “at Athens there are altars (several) of gods which are called the ’ unknown ones.’ “Philostratus, who lived a century later, notes the same in his life of Apollonius. Jerome goes farther in his Commentary on Titus i. 12: “The inscription on the altar is not as Paul asserts ‘To the Unknown God; ’ but ‘To the
Ta ceaffixara v[iQ)v. “This denotes sacred objects in the widest sense of the word. Proper temples and also single altars, or sacred enclosed places.” — Olshausen on Acts p. 553. “NVycliff simjily renders it “Your idols.”
2 K-^vdcTi Oey.
Gods of Asia, Europe, and Africa: — to gods unknown and strange.’ “Laertius, a writer, B.C. 600, gives a special narration as to the cause of one of these altars being erected — that Epimenides, on the occasion of a plague, led some white and black sheep to the Areopagus, allowing them to wander at will, but commanding those that followed them to mark the spots where they lay down, and there erect altars and sacrifice to the God to whom the things pertained, without giving the name: and thus the pestilence was allayed. Dean Alford refers to a conjecture of Eichhorn that these shrines may have been erected before the use of writing, and thus inscribed in after times. “But,” he adds, “I should rather suppose that the above anecdote (of Laertius) furnishes the key to the practice, — that on the occurrence of any remarkable calamity or deliverance not assignable to the conventionally-received agency of any of the received deities, an UnJcnoivn God was reverenced as their author.” The point is, after all, not one of any real importance. The suggestion, however, first made by ancient writers and endorsed by several modern reliable authorities, seems at least far from improbable; that the * Deus Ignotus ’ was none other than Jehovah, the God of the
1 Alford’s Greek Testament in loc.
Hebrews: He who by these Hebrews themselves was designated “the Unknowable” — the “All Hidden,” the “Ineffable;” “Dwelling in thick darkness: “— the awful Name they were forbidden, save by a circumlocution, to pronounce. If the name of Jehovah was thus so sacredly safeguarded by His own worshipping people, how otherwise could He be revealed to those outside the bounds of the Holy Land? We know that the Athenians in their too * idol-loving ’ ways, were not reluctant to introduce the gods of other nations into their Pantheon. To use the words of Mr. Froude, “A new god was welcomed there as a new scientific subject is welcomed by the Royal Society.” St. Jerome specially mentions, in one of his Commentaries, that the divinities belonging to all the countries of the then known world were to be found in Athens. “The Athenians,” says Strabo,” are hospitable; as in other respects, so also in respect of the gods, for they have received many foreign religions, for which they were
1 See Cave’s Lives of the Apostles, p. 79, with references to Justin Martyr, Plutarch, Tacitus, &c. Mr. Lewin strongly favours the interpretation: also Professor Dick in his Commentary on the Acts.
2 “Dion Cassius speaks of the God of the Jews as apprjrov ‘not to be expressed,’ and the Emperor Caligula, in his answer to the Jews, calls him Tov aKarovofj-affTov vniv, ‘Him that may not be named by you, ’ and Lucan and Trebellius PoUio call him Incertus Deus.*’ — Lewin’’s St. Paul, p. 282.
3 Short Studies on Great Subjects.
ridiculed in the Comedies.” Is it probable they would make an exception with respect to the Deity of the remarkable race which included David and Solomon among its sovereigns, and in later ages had resounded with the exploits of the Maccabees, — exploits worthy of mention along with Marathon and Thermopylse? ‘* They were, besides, not unlikely,” remarks Dr. Kitto, “to have set up an altar to Him, at or about the time they gave a statue to His High Priest (Hyrcanus).” We know, moreover, that subsequent to the conquests of Alexander the Great, a strong alliance was formed between Greece and Palestine. The Poman antipathy to the children of Abraham was not so strongly shared by the countrymen of Socrates and Plato. Be this as it may, we think the conjecture gives point and significance to what follows: and although with an array of authorities against the surmise it would be more than presumption to state it otherwise than a possibility, it would seem to furnish the appropriate comment — *’ Whom therefore ye ignorantly — (or, much rather, * without knowledge ’ or * unintelligibly ‘) worship, Him (whom ye worship as the Unknown) — declare
1 Strabo, Geog. x., p. 471, quoted by Dr. Alexander. “Lucian in his Philopatris, uses this form of an oath, ‘I swear by the Unknown God at Athens.” Quoted by Barnes on Acts,
I unto you.’’ And the sequel of the speaker’s Discourse, constitutes that promised * declaration.”
Paul was speaking under the blue expanse of heaven. Milton’s “sea, air, earth, and sky,” were all around and above him — the handiwork of Him he loved and served: — “God that made the world and all things therein... the Lord of Heaven and Earth” (v. 24). If we may venture to expand his words and their meaning as he thus turns to the pages of Nature’s great Lesson-Book: — ‘You, Epicureans, entertain the belief that this beautiful world, with its manifold evidences
1 Some recent commentators thus recognise an alliteration between the word on the altar {’KyvucTTi Oe) and the same word here employed, “Whom (or what) therefore ye worship, not knowing, {ayvoovvre), Him I do make known to you,” or rather, “I set forth to you:” a play also on the word his disputants employed regarding him, — “a setter forth ol strange Gods” (/caTa77eXeipj) v. 18. He retorts with the same expression, “Him I set forth’ {KaTayiWu) v. 23.
Since the above paragraphs were written, my attention has been directed to a book now rare, published more than a century ago, by Chevalier Ramsay, called “The Travels of Cyrus.” He describes the visit of the Persian monarch to Egypt, where he was spectator of its religious ceremonies in one of the temples. “Before the sacrifices were offered,” says the writer to whom I am indebted for the quotation, “the High Priest explained to him the meaning of the mysteries in such language as this: — ‘We adore,’ said lie, ’ no other but the Great Ammon: that is to say, the Unknown God. We consider him sometimes as he is in himself, and at other times as manifested in nature. In the first sense, we call him Ptha, life, light, and love; all whose operations, thoughts, and affections being concentrated in himself, he remains in solitary unity, incomprehensible to mortals. Thus considered, we adore him only by silence, or by the name of ‘Incomprehensible Darkness,’ and we represent him by the clouds which you see at the top of the Obelisk.’” — Growtker’s Sun-Wo7’sydp, ^. 23.
of design and adaptation, was made by a capricious combination of atoms. I come to unfold to you the Personality of the Great, Self-existent, Intelligent Creator: — not as the current mythology of your nation teaches — Gods many and Lords many; divinities dreamingly haunting the solitudes of nature, having no bond of sympathetic interest with the human race, — far apart from all the affairs of men: I come to reveal to you Plim in whom we live and move and have our being. The God, moreover, of all the families of the earth. Once my belief was similar to your Own, that the Jehovah I serve had no interest beyond the limits of my own nation. Under the influence of a more expansive spirit I have been taught that He is the Living, Loving Father of all the human race; confined within no artificial bounds, but keeping everlasting watch over the universe.’
The passing reference to the outer world, leads to a new topic and one of significant contrast.
Can we not imagine that outstretched hand (the Apostle’s familiar attitude) directed now in another direction. Confronting the Speaker, as abeady minutely described, was the Rock of the Acropolis, its wondrous coronal of so-called sacred architecture, — crowded masses of temple, statue, and shrine — the pardonable pride of the world’s proudest nation. Whatever it might be to others, it was little else in itself to the eye which now surveyed it, but a colossal Altar with the enlarged inscription — ‘’To Gods Unknown.’’ *The God I serve and love,’ continued he — ’ the Universal Father — the unseen and invisible ^’ dwelleth not in (such) Temples made with hands, neither is worshipped with the product of mens hands;” however skilful and cunning the artificer, — however splendid and imposing the ritual, however costly the sacrificial offerings. You have given shape and embodiment, in that Acropolis of yours, to your reputed Gods of Olympus and Helicon. He stands in need of no such sculptured forms, though they be the workmanship of the most distinguished human genius {’’as though He needed anything,’’ sV. 2b)y You believe that your presiding deities, to whom you have given ideal shape and beauty, dwell in selfish unloving seclusion, far apart from the wants and necessities of their votaries. My God and Heavenly Father has not only, as Creator, fashioned those mountains which girdle your city and shores, — stretched out the heavens as a curtain
1 Doubtless the very words he used were suggested and supplied from the dying utterances of the protomartyr Stephen — indelibly impressed on his memory (Acts vii. 48, 49).
2 “The previous words struck at a false theory of the Temple; these at a false theory of worship.” — Dean Plumptre.
and given the sea its decree. He has done more. He is infinitely better. He is the Almighty Sustainer, — “Seeing He giveth to all, life, and breath, and all things” ’ (v. 25).
He pursues the theme: — adding a natural corollary; or, as it has been expressed, “after giving them the philosophy of religion, he passes to the philosophy of history.” He knows, too well, the haughty self-assertion of the nation whose representatives are now around him. “The Athenians,” says Kuincel, “deemed themselves to be avToxOove; — “Aborigines” — “sprung from the soil.” They claimed a special and illustrious pedigree. Their theory was, that each nation had a separate descent, and that each realm and race were under the supervision of separate divinities. Hence the polytheistic system which had its most singular development in the capital of the Hellenes. Paul claims boldly, in contravention alike of ancient and modern theories, the one Adamic descent, — the unity of the wide family of man, — the children of one Almighty Parent, — the brotherhood of humanity. To use the forcible words of Olshausen — “For this reason he made it appear that all tribes were brethren; and that a higher destiny assigned to the nations their dwelling-places and epochs of development. By this last thought the Apostle indicates that the calamities of nations exhibit no unregulated fluctuation, but a course of things determined by laws from above.” * I concede,’ — is the expansion of the Apostle’s thought — * your distinguishing place among the world-kingdoms. You may well look with elation on your heroic struggles for your nation’s liberty: — your warriors and statesmen — your artists and craftsmen. But imagine not that you are the one race on earth exclusively favoured with divine protection: — that your land enjoys a favoured monopoly, while the outer world is consigned to a godless fate. You, Epicureans, ignore a God of Providence: — you, Stoics, abandon the world to a dreary fatalism. The Unknown God I declare unto you is Upholder as well as Framer. Do not foster the delusion that you are privileged, by exclusive descent from some fabled progenitors, while the outside world you deem Barbarian is the product and haunt of demons. Whatever be the disparities, physical and intellectual, wrought by time and circumstance, we have one common origin. He whom I have already declared not only gives to all, “life and breath and all things” but, V. 26, “He hath made of one blood:” — or rather, ‘’He hath caused every nation of men
Commentary on the Acts, vol. iv., p. 354.
(sprung) of one blood, to dwell on all the face of the earth.’”
From this, the preacher naturally proceeds to enforce the great moral obligation, resting on God’s intelligent creatures, ‘’ to seek the Lord, if
1 See Alford’s Greek Test. iM ?oc. “Every nation.” ‘R.Y.Trav iOpos. Dean Plumptre notes the reference to “the special gift of character of each race. The Greek sense of beauty and the E,oman sense of law. Teutonic truthfulness, Celtic impulsiveness, and Negro docility, have all their special work to do... and their special parts to play in the drama of human history.” — New Test. Commentary for English Readers. “All nations of one blood,” seems to contain a covert rebuke at the Hellenic ’ pride of race; ’ to their cruel system of slavery and its large proportions, despite of their boasted refinement.
I have purposely abstained from entering on the speculations of later decades regarding the ‘Descent of Man.’ These would be altogether out of place in such a volume as this. Let me simply quote, with approval, the following brief but pertinenl remarks on the subject by another writer. Dr. Stuart, of Edinburgh, speaking from a Bible and Christian standpoint on the modern theories, pushed to their extremes, of evolution and development, observes: — “Viewed in some of its aspects, the distance may seem little between a man and the dog that follows at his foot. We are both creatures formed by one Maker out of the dust of the same earth; and although not of one blood, we are both born out of flesh and blood, and at death the bodies of both return to the dust. Fascinated by this resemblance, some acute men of science, ignoring man’s creation in the Divine image, and his peculiar and completely distinctive capacity for God, and seeking a oneness for man beneath him and not above him, have pored over this earthly lilieness till what is heavenliest in their own faculties seems to have been benumbed; and they have pictured to themselves a man near of kin to the other beasts, only little higher, and almost if not quite self-promoted among them. As in its childhood the world by wisdom knew not God, but changed His glory into the image of corruptible things, so again in its old age the world seems ready to relapse into a second childhood, by returning after another fashion to the glorifying of ‘four-footed beasts, and birds, and creeping things.’... Between man and the wisest beast of the field, there is interposed a chasm, deep and dark, across which millions of years can weave no thoroughfare. But man was created in likeness and for fellowship with God; in that likeness we are renewed j and to that fellowship we are more than restored by Jesus Christ.”
haply they might feel after Him and find Him, though He he not far from every one (* each one ‘R.V,) of us” (v. 27). *I speak, not of what can only be regarded as beautiful myths; your recognised divinities presiding over separate localities and diverse interests: — not of the distinctive gods of mountains, or winds, or rivers, or fire; — not of the deities personating the abstract emotions and passions of the soul — Duty, Patience, Honour, Hope, Pleasure; but the All- Comprehensive — Omnipotent — Omnipresent One: ‘’ For in Him we live, and move, and have our being” ’ (v. 28).
This great foundation-truth in Christian theology he happily enforces, not from His own Hebrew Scriptures, for these would be valueless in their eyes, but from one of their own literary authorities; a quotation from an astronomical poem called ‘’ Phcenomena’’ the work of Aratus (b.c. 278):^ As certain also of your own poets hath said, For ive are also his offspring “(v. 28). Prom St. Paul’s expression “certain of your own poets,” it would
1 Ovid says, “Cum Sole et lun semper Aratus erit.” — Quoted by Humphry on the Acts.
The writings of Aratus were well known and much prized: indeed, commentaries were written upon them. Being by birth and repute a Cilician or rather a native of Tarsus, and consequently with whose writings Paul could not fail to be familiar, it has been surmised that among the “Books” the Apostle had left behind him at Troas, and which he charges Timothy in his last letter to bring with him to his Mamertine prison, — the poems of Aratus may not xinlikely have been included (Tim. iv. 13).
seem to denote that the quotation was familiar to the Athenians; moreover, that it was used by more than one Attic bard. Many expositors have given the one akeady referred to; — also an identical reference in the Hymn of Cleanthes — himself an Athenian and Stoic philosopher, who, after leading a life of rigid asceticism, committed suicide by starvation. Both poems are, of course, in celebration of Jupiter. I give Mr. Le win’s translation of the former — that of Aratus: —
“He animates the mart and crowded way, The restless ocean and the shelter’d bay; Doth care perplex? Is lowering danger nigh? We are his offspring, and to Jove we fly.”
Dr. Kitto furnishes a literal rendering of the quotation from the “Hymn of Cleanthes;” adding that the hymn has been pronounced to be the purest piece of natural religion extant in pagan antiquity, containing, as he farther observes, nothing unworthy of a Christian or an inspired writer: —
“Most glorious of Immortals, Thou many named, Always Almighty, prime Ruler of Nature, Governing all by law, Jove — hail! Tor mortals all, Thee to address is meet: For we are Thy offspring. But the lot Of puny mortals who upon this earth Do live and creep, is only like The image of a Voice. Thee obeys the starry world, revolving round
The earth, and following where Tlion leadest: For Thou, with hand invincible, doth wield A thunderbolt, two-edged, flaming and ever living, The stroke of which all Nature dreads.”
If, after what the Apostle had just stated as to the common origin of the nations, the pride of his auditory may for the moment have been wounded, — this new passing reference to one or more of their minstrels, would seem to have condoned the offence and engaged afresh their attention. ‘This Jew,’ would be their verdict, ’ can be no uneducated illiterate fanatic. He must be a man of culture, who is able to enforce his argument by quotations like these. Nor, moreover, can he be narrow or exclusive. At all events, whatever his distinctive religious dogmas may be, he recognises us as “God’s oflfspring:” — the children of his Supreme Divinity.’ If there be, in consequence, a fresh stir of sympathetic interest among the audience, it seems to act as a stimulus on the Speaker himself. He may venture to advance a step farther in his protest, as he points, once more, across the intervening valley.
The masses of parti- coloured Pentelican marble, are not alone in the homage done to false gods and a false worship. The precious metals have been made auxiliaries — as we have already abundantly noted: gold and silver, as well as stone and ivory, ^’graven by art and maris device’’ (v. 29). From the text fui’nished by their own poets he emphasises the lesson — ‘^ Forasmuch then, as we are the (achnoivledged) offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto these’’ (v. 29). ‘To make the Godhead like unto stone, would be to repudiate our divine origin.’ He wished to serve them legatees to a heritage and patrimony more precious far than hoards of gold, ’ yea, the most fine gold ’ — the unsearchable riches of Christ — “Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” He might, indeed, appropriately here have borrowed the language of an Eastern Emir, very familiar to him, language whose beauty and pathos at least would have been appreciated by his audience, however otherwise unacquainted with the words themselves: — “But where shall wisdom be found? and where is the place of understanding? Man knoweth not the price thereof; neither is it found in the land of the living. The depth saith, It is not in me: and the sea saith, It is not with me. It cannot be gotten for gold, neither shall silver be weighed for the price thereof. It cannot be valued with the gold of Ophir, with the precious onyx, or the sapphire. The gold and the crystal cannot equal it; and the exchange of it shall not be for jewels of fine gold.
No mention shall be made of coral, or of pearls: for the price of wisdom is above rubies. The topaz of Ethiopia shall not equal it, neither shall it be valued with pure gold. Whence then cometh wisdom? and where is the place of understanding?” (Job xxviii. 12-21.)
The Apostle now proceeds with a more solemn home appeal to heart and conscience: while at the same time unfolding, not natural, but revealed truth: — ‘’And the times of this ignorance God tuinJced at: “— (an unhappy and commonplace rendering, — much better, as accepted by all expositors — ‘* overlooked.”) He speaks of the Almighty’s wondrous patience and long-suffering: — so many ages bearing with evil in His fair creation; — that creation which the Speaker, in a future letter, describes as “groaning and travailing in pain:” — ‘The God whose name and existence I vindicate, had His own Sovereign meaning and reasons, for leaving the nations, century after century, to grope in the darkness of their blinded imaginations — not sending, as He did to my fathers, accredited messengers and interpreters of His will. One of these purposes, among others, may have been, to make the experiment, on the widest scale, as to the possibility of man’s unaided reason and consciousness attaining a knowledge of Him-THE DISCOURSE, g’j
self. But now, ignorance of the Divine nature and of the Divine will, cannot be pleaded in condonation. A new era of revelation and responsibility has dawned: — “Now He commandeth all men (you Grecians included) everywhere to repent “(v. 30). Deceive me not: do not attempt to deceive yourselves, or that Heart-searching God I declare to you. The objects of your worship, ideals of beauty though they be, minister to the sensuous. Let not the boasted glory of art — the luscious and splendid in external form and ritual, conceal its dangerous affinity with the base and the impure. Minerva, your patroness of “Wisdom, presides as Protectress over those mighty Sanctuaries close by. But Wisdom — the true Wisdom I have come to unfold to you — “the Wisdom which is from above, is first pure” (James iii. 17). God’s call to you, and to all, in this new age {aiov) is to * repent.’ Mimic and parody the truly Beautiful by no unworthy counterfeit. Do not permit vice to be shielded in cunning workmanship, under gorgeous shrine and imposing architecture. My loud call is — Repent! Repent! Renounce your idol worship. Holier than the best of human sanctuaries are these hearts of yours purified from corruption, made to serve the living and the true God.’
He proceeds, in augmented tones of solemnity, as he approaches yet deeper — diviner — more august themes. He urges this call to immediate repentance, by a disclosure, altogether new to them, — an article which had no place in their accepted creeds. He unfolds Jesus, that Divine Saviour, whose Person and work he had come in their midst to proclaim — as the appointed Judge of the world. What are all these sculptured triumphs to Him, in comparison with the power and charm of divine heavenly graces wrought by His Spirit; — not in those who are worshippers of an “unknown name,” but of whom it is elsewhere said — “Him that overcome th will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is New Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God; and I will write upon him my new name.” “The Epicurean, teaching himself to seek for tranquil enjoyment as the chief object of life, heard of One claiming to be the Lord of men, who had shown them the glory of dying to self, and had promised to those who fought the good fight bravely, a nobler bliss than the comforts and luxuries of life could yield. The Stoic, cultivating a stem and isolated moral independence, heard of One who had promised to give His righteousness, to those who trusted not in themselves but in Him.”
The fii’st part of this novel revelation must have been startling enough to that group of listeners regarding the Day of Judgment and the man (” a Man “) whom God had ordained to preside on the august tribunal. But if its assertion was heard in silence and without demur, not so was it, when the climax was reached, that the Great Father-God had given assurance unto all men of the final assize — the supreme consummation, in that ‘’He had raised’’ this Divine Man and appointed Judge ‘’from the dead” — ilie pledge that His people were to rise also (v. 31).
This proved too much for that susceptible and irritable auditory. Much that went before may have roused opposition or stirred to protest and remonstrance. They hitherto, however, at all events, had manifested self-restraint, and listened, with a cynical, contemptuous indifference. But Eesurrec-TION! — Resurrection not of spirit merely, but of the crumbling body: — the Resurrection of the mortal tenement consigned to the tomb or to ashes! Resurrection of this Man of Nazareth, the first-fruits of a great Easter Day for all the world-ages!
J Dr. Smith’s Bib. Die. Art. “Paul,” p. 743.
And the assurance was given unto all men:*^ equivalent to the assertion which, as we have seen, specially roused their antipathies, that all are equal in religion — that the polished and refined Greek is, on a predicted solemn day of reckoning, to be found side by side with Jews and barbarians! No, no. It cannot be! It is diametrically opposed to their every view about matter and spirit. We can readily picture to ourselves the gathering and bursting of the storm. The Epicureans, to whom any resurrection — far more that of the body, was a myth and fantasy, we read, “mocked” (v. 32) — ironical words and derisive jeers greeted the statement of this ‘Bird-Pecker: ’ while the Stoics — less pronounced in their opposition — more tolerant of alien creeds — especially if these inculcated demon- worship, or claimed some new human apotheosis, — with more of the courtesy of a courteous race, merely evaded the subject. The new dogma had startled them with its novelty. Their curiosity had been aroused. Perhaps, more than all, they had been attracted and arrested by the earnestness of the Preacher. So, with a wave of the hand, they requested the postponement of any farther exposition: — “We will hear thee again of this matter” (v. 32).
The clamour was for the time hushed. The “waves of babble” rocked themselves to rest.
THE DISCOURSE. loi
No severities of the law were threatened to “the setter forth of strange gods.” A Greek poet speaks of this sudden collapse of the most animated of these conclaves. “A drop of rain,” as he expresses it, was sufficient, at times, to cool the fever-heats of discussion and disperse the versatile auditory. Whatever was the cause now, an assembly ever memorable dissolved; the hearers were once more lost in the crowd and buzz of the Agora beneath.^
1 Though all writers, secular as well as sacred, have borne witness to its argumentative skill and oratorical power, we have the strongest ground for surmising that the discourse of the Apostle, as recorded in the Acts, is only given in outline or brief extract. We can hardly think of this formal adjournment to the Areopagus, affording such a wonderful opportunity to the Speaker to unfold his great message: — and all the result being, as a writer has expressed it — ’ * what would not occupy five minutes in delivering, “Be it however either partial or complete, it is interesting to think that the Text (the words) must have been supplied by St. Paul himself: St. Luke — the writer of the Acts, not being with him: he, indeed, as we have seen, being all ‘alone.’ It must have either been dictated orally to the Apostolic Biographer, at a future time; or, like some few other statements, elsewhere mentioned, they might be “written in large characters by his own hand” (Gal. vi. 11). Dean Alford’s remarks, with their scholarly insight, are well worth quoting: — “Do we discover in the narrative or speech the traces of an unusual hand, and if so, whose is it f That some unusual hand has been here employed, is evident: for in the six verses 16-21 inclusive, we have no fewer than eleven expressions foreign to Luke’s style, or nowhere else occurring; and in the speech itself no fewer than twenty. Now, of these thirty-one expressions, five are either peculiar to, or employed principally by Paul; besides that we find the phi-ase to irvev/xa avrov, so frequently (see reff.) used by him of his own spirit or feelings. That the aTra ley6ixeva. in the speech exceed in number the expressions indicative of his style, may fairly be accounted for by the peculiar nature of the occasion on which he spoke. Here, I think, we can hardly fail to trace the hand of the Apostle by quite as many indications as we may expect to find. That Luke should, as in every case, have wrought in the section into his work, and given it the general form of his own narrative, would only be natural, and we find it has been so.’’ — Prolegomena, Acts of the Apostles, p. 12.