Studies in the Acts of the Apostles

[Resource Manager]

72. Paul and the Ecclesia at Thessalonica

 

It was no easy life that Paul led during the few months that he lived there, bringing into existence one of the finest of all the ecclesias founded by him.

 

There was constant opposition from Jews, of course: "We were bold in our God to speak unto you the gospel of God with much contention (RV: in much con­flict)" (1 Th. 2:2). He had to work day and night, not only in the gospel but also for his own subsistence. He was resolved that from the first these Thessalonians should see in him a worthy example of Christian character: "Ye are witnesses, and God also, how holily and justly and unblame­ably we behaved ourselves among you that believe" (2:10).

 

Jewish defamation

 

Evidently there were malicious attempts by Jewish adversaries to dam­age Paul's public standing, or he would surely not have sought to justify himself in the way that several passages seem to imply:

 

"Our exhortation was not of deceit, nor of uncleanness, nor in guile ... so we speak, not as pleasing men, but God which trieth our hearts. For neither at any time used we flattering words, as ye know, nor a cloke of covetousness (God is witness): nor of men sought we glory ... when we might have been burdensome, as apostles of Christ" (2:3–6). "He therefore that despiseth (us), despiseth not man, but God, who hath also given unto us his Holy Spirit" (4:8).

 

When that extraordinary passage in 2 Thessalonians 2 is read as a warning against a contemporary Judaistic under­ground (and not against the church of Rome centuries later; why should Paul warn his Thessalonians against that?), it harmonizes perfectly with copious other allusions. (see: Appendix 3).

 

Paul's gospel

 

Clearly, it was Jesus as Messiah which dominated Paul's teaching at Thessaloni­ca (17:3), for it is there in every chapter of his two epistles. There is remarkably little about Jesus as the means of atonement: – "salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us that ... we should live together with him. ... We believe that Jesus died and rose again" (1 Th. 5:9,10;4:14).

 

There are clear indications, in words which must be received as inspired, and therefore true, of an expectation of a very early return of the Lord. The commonly–heard improvisation that "the day of resurrection at the Lord's return is as near as the day of one's death (because of total unconsciousness in the sleep of death)" must be discarded for several reasons, of which two are these:

 

1. It is a point of view never once hinted at in Holy Scripture.
   
2. There are so many "early Second Coming" passages which it fails utterly to explain: e.g. "I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ" (5:23); "We which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord" (4:17); "The judge standeth before the door" (Jas. 5:9, and v.7,8). (For a Biblical explanation see "Re­velation", by H.A.W., p.259ff.)

 

Paul stressed to these new believers the essential connection between the hope of the Second Coming and the comfort of faith in the resurrection. He expounded it to his converts in a very explicit and realistic fashion (4:13–18).

[Resource Manager]

The new life in Christ

 

But, as in all his epistles, he was as much concerned with their Christian living as with their faith. He alluded to the "How ye ought to walk" (4:1), as though it were a kind of pocket manual of moral instruc­tion compiled for their benefit. Whether that or not, he had assuredly not left them uninstructed in the art of Christian living. Gentile converts especially needed to be taught that the Christian who fails to reflect the character of Christ is no Christian. Gentile life in that era was riddled with evil of every kind, for the multifarious religions which competed for a man's devotion taught him almost nothing about moral standards.

 

Was there a tendency among these Thessalonians to batten on the good nature and beneficence of wealthier brethren and "the wives of the chief men" of the city (17:4)? Paul renewed com­mands to them that they "do their own business, and work with their own hands" (4:11 cp. 2Th. 3:10,11). There must be diligence not only in the Lord's work but also in their own day–to–day affairs.

 

In particular, there was serious need to pull these new–born Thessalonians right away from sexual depravity which ran through all ranks of Gentile society there. Even the excellent N I V is not as explicit as it might be in translating Paul's blunt warnings:

 

"It is God's will that you should be holy; that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control his own body in a way that is holy and honourable, not in passionate lust like the heathen, who do not know God; and that in this matter (he means: stealing another man's wife) no–one should wrong his brother or take advantage of him. The Lord will punish men for all such sins, as we have already told you and warned you. For God did not call us to be impure but to live a holy life—" (4:3–7).

 

In spite of his intense affection for these, his children in the Faith, Paul knew the need for a certain degree of severity. So for the sake of good order and seemliness in the ecclesia, he urged on all a proper spirit of respect for those in authority over them (1 Th. 5:12,13). Where there was a lack of discipline, the leaders were counselled to take strong measures – for the sake of the flock, and for the spiritual recovery of the dissi­dents:

 

"Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us – If any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet count him not as an enemy but admonish him as a brother" (2 Th. 3:6,14,15).

 

Apart from such defects – to be ex­pected in an ecclesia dredged out of the wickedness of a first–century seaport –there were certain very fine qualities almost unique to Thessalonica.

[Resource Manager]

Persecution?

 

Almost from the earliest days they had to face persecution, And how well they stood up to it!:

 

"Ye received the word in much afflic­tion, with joy of the Holy Spirit" (1 Th. 1:6). "For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus; for ye also suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews" (2:14).

 

All this was after Paul's own heart. He gloried in their staunchness – "for your patience (i.e. dogged endurance), and faith in all your persecutions and tribula­tions that ye endure" (2 Th. 1:4).

 

He comforted them with assurances that the day of judgement, "when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire," would set all things straight – for themselves vindication and for their enemies retribu­tion (2 Th. 1:6–10).

 

Worthy converts

 

The fine reputation of these Thessalo­nian believers travelled everywhere by means of a first–century "grape–vine" nearly as efficient as in modern times: "In every place your faith to God–ward is spread abroad; so that we need not to speak anything (concerning you). For they themselves (Paul's correspondents far afield) report concerning us what manner of entering in we had unto you" (1 Th. 1:8,9). Apparently, echoes of that campaign were coming back again to Paul, as though he himself were hearing them for the first time.

 

Best of all, these new converts were so fired by the Faith they learned that they forthwith became zealous evangelists: "From you sounded out the word of the Lord not only in Macedonia and Achaia ... (1:8). Paul could wish nothing better than this.

 

So his natural affection for them, as his converts, was later intensified by his absence from them and by encouraging reports received. In no other epistle are there such signs of overflowing love and joy as in these short letters written some months later.

 

Being "affectionately desirous" of them, he let his pen run into highly uncharacteristic phrasing: "We were gen­tle among you, even as a nurse cher­isheth her children" (2:7). Properly understood, the phrasing here paints a picture of a delighted mother cuddling her baby at her breast, and meantime in­dulging in happy meaningless baby talk. This is only one example. Chapters 2,3 (and 1:2–4) are sprinkled with instances of the same irrepressible affection the apostle held for them.

 

And well he might!

[Resource Manager]

73. Trouble at Thessalonica (17:5–10)

 

The progress of the gospel, particularly among the "proselytes of the gate," provoked an inevitable reaction amongst the Jews. Indeed it is something to marvel at that Paul and his helpers were able to consolidate the new ecclesia as much as they did before trouble arose.

 

By this time the preachers, after the pattern of Philippi, had been pressed to make the home of a certain Jason, the centre of their activities. This Jason (the same as in Rom. 16:21?) was almost certainly a Jew who had taken this Greek name, as equivalent to his original "Joshua."

 

Jewish trouble–making again

 

As at Iconium and Lystra (14:2,19), the malevolent Thessalonican Jews got the riff–raff of the city on their side.

 

Farrar has a very eloquent passage regarding this hostility of Jews: "Never, till death released him, was he (Paul) wholly free from their violent conspiracies or their insidious calumnies. Without, they sprang upon him at every opportunity like a pack of wolves; within, they hid themselves in sheep's clothing to worry and tear his flocks ... Jealous, as usual, that the abhorred preaching of a crucified Mes­siah should in a few weeks have won a greater multitude of adherents than they had won during many years to the doctrines of Moses – furious, above all, to see themselves deprived of the re­sources, the reverence, and the adhesion of leading women – they formed an unholy alliance with the lowest dregs of the populace" (Life of Paul, p.290).

 

Unemployed loafing seems to have been specially characteristic of this city, tor in his epistles Paul twice came to allude to it. Indeed, these fellows seem to have earned for themselves a special nick­name: "the market boys," because that is where they loafed around.

 

Egged on by the Jews, and doubtless bribed by them, they set going a surge of excitement and strong feeling against the apostles. Then, reinforced by others of the same sort, they attacked Jason's house and forced their way in, confident (from the result of prior observations?) that they would without doubt grab Paul and Silas. But, whether by providence or a timely warning, neither was to be found there.

 

The Mouse was diligently searched from top to bottom, and was doubtless ransacked in the process. However, since the intended victims were not there, the roughs laid violent hands on Jason, and one or two others, for the antagonistic mob which had now gathered outside the house would have to be satisfied with some victim or other.

 

"The voice of the common people is the voice of God" was a principle it was unwise to question in any Greek city in time of excitement. So, amid a tumult of shouting, the city rulers conceded that there was a case to be tried.

[Resource Manager]

Charges laid

 

These rulers were called politarchs, chief men of the city. It is a title used, in Acts, only for the magistrates of Thessalo­nica. At one time this occasioned criticism against Luke's accuracy, as though he had invented an otherwise unknown title. But the critics crumpled up when it was pointed out that, at the very time of their criticism, in Thessalonica there was an arch contemporary with Paul, and still standing, bearing an inscription which included this debated expression. Frag­ments of that arch are now in the British Museum. The word politarchs has now been found on quite a number of other inscriptions.

 

Today no–one would be fool enough to question Luke's accuracy in this and similar respects.

 

The charges made against the brethren were threefold:

 

1. At Philippi they have "turned the world upside down," and they have now come here with the same intention.
   
2. They defy the decrees of Caesar. (This cry would sound very loyal!)
   
3. They teach honour to a different kind of king, a certain Jesus.

 

There was also a special charge against Jason that he had welcomed (s.w. Lk. 10:38; 19:6; Jas. 2:25) these distur­bers of the peace.

 

That expression: "These ... are come hither also," surely implies that, although Paul and Silas had somehow evaded capture, at least two of Paul's party were now in custody – probably Timothy and Titus.

 

That unusual phrase: "they have turned the world upside down," may have been used with reference to what had been heard about happenings at Philippi – two men shut up, then a violent earthquake bringing city buildings to the ground. It was what Scripture said had happened at Jericho! And now the same men were here, and associated with another Joshua, so surely there was a great peril impending!

 

Or did those Jews mean that their world was being turned upside down by a message which proclaimed that Jews were no longer a nation of special reli­gious privilege? The grace of God was now offered freely to Gentiles also. They may have heard Paul using such Scrip­tures as Ez. 21:27 and Is. 29:16,17 with reference to the rejection of Jewry.

 

From the rulers' point of view this first charge would be either too vague or a palpable exaggeration.

 

The second charge was just a plain lie, and to the magistrates, if they had the young and timid Timothy before them, it would be obviously that. And to think that Jews made such a charge: "They do contrary to the decrees of Caesar." The irony of it! for there was no people in all the empire who flouted the rules of Rome as the Jews did.

 

But the third charge: "They say there is another king, one Jesus," was a clever half–truth, calculated to raise strong pre­judice at once. Of course, they did proclaim a king greater than Caesar, but as long as that king was not visible amongst men neither Claudius nor any other Caesar would deem this to be anything more than a prophetic pipe–dream. The decree of Claudius clearing all Jews out of Rome (18:2) had been Caesar's reply to a series of Jewish riots in Rome, all concerning a certain "Chres­tus" (Christos!). Then what a nerve these Jews in Thessalonica had in daring to take the same hard line as in Rome, thus risking an application of the same decree!

[Resource Manager]

Cautious judgement

 

The rulers of the city handled this explosive issue in a canny fashion. They put the little group of accused on bail, and deferred the hearing of the case – a good way of taking the steam out of the situation. Presumably Jason was fairly wealthy, and not hard put to find the money. But if not, there would be some influential supporter (v.4) who would put up the needful security.

 

It is a likely guess that one of the conditions attached to the decision was that Paul and Silas leave the city forthwith and not show their faces there again for, perhaps, a year. Otherwise it is difficult to understand why the apostles would be so passive when the brethren insisted that they leave Thessalonica that very night. It was not like Paul, having seen that the law was half on his side, to run away. But probably the brethren feared another explosion from the mob who were dis­appointed that the Christians had been treated so leniently, as they thought.

 

So next morning they were well on their way to Berea, fifty miles away. Doubtless at least one of the believers had good contacts there, and this knowledge would make Paul the more willing to let go Thessalonica for a new and promising venture, the more so since he was able to leave helpers behind to steer and encour­age the new ecclesia in his absence.

 

Indications are that almost at once the Jews of Thessalonica stirred up a sharp persecution of the believers (1 Th. 1:6; 2:14–16; 3:3, 4; 2 Th. 1:4–7). But the only effect of this was to consolidate their faith and put a sharper edge on their zeal for the Lord. So Paul, vexed by compulsory separation, was nevertheless made a happy man by the news which later reached him from Thessalonica.

 

 

Notes: 17:5–10

5. The Jews. Note that almost resentful passage in 1 Th. 2:14,15.

Moved with envy. The Greek aorist suggests a sudden (carefully timed?) flare up of antagonism.

6. Jason. If Rom. 16:21 is about the same, then perhaps it may be inferred that this outburst made Thessalonica too uncomfortable for him, so he left and became one of Paul's band of peripatetic preachers.

Turned the world upside down. Remarkably enough LXX uses the same word to describe what Rome had done: Dan. 7:23. But it is possible that here oikoumene is used of the Jewish world (Heb. 1:6; Rev. 3:10; Lk. 2:1; 21 .26, as kosmos often is. The way this charge is framed suggests knowledge of events at Philippi. On that Roman highway through Macedonia news of excitement at Philippi would travel fast.

7. Contrary to Caesar. Does Paul allude sardonically to this in 1 Th. 2:15?

Another king, meaning; a king of different sort. Cp. the charge made against Jesus himself; Lk. 23:2.

[Resource Manager]

74. Berea (17:10–15)

 

Thanks doubtless to the good help of some convert in Thessalonica, Paul and Silas had no accommodation problem in Berea. So, losing no time they put in attendance at the local synagogue. Luke uses an unusual and unexpected word in describing the beginning of this new preaching effort: "they went absent into the synagogue" (this is the meaning in seven other places). Then, is the implica­tion that those who escorted them to Berea were reluctant that appeal should be made to the Jews lest the Thessalo­nian situation repeat itself, so Paul and Silas slipped away to the synagogue unaccompanied? The two preachers were not to be gainsaid; and, as it proved, there was no lion in the streets. Instead, a most unexpected and stimulating re­sponse awaited them.

 

The reader of Acts can hardly fail to be impressed with Paul's persistence in his policy of going "to the Jew first, and also to the Greek." When consideration is given to the rapid hooligan Jewish opposi­tion to his work on the first journey, and now again at Thessalonica, a reaction to the extreme of keeping as much away from Jews as possible seems the most obvious decision to take. But always and unquenchably his "heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel was, that they might be saved."

 

These Jews at Berea were "more noble" than any Paul had yet encountered in the Gentile cities. Luke's description is, literally: "more well–born." But since all Jews were from the same stock, the versions are certainly correct in translat­ing more generally: "of more noble char­acter" (NIV). Apparently contemporary writers had just the same impression about the citizens of Berea also.

 

There are those who insist that one of the main purposes behind the writing of "Acts" was to expose the vile intransi­gence of the Jews. But this brief but heart–warming account of the Berean synagogue hardly harmonizes with such an extreme interpretation.

 

A wholesome attitude

 

The response in this Berean synago­gue must have been like a tonic to Paul. Not only were the Jews encouraging, but also the Greek women of quality, who were "proselytes of the gate," gave a ready hearing to the message. And, so the text implies, these women also en­couraged their husbands (some of the leading men of the city) to welcome Paul's preaching. Paul is often accused – quite falsely! – of a prejudice against women. But no–one has ever laid such a charge against Luke, and his record of the gospel at Philippi, Thessalonica, and Berea (16:14; 17:4,12) would not be written without Paul's approval.

 

The reaction of these Bereans was precisely what the apostle would fain have seen in every place. The sequence of ideas in Luke's brief description is impressive:

 

1. They showed a good disposition.
   
2. They "received the Word" forthwith (Gk. aorist), recognizing their need of such a message as this (Gk. middle voice).
   
3. They not only read the Scriptures; they searched them, to verify the degree of correspondence between message and prophecy. Here Luke has a word which usually implies careful legal examination. In other words, they were not prepared to swallow all they heard, at least not until they had carefully checked the Bible evidence which Paul advanced.
   
4. This was done "daily" and with enthu­siasm – "readiness of mind" – at home, or in further synagogue meet­ings?
   
5. "Therefore – the inevitable result of such a wholesome attitude – many of them believed." There was a logical inevitability about this consequence. Luke doesn't take the trouble to men­tion baptism. This is taken for granted (as in 5:14; 8:13; 9:42; 11:21 etc.

[Resource Manager]

Implacable hostility

 

There is no indication how long this satisfying activity went on. But all at once it was seriously interrupted. The Jews of Thessalonica heard that Paul had now transferred his activities to Berea. So, such was their malevolence against the gospel, they lost no time in organizing more terrorism.

 

Had it been the enlightened twentieth century they would, no doubt have planted bombs. However, their first cen­tury alternative – the raising of a mob –proved almost as effective. This tactic, so the text implies, was used more than once.

 

"Flee to another city"

 

The reaction in the new ecclesia was prompt and resolute. Paul must be saved from this harassment and danger. In any case the apostle could not afford to risk having the same charges made against him as had been preferred at Thessaloni­ca. So, immediately (v.14; cp. v.10) they got him out of the city.

 

Timothy had already come on to Berea, so he and Silas would be more than adequate to take care of the ecclesia. These two faithful helpers were not under threat as Paul was. Jewish virulence was directed solely at him, for from the first the adversaries were convinced that Paul, and Paul only, was the challenge and danger to their Judaism.

 

The apostle's "travel agents" appear to have "leaked" his intention to move on by sea from a neighbouring port, in the hope, doubtless, that his persecutors would assume that he had abandoned his preaching tour and was returning to Antioch or Jerusalem.

 

Perhaps they made as though to get the apostle on board a big ship sailing for Ephesus or Antioch, but then quietly smuggled him on to a nearby coaster going south to Corinth.

 

These brethren not only saw him safely on board, they travelled with him as far as Athens, two hundred miles down the coast. The inference, sometimes made, that Paul eluded his pursuers and went by the coast road to Athens, is surely mistaken. Why should he wear himself out with such a long journey on foot when he could travel in relative comfort by ship?

 

 

[Resource Manager]

Paul's health

 

And apparently the apostle was in need of both rest and recuperation. Three details suggest that he may have had a debilitating sickness at this time. Ramsey argues that Paul suffered from recurring attacks of malarial fever, to cope with which there was no wonder drug in those days!

 

1. The brethren sent Paul away. And he seems to have gone passively enough.
   
2. They accompanied him all the way to Athens. Yet, if he were a fit man, he was surely capable of looking after himself.
   
3. Codex Beza adds here: "But he by–passed Thessaly (the country immediately south of Berea). For he was hindered from proclaiming the word to them." In other words, whereas he could have dis­embarked for more preaching work at one of the intervening sea ports, something prevented him from fol­lowing such a natural and obvious policy. What more likely than a lack of physical fitness, to explain this?

 

From Athens Paul sent back a mes­sage to Silas – and also to Timothy now back in Thessalonica (1 Th. 3:2) –bidding them join him there with all speed. And meantime he "waited" at Athens (v. 16). Such inactivity was so uncharacteristic that an explanation has to be sought. The one just advanced is surely more likely than the others.

 

 

Notes: 17:10–15

11. Noble. the only other occurrences of this word are in Job 1:3 LXX; Lk. 19:12; 1 Cor. 1:26, two (or all) of which seem to imply social standing. But as applied here to Jews, Lk. 8:15 and Jn. 7:17 seem to be the most relevant. Readiness of mind. Compare the usage in 1 Chr. 29:5, 6, 9, 17 LXX; 2 Cor. 8:11,12,19; 9:2;Mt. 26:41;Rom.1:15;1 Pet. 5:2.

12. The Greek text picks out a deliberate contrast between v. 12,13.

13. People. The plural is significant–crowds. And the verbs "stirring up and troubling" (RV) are continuous.

14. The brethren. Was Sopater (20:4) one of those full of concern for Paul's well–being?

15. Conducted Paul. In the New Testament this verb normally means "appoint to office". Then here does it mean "those that specially esteemed Paul, those who accepted his lead"? But Josh. 6:23 and 2 Chr. 28:15 LXX might well imply "those concerned to see him safe." An additional Bezan reading here seems to imply that the coaster on which Paul travelled called at various ports in Thessaly, but he was forbidden (by the Spirit or by his health?) to attempt any preaching there.

[Resource Manager]

75. Paul at Athens (17:16–21)

 

The suggestion made earlier that at this time Paul's health was not good seems to find support from his apparent lack of drive on arrival in Athens. He "waited" to be joined there by Silas and Timothy. The word often describes hopeful waiting (e.g. Jn. 5:3; Heb. 11:10; Jas. 5:7); it might imply a certain impatience. Without his helpers Paul lacked initiative. For the time being he was content to be a tourist and sight–seer.

 

But Athens itself changed all that. When the apostle "beheld the city full of idols" his Jewish reaction was vigorous: "his spirit was stirred in him." Instinctively there came to his mind the curt Second Commandment and caustic prophetic censure of the puerility of all idol–worship (Jeremiah 10:1–16; Isaiah 44:9–20).

 

A decadent city.

 

Beautiful Athens, the intellectual and artistic capital of the world, also had in its streets and on its hills the tokens of every known religion. It was the world's religious capital also. Temples, altars, and idols were to be seen everywhere, so that even some of Athens' most famous sons made fun of the fact. One contemporary of Paul commented satirically: "Our (Athens) re­gion is so full of deities that thou mayest more easily find a god than a man." Athens even had a statue of John Hyrcanus, the Maccabean high–priest.

 

It is difficult to be sure whether Paul's provoked "spirit" was Paul himself – a natural reaction of indignation – or whether there is here an indication of a sudden and strong burst of divine inspira­tion goading him into action.

 

"Therefore," in his disgust at all this intellectual pride and religious futility, the apostle turned away from the self–satis­fied academics to others who, he hoped, were more ready to tremble at God's Word – to Jews in the synagogue, and proselytes of the gate, and the ordinary folk in the marketplace who were willing to leave their daily affairs to hear this unprepossessing Jew discourse on themes utterly foreign to the cleverness of their proud Oxford University.

 

This series of unconventional open–air meetings immediately began to make an impression. Here were Hyde Park Corner crowds of a sort Athens had never seen. Even some of the intellectual snobs of the city found themselves held by the mes­sage and the burning sincerity of Paul's oratory.

 

The technique of discussion, with ques­tion and answer, first tried out at Thessa­lonica (v.2), was just right for Athens. "Those that met with him" is almost certainly an inadequate translation of the difficult Greek word used to describe Paul's hearers. Rackham has suggested: "those sharing his conviction (about one true God)." Other possibilities are: "chance comers" or "those he could get (to listen to him)."

[Resource Manager]

Patronising intellectuals

 

The supercilious attitude of many was expressed in their comment: "Whatever would this cock–sparrow, this intellectual amateur, want to tell us"? Their words probably carried more than a soupcon of envy that this Jew could command such ready attention. It is not unlikely that Luke, with a wry smile on his face, recorded their use of spermologos because he saw in it a possible double meaning about Paul's use of "the seed of the Word."

 

Another reaction was: "Assuredly he declares, as with authority, the existence of certain foreign demons." In Greece it was normal to reserve the word "gods" for the original pantheon of their mytholo­gy, whilst great heroes and other out­standing human characters whom they deified were called "demons." So, natur­ally enough the use of this term would be the hearers' reaction to Paul's message about the death and resurrection and ascension of Jesus.

 

The suggestion (based on the plural "gods") has long been popular that these Athenians took "Jesus" and "Anastasis" (resurrection) to be the names of two new gods. But it is surely not conceivable either that Paul's message was so obscure as to be badly misunderstood or that his hearers were so unintelligent as to misconstrue his meaning so completely.

 

Of the various schools of philosophy then popular in Athens, it was the Epicu­reans and Stoics who specially took on Paul in argument, but in such a conde­scending sarcastic fashion: "Are we able to grasp this new teaching which is being spoken by you?" – as who should say: "We are only the best brains in the civilised world. We hope your message isn't beyond us!" They insisted that there be a formal hearing of this new teacher's claims before the Areopagus, the Athe­nian Sanhedrin. "Thou bringest strange things to our ears" might imply: "You are a prophet with a heavenly message, are you?"

 

Paul and Socrates

 

Judging from the satirical character of their comments and from certain remark­able resemblances it almost seems as though they were deliberately putting on a burlesque of the trial of Socrates, the great philosopher who, some four hundred years earlier, died in Athens for his "heresies", one of which was the intro­duction of "new gods." Like Paul, he had "reasoned" (by the Socratic method) in the agora. Like Paul, claiming a certain divine authority, he had charged his contemporaries with failure to fulfil their Creator's intention with them. And So­crates had ended up condemned by the Areopagus.

 

But this "trial" of Paul of Tarsus was a much less serious business, for now life in Athens was such a broadminded affair that in the field of religion these philo­sophers were interested in everything, but were serious about nothing. Hort's comment is relevant here: "The profound study of truth had withered into the idlest of imaginable frivolities. Athens was living on its reputation." All that these dilettanti were interested in was in hearing or publishing "something newer" than yesterday's stale ideas. Even the more serious of their own writers condemned them for their itching ears. So there was nothing accusatorial about the procedure, or surely Paul's speech would have been very different in its tone. Mars' Hill was chosen for its peace and quiet, an escape from the bustle of the agora.

 

It is not easy to summarise the kind of outlook these Athenian philosophers had developed towards the more important issues of life.

[Resource Manager]

Epicureans —

 

The Epicureans had originally been taught by their leader Zeno an outlook which today would be described as "coming to terms with the world we live in." But what had been in some respects a fairly admirable way of life had now degenerated into taking the easy course, a seeking of pleasure and gratification of the senses. These Epicureans believed in the existence of the gods, but conceived of them as remote and withdrawn from this world. Thus each man was left to paddle his own canoe. With this emphasis on freedom of the will they took out of life a lot of the fatalism and blind superstition which made the lives of the majority bewildering or miserable. So at this time the Epicurean philosophy was little better than a pragmatic atheistic materialism, the kind of attitude to life so common in the twentieth century's affluent society.

 

— and Stoics

 

The Stoics put emphasis on human life being governed by an iron fate which it would be folly to struggle or gird against. So, let a man learn "indifference to every influence of pain or sorrow. Let hardship and pleasure be encountered in the same spirit of sublime indifference or superior­ity. It was the cultivation of this passionless conformity to unbudgeable circumst­ance which made a good man." This was the highest good. So they said.

 

Stoicism was hardly a religion for everyman. It fostered a certain element of intellectual snobbery. It taught a man spiritual pride, whereas Epicureanism emphasized pleasure. Stoics denied re­surrection, but they believed in the immor­tality of the soul. Epicureans had no convictions about life after death. Thus these two schools were the Pharisees and Sadducees of Athens.

 

 

Notes: 17:16–21.

16. Stirred. There was surely anger here; s.w. 15:39; 1 Cor. 13:5; and in LXX the same word describes the anger of God with Israel's idolatry: Dt. 32:41; 9:18,19; 29:28; Jer. 32:37 etc. Clearly Paul was no Stoic.

Saw. Gk.: thēoreō (whence "theatre") suggests a sightseer; v.23. s.w. Wholly given to idolatry. The Gk. word has a hint of contempt in it– and the Athenians also for Paul: v.18,19,32.

[18. A setter–forth: s.w. v.23. The word implies declaring with authority. In the Apocrypha (2 Macc. 8:36;9:17) it means declaring the power of the God of Israel.

19. Took him. A fairly strong word, as in 16:19; 18:17;21:30. So probably reluctance on Paul's part is implied. But the same verbs: "took him and brought him" (s.w. 9:27) hardly seems to imply any hostile intent.

Aeropagus. Does Luke include this name to hint at a play on the Gk. word for "a trap"? RV: spoken by thee. The Gk. word often means "to speak by inspiration."

[Resource Manager]

76. Paul and the Philosophers (17:22–34)

 

They set Paul "in the midst of Mars Hill," that is, in the midst of the Court of Areopagus; and there before him – in­terested, sceptical, supercilious — was the cream of the world's education, men capable of bringing incisive criticism to bear on everything he said, and all the more able for that because they were full to the top with prejudice against what "that ugly little Jew" had to say.

 

The apostle's rhetoric and develop­ment of argument could hardly have been more different from what he would have used before a crowd of synagogue Jews. His approach had to be different, for where was the point in quoting Holy Scripture to these who were so utterly unfamiliar with the Book and would in any case have no respect for its authority?

 

Today a Christadelphian turned loose on a collection of atheistic Marxists would no doubt fall back on the argument from Bible prophecy. Paul could have done that in Athens, but didn't. One wonders why he didn't.

 

Careful beginning

 

He began on a conciliatory note: "Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious." The familiar AV words sound anything but conciliatory, but in fact the apostle cleverly chose a double–meaning word which in his mind had precisely this AV flavour, but which his hearers would naturally take to mean: 'I note that, according to all the indica­tions, you are much given to religious observance.'

 

The Athenians would take this as a compliment. Josephus used the same phraseology without any intention of cri­ticism.

 

'I am only passing through,' Paul added. Thus he disarmed them. He was not there to lead a sustained campaign.

 

There was no intention to seek recogni­tion as an official teacher in the university.

 

The Unknown God

 

'I observed your devotions' – that is, not how they worshipped, but what. Since there were such diverse religions repre­sented in that city, he naturally looked to see if his own people's faith was included. His eye lighted on an altar with the remarkable inscription: "To the Unknown God."

 

All kinds of guesses have been made regarding this: Afraid that they might incur the wrath of some deity who had been left out and felt slighted, the Athenians had taken out an insurance policy. There is also a rather childish story of how in time of plague Epimenides (whom Paul quotes in Tit. 1:12) let loose a flock of black and white sheep from Areopagus, bidding the Athenians offer sacrifice to whatever unknown god they deemed suitable on the very spot where any of these animals lay down.

 

But it is far more likely that by "The Unknown God" was meant The God of Israel, the God with the Name that was never pronounced or understood. One of their writers speaks of Judaea as "de­voted to the worship of an unknown god." Justin Martyr says that men referred to Jehovah as "the completely hidden One." And certainly in the development of his argument Paul did proceed to stress the purpose of a God "which is, and was, and is to come" (Rev. 1:8; v.24, 25, 31). By this approach the apostle was able to proclaim the God of Israel without appearing to despise the gods of Athens.

 

"Whom ye ignorantly worship, Him declare I unto you," Paul boldly announced. To a Jewish audience, schooled in the LXX (and cp. 3:17), that ; word "ignorantly" would have definitely ; implied blame, but in Athens it was innocuous enough. By this categorical assertion Paul told them, 'I am no sper–mologos (v. 18), but an accredited mes­senger of heaven.'

[Resource Manager]

The Lord of creation

 

With that exordium he took them back to the philosophical problem of Creation. By a single phrase – "God that made the world" – he discarded the Epicurean theory of evolution from a meaningless chaos, which totally commands the ready assent of all who like the idea of getting away from personal responsibility to an Almighty Creator.

 

From the very beginning (even from the time when there was nothing but a vast random collection of atoms) Paul's omnipotent Lord was the Master of all heaven and earth.

 

This concept, so supremely satisfying to a well–balanced contemplative mind, swept away every notion of a man–made temple being the dwelling–place of such a Creator. Nor, if they would think about it, could they go on believing that the superb sculptures gracing their streets were actual deities. How could they be –devised and fashioned by men who then had to lift them about, set them in position, and make them secure. Could an intelli­gent man – a philosopher! – actually believe that everything in human life was under the control of such "gods" as these?

 

Reacting away from this impossible notion, the Stoics had wedded them­selves to the concept of a blind fate exercising iron control alike over the big and the little things of life. Instead of this equally difficult theory, Paul led them to a belief, both rational and revealed, of an all–wise, all–powerful Lord who is so great that He needs nothing from anybody. With what was near to being a touch of humour the apostle's Greek may have implied 'the true God doesn't even need Epicureans' – and how these listening Stoics would approve! This unconventional orator seemed to be more for them than for the others.

 

How skilfully Paul lifted the entire subject on to a higher level than men of his day normally dreamed of contemplating! In every temple there were priests galore, intent on maintaining the impressiveness of the god by polishing and furbishing. Does a true God need this? Certainly Paul's "Unknown God" did not need to be cared for by men's hands. How could He, since He Himself is the source of "life and breath and all things"?

[Resource Manager]

All men made... to seek the Lord

 

Also, let them learn this – that this Almighty One had chosen to "make of one all nations of men." There is a textual problem here. "Made of one blood" (as AV and many MSS)? or "made of one man"? or "of one nature" (as certain other important MSS suggest)? Which is it?

 

Basically, the apostle's intention seems to have been, either way, essen­tially the same. Let these proud university men realise that they were in no position to preen themselves regarding their race or intellect or culture or political status. Just as, in the sight of a man, all ants are ants, so also to the God who made all, the Greek philosopher is as small as the uncouth barbarian, the spiritual snobbery of a Jew is as paltry as the ignorance of a superstitious Gentile.

 

God designed all of these to live in their appointed habitations and at their appointed epochs "that they should seek the Lord." It was for this purpose that the Creator had framed the entire race. Neither dead–pan Stoic reaction to hard circumstance nor soft Epicurean self–indulgence, neither the intellectual pride of the Greek thinker nor the boastful self–confidence of a Roman conqueror, came within a thousand miles of fulfilling the true purpose which their Maker had with every man jack of them: "that they should seek the Lord."

 

But how could they? If God is an Unknown God, the search is a failure from the start, surely.

By all means let them "feel after him" as a blind man gropes his way, making mistakes but also slowly making prog­ress, for the great God is not a God afar off, but One nigh at hand with revelation of Himself both in the world of nature and through prophets who are His spokesmen.

 

By this allusion to blindness and also by the assertion that God had designed "all the face of the earth" for man's habitation Paul shook his hearers with the truth that they were all members of a fallen race, needing redemption; and that the world they lived in was under a curse, for was it not familiar knowledge that large areas of the earth were not habitable? So some­thing must have gone wrong with the world which the Omnipotent had made.

 

Paul's phrase: "He was originally not far from every one of us, "likewise under­lined the unpalatable fact that an estrangement had somehow come in, so that now, they mostly "feel after him" in vain.

 

And if "all nations were made of one," why so much mutual rivalry and hostility between race and race? So – God may be in His heaven, but all is not right with His world!

[Resource Manager]

The source of all life

 

Nevertheless He continues to be the source and spring of all existence. In Him a tree lives. In Him an animal lives and moves. In Him (and not in himself) a man lives and moves and has his con­scious being!

 

By this time Paul had left the gods of Athens a long long way behind. He felt now the need for reinforcement in leading his hearers so far away from their tradi­tional thinking. Here many an authorita­tive Scripture would have come to his aid, but what use were they to influence the minds of clever men grossly ignorant of heaven's revelation?

 

So he fell back on their own "prophets" – poets and authors of repute. Aratus of Cilicia (perhaps of Tarsus) and Clean­thes had both penned almost identical lines: "For we are also His offspring." They wrote with reference to Zeus, the chief of the gods, and of course Paul knew that, but without hesitating he applied the words to his Unknown God, a thing he would not have dared to do if there had been a handful of Jews in his audience.

 

The only difference between these two quotes lay in Aratus's word "also", and this was the very point Paul wanted to make, that although already men live and move and have their being in God there is further progress still to be made by aspiring to be also "His offspring". Paul knew that in the beginning God had intended man to be not only "in His image," but also "after His (spiritual) likeness." So he bade them "feel after Him and find Him," and thus become, as their own poets put it: "His offspring."

 

"Being then originally (before the Fall) the offspring of God, we ought not to think that Deity is like unto "any offspring of man's cleverness and devising," white men making Him white and black men making Him black. All such spiritual immaturity should now be put away. Hitherto God had put up with it, being primarily concerned with the spiritual education of Jewry. But now, through their Unknown God, Jews had diffused know­ledge of this basic truth through all the known world.

[Resource Manager]

An imperative "Repent"

 

So the times of blameworthy ignorance (so LXX and 3:17; 13:27) were now ended with a wider and more explicit revelation.

 

Ignorance! what a charge (cp. v.23) to level against these learned Athenians! And here now, making that charge was no timid foreign spermologos, but one who spoke with all the authority of heaven: "Now (today, through me) God comman­deth all men everywhere to repent." No more of this dabbling in theories, no more of this deferring to human teachers, no more of this pride in the powers of human intellect! Here was a command to adopt new thinking (metanoia), a new religion, a new way of life.

 

No longer was this court a condescend­ing investigation into the claims and abilities of a new philosopher. The august judges of Areopagus were themselves on trial and found wanting – not condemned as yet, but certainly proved inadequate.

 

Even so, this call to repentance would find little acceptance with either Stoics or Epicureans. The former were too proud of the superior way in which they lived their lives. The latter deemed their lives to be their own to be used just as they saw fit.

 

The urgency of the message was now underlined. There is to be a day of righteous judgement. One day God will call men to account. No man is at liberty to live his life as he thinks best. The world is God's and those to whom He gives "life, and breath and all things" are answerable to the God–Man whom He has appointed to be Judge and Lord of all.

 

The deification of man was no new idea to these Greeks. But when Paul went on to declare that this Man had been raised from the dead and that thus God had brought forth evidence on which men could base their faith (so the Greek text implies), then the orator lost his audience. Let him propound afresh a doctrine of a disembodied immortality of the human soul, and the Stoics, at least, would be with him. But to them the idea of even one dead body coming to life again was little short of hilarious. No sensible philosopher would have any truck with it.

 

Reception of the message

 

Against all the rules, they interrupted the proceedings with sustained self–confident ridicule and sarcasm. Paul could go on no further. Nor, in the face of this, had he any wish to. Others, more impressed by his message and by his call to repentance, yet unwilling to face the scorn of their colleagues, said: 'Without these mockers we will hear thee again of this Man.' But after sleeping on it, very few of them still had that good intention. The rest were like Felix (24:25), fobbing off the message with a milk–and–watery half–promise. In them the world and the flesh (which between them are the very Devil) harnessed too many prejudices and per­sonal inclinations.

 

"Thus – as an object of scorn, and as a creator of division, and with little positive success – thus Paul went out from the midst of them." However, there was a Greek Joseph of Arimathea. But besides Dionysius, one of the judges on Areopa­gus, only a handful of these men of consequence believed. The record does not say that they joined Paul, but that they were joined (passive voice) to him, the implication being that as on other occa­sions God was at work (2:47; 13:48; 16:14), or Paul had testified in vain.

 

But (so it is possible to infer from 1 Cor. 16:15; 1:16) the very first of the few converts made in Athens was Stephanas, a visitor from Corinth. Contrary to his normal practice, Paul baptized him perso­nally–had to, because Silas and Timothy were not yet come from Macedonia; and when they did come, so great was Paul's concern for his new ecclesias, they were promptly sent back again, one to Thessa­lonica and the other to Berea or Philippi (1 Th. 3:1,2).

 

Another convert was Damaris, who may have been Dionysius' wife, though –very differently– some have guessed that 'Damaris' was a more respectable form of Damalis, which means "heifer", which means (they opine) she was a harlot. Maybe!

 

Is that why she is specially mentioned, or is it because Paul, still fighting ill–health, needed nursing attention, and got it from one whom he in turn brought to spiritual health?

[Resource Manager]

Why failure?

 

It is often said that the relative failure of Paul's preaching at Athens was due to his attempt to bandy philosophy with philo­sophers and that by the time he got to Corinth he had recognized the blunder and determined to rectify it. Hence his words to the brethren there: "When I came to you, I came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom ... for I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified ... And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom ..." (1 Cor. 2:1,2,4).

 

The idea is very plausible, but quite mistaken, as four considerations readily show:

 

1. "When they shall...deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premedi­tate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Spirit" (Mk. 13:11). Would not a promise such as this apply to Paul on Mars' Hill?
   
2. The record says explicitly that "he preached unto them Jesus and the resurrection" (v. 18,31). How could he proclaim these truths without also telling them that Jesus was "him that was crucified," and why he was crucified?
   
3. It is demonstrable (see next chap­ter) that even though the quoting of Holy Scripture to the Athenians would leave them unimpressed be­cause of their Biblical ignorance, from beginning to end Paul was steered by the principles which the Word taught him. It is an aspect of his speech at Athens which has gone either unnoticed or unappreci­ated.
   
4. Paul also wrote to the Corinth ecclesia 1 Cor. 9:20–22.

 

 

Notes: 17:22–34

22. Note that in 24:10 and 26:2,3 Paul likewise begins with an unforced compliment.

23. This inscription. So Paul was not half–blind as some choose to think. The Greek pluperfect: "in which had been inscribed," courteously implies: 'I'm not blaming you, but an earlier generation.'

Unknown God. There are apparently plenty of Greek literary allusions to 'unknown gods,' but no parallel to this singular.

25. With this verse, cp. 1 Chr. 29:14.

Worship. Hardly the right translation. Classically: do service; NT: heal. The translation care for covers both ideas. Here the picture is of priests assiduously dusting and polishing the idol.

Life and breath, the second term emphasizing the continuance of the life given.

26. Of one blood. If this AV reading is correct (the textual evidence is about 50/50), then Paul may have intended a double meaning, with reference to the death of Christ. But if RV, then the allusion (without direct quotation of Genesis) is to Adam. AV also may have this meaning.

All nations... all the face of the earth. Very effectively the word "all" comes no less than nine times in this speech. Determined, that is by Paul's Unknown God, not by Mars, the god of war.

27. Seek after him. There was, and is, need for this because, although He is near, men have withdrawn from Him. There is a hit here at Stoic self–sufficiency.

If haply. A rather sardonic disparaging phrase.

Not far. Pointed understatement! Jer. 23:23.

28. Live, move, have our being. Alternatively this sequence refers to birth, growth, maturity; and in that case, "his offspring" suggests perhaps a new birth.

Certain of your own poets. In 1 Cor. 15:33 Paul quotes from Menander, making the slightest possible alteration so as to suggest "corrupt Christ manners." And in Tit. 1:12 the quotation is from Epimenides.

Have said. In practically every other place this Greek word implies inspiration. Here also?

His offspring. The original (in both Aratus and Cleanthes) actually refers to Zeus, the chief of the gods. Near enough for Paul's purpose.

29. Why does Paul say "we ought not ..."? Was he in any danger of making this mistake?

30. This ignorance. Although Gk. has the ignorance, AV is right; for the definite article is often used with demonstrative force.

31. Because is, more accurately, "accordingly"; i.e. in harmony with this call to repentance.

Will is to be read either as meaning "he is about to" or else: "he intends to, he has decided." The first is the normal meaning.

Judge. Including Paul's judges; cp. 24:25.

By that man. Greek: not an ordinary man, but a man of distinction.

32.Heard Here aorist implies: "as soon as they heard." Cp. 22:21, 22.

34. Dionysius. Was it he or Paul who supplied Luke with this amazingly impressive summary. On the lowest level v.21–34 represent a work of genius.

Why did Paul fail at Athens? Not because of a wrong approach but because all universities put confidence in human intellect. For them that is the supreme authority.

[Resource Manager]

77. The Old Testament on Mars' Hill

 

It would appear that Paul, far from attempting to turn himself into a philo­sopher for the sake of acceptance by philosophers, based his discourse at Athens solidly on Isaiah 45, and then laced it with a wide range of other Scripture.

Acts 17	Isaiah 45
23. The Unknown God.	5. I am the Lord, and there is none else, there is no God beside me. 15. Verily thou art a God that hidest thyself.
23. Him declare I unto you.	6. That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me.
24. Lord of heaven and earth.	12. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: my hands have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.
25. As though he needed anything.	13. ... not for price, nor for reward, saith the Lord of hosts.
26. Made of one all nations ... that they should seek the Lord.	14. Egypt... Ethiopia .. . Sabeans. 22. Look unto me, and by ye saved, all the ends of the earth.
26. The times before appointed.	21. Who hath declared this from ancient time? Who hath told it from that time? have not I the Lord?
26. The bounds of their habitation.	18. God himself that formed the earth ... he formed it to be inhabited.
27. That they should seek after the Lord.	19. I said not unto the seed of Jacob, Seek ye me in vain.
28. We are his offspring.	11. Ask me of things to come concerning my sons.
29. The Godhead not like unto silver or gold, graven by art and man's device.	46:6. They lavish gold out of the bag, and weigh silver in the balance, and hire a goldsmith: and he maketh it a god
29. The offspring of God.	46:3. ...which are borne by Me from the belly, which are carried from the womb.
30. This ignorance.	20. They have no knowledge that set up the wood of their graven image.
30. Commandeth all men everywhere to repent.	22. Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth. 46.:8,9 LXX. Repent, ye that have gone astray, return in heart ... for I am God, and there is none other beside Me.
31. He will judge the world in righteousness.	23. The word is gone out of my mouth –righteousness... unto Me (Him) every knee shall bow.
31. He hath raised him from the dead. (Philosophy condemned.)	13. I have raised him up in righteousness. 9. Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker!... shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou?

[Resource Manager]

There are also other significant Isaiah contacts; e.g. "As though he needeth anything" surely finds its earlier express­ion in 40:13,14: "Who hath directed the Spirit of the Lord, or being his counsellor hath taught him? With whom took he counsel, and who instructed him ... and taught him knowledge, and shewed to him the way of understanding?"

 

Again, Isaiah 55:4–7 provides a sequ­ence of ideas marvellously like Paul's in his Athens speech: "I have appointed him ... A leader and commander to the people (that man whom he hath ordained) ... nations (all men everywhere) that knew not thee (the Unknown God) shall run unto thee ... Seek ye the Lord while he may be found (that they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him and find him): call ye upon him while he is near (though he be not far from every one of us). Let the wicked forsake his way (now commandeth all men everywhere to repent)."

 

So also Isaiah 42:4–9: "Judgment in the earth (judge the earth in righteous­ness) ... he that created the heavens ... that spread forth the earth (Lord of heaven and earth) ... he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein (seeing he giveth to all life and breath and all things)... a light of the Gentiles (all nations of men) ... to open the blind eyes (that they should feel after him, and find him; compare also 59:10) ... my praise I will not give to graven images (we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone) who will declare to you things from the beginning? (hath determined – the times before appointed)". Several of the Psalms also seem to have been in Paul's mind as he reasoned on Mars' Hill. "Thou hast set all the borders of the earth" (74:17) is echoed in "He hath determined the bounds of their habitation" (but compare also Dt. 32:8). And in Psalm 96 phrase after phrase anticipates Paul's discourse: "Declare... his wonders among all people ... he is to be feared above all gods. For all the gods of the nations are (mere) idols: but the Lord made the heavens .. . fear before him, all the earth ... he shall judge the world with righteousness."

 

One other intriguing similarity is nearly point–blank quotation, and most apt too: "He hath made of one (family?) all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth" clearly looks back to Genesis 11:8 – the scattering of the one family, now idolatrous, into a diversity of nations all over the earth.

 

There is also a specially interesting quotation from Stephen's speech be­fore the Sanhedrin, an oration that Paul had heard with chagrin but which he now used with gusto: "The most High dwelleth not in temples made–with–hands" (7:48), the Greek word for that last phrase being a common LXX word for an idol.

 

In the light of the foregoing how can it be maintained that at Athens Paul sought to convert by turning himself into a purveyor of philosophy? It is an idea that ought never to have been thought of and that now deserves decent interment.

[Resource Manager]

78. At Corinth (18:1–11)

 

When Luke wrote, simply, that "Paul departed from Athens," it is possible to infer (from the form of that word "depart", s.w. verse 2) that he meant to imply that the apostle was told to leave. The great university wanted to hear no more of the highly unphilosophical thesis of this strange Jew.

 

And it may be assumed with fair prob­ability that Paul was not loth to go. By this time he must have learned that there was "more hope of raging Jews, more hope of ignorant barbarians, more hope of degraded slaves, than of those who had become fools because in their conceit they were exceptionally wise." In Athens Paul must have felt like a fish out of water. But how could he return to Mace­donia? Active Jewish hostility there was too intense. Yet what encouragement could he look for in the next big city he came to? The distance from Athens to Corinth is almost exactly the distance from Oxford to London, and the change in character was just about as dramatic.

 

The character of Corinth

 

Rome itself was not more cosmopoli­tan than Corinth. Its key position on the isthmus so facilitated east–west trans­portation of both goods and people as to make the city a thriving hub of industry and commerce, with all the ethnic types of the empire thronging its streets.

 

But "this mass of Jews, ex–soldiers, philosophers, merchants, sailors, freed–men, slaves, tradespeople, hucksters, and agents of every form of vice" guaran­teed that there was not only every kind of religion represented in Corinth but also every evil. Was Paul willing to take on such a challenge armed only with the simplicity of the gospel?

 

Later he was to write to the young ecclesia there: "Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of them­selves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you!" (1 Cor. 6:9–11).

 

Well might the apostle write in such downright fashion. There was one temple in Corinth which encouraged the piety of its worshippers by having in its sacred courts no less than a thousand prosti­tutes – temple "virgins" – all of them blessed by the approving smile of Aphrodite.

[Resource Manager]

Aquila and Priscilla

 

However, Corinth also offered Paul big encouragement, for no sooner was he arrived there than he fell in with Aquila and Priscilla. It is not difficult to surmise how they came to meet. In some provin­cial synagogues (e.g. Alexandria – so says Edersheim) Jews sat according to their trade guilds. So it is not unlikely that on Paul's first sabbath in Corinth the two tent–makers got to know each other. It is even possible that before ever they met they already knew of each other, for even in those far–off days the ecclesial grape­vine functioned wondrous well.

 

Aquila and Priscilla had had to leave the metropolis because of a recent de­cree by Claudius that all Jews leave Rome forthwith. The capital had been plagued by Jewish riots concerning "a certain Chrestus" – a historical detail which has been very widely interpreted with reference to violent Jewish opposi­tion to the gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

With a superbly unstatesmanlike ges­ture Claudius decreed that all Jews be banned from the city. Some years earlier Tiberius had rounded up four thousand Jews and deported them to Sardinia, hoping that there the malaria would kill them all off. But that was a trivial busi­ness compared with this latest measure which it was impossible to enforce, for any Jew who chose could conveniently "get lost" in the labyrinth of congested Rome. Claudius would soon realise this, and probably contented himself with the deportation of such leaders as he could lay hands on. This law soon became a dead letter (as 28:17 and Rom. 16:3 clearly show). It is almost certain that Aquila and Priscilla were already Christ­ians, for it is hardly credible that an unbelieving Jew would work with Paul at tent–making. In Rome Aquila, well sup­ported by so able a wife, had probably come to prominence among the brethren, and now the two paid for their zeal by being uprooted from Rome. So they came to Corinth, and set up in business there. It is even possible that they were newly–weds, for Luke uses the very unusual word prosphatōs regarding them, thus perhaps putting in a subtle allusion to the Mosaic rule about a man with a new wife (Dt. 24:5 s.w.). In that case they were a fairly young couple. But see notes.

 

Very soon Paul was in full partnership with them. He lived with them, he worked with them, and he preached with them.

 

The happy association with Aquila and Priscilla begun here doubtless explains the apostle's growing aspiration to visit Rome, to further the cause of Christ there; see ch. 81 (10).

 

Limited witness

 

At first the preaching in Corinth was on a rather modest scale, perhaps because Paul still hoped for word from Thessalo­nica or Berea that the way was open for him to return there (1 Th. 3 10; cp. the return in Acts 14:21). So meantime he contented himself with a not–too–vigorous participation in synagogue discussions, in the course of which "he inserted the name of the Lord Jesus" (Bezan text). Here the implication seems to be that the apostle was now experimenting in a kind of "indirect method" of instruction – talk­ing in a way that would be construed as orthodox Judaism, but flavouring it now and then with Christian Truth. There is no indication that he made much progress either with the Jews themselves or with the God–fearing Gentiles.

 

The site of this synagogue has been identified by the archaeologists, and the inscription over its door has been found: "Synagogue of the Hebrews," a title which might suggest that the congrega­tion consisted mainly of Jews from the Holy Land, who could therefore be counted on to be extremely conservative in their reaction to Paul's "new ideas".

[Resource Manager]

Change of method

 

The arrival of Silas and Timothy once again (1 Th. 3:2; Acts 18:5) from Mace­donia made a big two–fold difference to Paul's attitude to his Corinthian mission. In the first instance, they brought with them a substantial sum of money, sent by the generous Philippian brethren (and possibly by the other Macedonian eccle­sias also). This meant that he no longer needed to spend a large part of his time earning his own living. Once again he could be a full–time missionary.

 

Also, at this time he was "pressed in spirit" (v.5: AV). There is double difficulty here, for there is ambiguity about the meaning of the word "pressed," and in place of "spirit," many texts read "word." In fact, the alternatives multiply:

 

1. Pressed in spirit.
   
2. Pressed by the Spirit.
   
3. Fully occupied in the Word.
   
4. Pressed (constrained) by the Word.

 

In the New Testament the Greek word for "pressed" most often means "shut in" (e.g. Lk. 19:43; 22:63; Phil. 1:23), frequently in the sense of "shut in from normal activity by reason of sickness (e.g. Lk. 4:38; Acts 28:8) Yet the con­text: "and he testified to the Jews seems to suggest the idea: "shut up to nothing but preaching activity" (by con­trast with his earlier part–time devotion to it).

 

Whatever the precise meaning, there seems to be little doubt that about this time Paul changed his tactics. Hitherto he had been "reasoning in the synago­gue," attempting to teach by discussion and the thrust and parry of argument. Now he "testified," an expression which – so the context suggests – meant open and direct teaching of Christian Truth through the medium of lectures and sys­tematic instruction: "I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him a crucified Christ" (1 Cor. 2:2). No longer the indirect method of talking Judaism in friendly fashion to Jews, hoping to profit by the occasional opportunity to insert some positive teaching concerning Jesus. Instead, he now went all out to expound in fullest possible detail the Old Testament gospel pointing to Jesus as the Messiah. "There was much speaking and interpreting of Scripture" (Bezan text).

[Resource Manager]

Persecution

 

The reaction to this change of front was immediate and drastic: "They opposed themselves, and blasphemed." This was too much for Paul. He could stand any amount of opposition and de­nunciation, but coarse blasphemy against his Lord was more than he could stomach. So, shaking his raiment in solemn disapproval (v.6; 20:26), he left the synagogue, uttering weighty warn­ings against their spite and unbelief. How could any man say: "Jesus is anathema" (1 Cor. 12:3), and not store up judge­ment for himself?

 

Centuries before this, Nehemiah "shook out his lap, and said, So God shake out every man from his house .. . that performeth not this promise" (Neh. 5:13). And now, by a comparable action, Paul meant the same thing. But doubt­less these Jews laughed him to scorn, for the effect of their blasphemy was to shake him out of their House of the Law.

 

But Paul did not shake the dust off his feet, as Jesus had commanded (Mt. 10:14) because at this time he had no intention of giving up Corinth as hope­less: "Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean: from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles (in Corinth)."

 

When he uttered these ominous words, did he have in mind the grim retribution David brought on the Amale­kite for turning against "the Lord's anointed" (2 Sam. 1:16)? Or was it God's grim message through Ezekiel: "Whosoever heareth the sound of the trumpet, and taketh not warning ... his blood shall be upon him" (33:4)?

 

The Jewish opposition now aroused must have been intensely rancorous and full of threat against Paul's life, for this situation turned into one of the very few occasions (perhaps the only one) when persecution filled Paul with fear. So much so, that it needed a special manifestation of the Lord himself (cp. 23:11) to rally his failing spirit: "Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace." The emphasis of that pleonasm shows how near the apos­tle had come to crumpling up completely.

 

It was not only Jewish hostility which brought him to this pass: "I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling" (1 Cor. 2:3). That word for "weakness" normally describes sick­ness; "much trembling" surely identifies the apostle's illness as being the ague of malaria.

 

In these circumstances it is easy to understand that in face of persecution Paul was reduced to tearfulness. To a man in low physical condition even mole­hills become mountains.

 

A vigorous campaign

 

So, helped by the exhortation of his Lord and by the encouragement of his fellow–workers, Paul started afresh. Ad­joining the synagogue was the commod­ious house of a "proselyte of the gate" called Justus. He was one of Paul's chief supporters and readily put his home at the apostle's service as a lecture room. Paul was now able to continue living with Aquila and Priscilla and to make his challenge to Judaism by preaching Christ almost within earshot of the synagogue's congregation.

 

A policy as tactless and militant as this appears to need some explaining. Surely by such a confrontation he was asking for trouble. That Paul, normally so careful of people's feelings (for the gospel's sake), should swing to such an extreme of provocation can only be taken as a measure of how intensely his spirit had been stirred by the crudity of Jewish blasphemy.

 

But also his Lord had given him empha­tic reassurance: "I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee" (cp. 27:24). It was the experience of diffident Jeremiah over again: "Thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak. Be not afraid of their faces, for I am with thee to deliver thee" (Jer. 1:7,8).

 

That there was real danger in Corinth may be inferred also from what Paul had himself lately written to his beloved Thes­salonians: "Brethren, pray for us, that the word of the Lord may have free course, and be glorified … and that we may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked men" (2 Th. 3:1,2) – "for (he added with breath–catching understatement) all men have not faith."

[Resource Manager]

Jewish malignity continued unabated. When, in the course of his third journey, Paul was leaving Corinth, there was a plan to assassinate him (20:3; ch.87).

 

But now the Lord added firm en­couragement: "I have much people in this city." It seemed impossible that it should be so, but Paul took the Master at his word, and girded up his loins. The Lord's word for "people" was that which was commonly used (in both OT. and NT.) with reference to Israel. Then did Jesus mean "many more Jewish converts," or "many Gentiles to be brought into the New Israel"? The latter, most probably.

 

The Lord might have added: "and in all Achaia," for as the gospel took firm hold in Corinth, it also spread through all the surrounding region (1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Cor. 1:1).

 

There came further encouragement with the conversion of Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue. And because of the special significance of such an unexpected gos­pel success, Paul broke his usual rule and himself officiated at Crispus's baptism (1 Cor. 1:14). Along with Crispus there was also the baptism of one Gaius who was evidently a prominent and wealthy man, for in the course of his next missionary journey Paul was to describe him as "mine host, and of the whole church" (Rom. 16:23).

 

Two other noteworthy converts were "Erastus the chamberlain (RV: treasurer) of the city, and Quartus" (Rom. 16:23). The latter is described rather oddly as "a brother." But the Greek text reads: "the brother." This is even more strange, until it is recognized that this is a common New Testament idiom for "his brother" (e.g. 1 Cor. 1:1; 5:1Gk.; 16:12; Mt. 9:10; 13:25Gk.; Lk. 16:8a etc.), that is, the brother of Erastus. The previous verse in Romans 16 mentions Tertius as Paul's amanuensis; and there is also a Secun­dus (Acts 20:4). It seems highly likely that these three, called "Second, Third, Fourth" were brothers, and that "First" was Erastus. More is known about him, for near the agora of Corinth there has been found a stone with this first–century inscription: "Erastus, the procurator of public buildings, laid this pavement at his own expense." A man as public–spirited as that would easily rise to yet higher status. And his wealth and spirit of service re–directed towards the well–being of the ecclesia would prove invaluable.

 

There are clear indications (e.g. 1 Cor. 14:23) that the growing ecclesia had one main assembly point, and presumably this continued to be the house of Titus Justus (v.7 RV). The idea of synagogue worshippers and Christian believers meeting, so to speak, cheek by jowl is one which intrigues or even titillates the imagination.

 

Paul's ministry at Corinth now showed no sign of flagging. He "sat" (Gk.) as a fully recognized rabbi, and "many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized," precisely as the Lord Jesus had promised. They came from all ranks of society. Prominent Jews and disting­uished Gentile citizens joined fellowship with many others from the lowest strata of the city's polyglot populace (1 Cor. 6:9–11; 1:26).

 

In all this Paul was aided by a renewed endowment of Holy Spirit power, by which, with many "signs and wonders," he demonstrated "the signs of an apos­tle" (1 Cor. 2:4; 2 Cor. 12:12; Rom 15:18,19).

 

This satisfying work continued for "a year and six months" – and since the Greek word here is commonly used for the holy year, this suggests a period stretching from Passover to the second Day of Atonement, or from Day of Atone­ment to the second Passover. Which of these?

 

The similarity between the Lord's ex­hortation to Paul: "Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace," and Isaiah's Day of Atonement prophecy: "Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet," (58:1) points to the second alternative. And this is supported by the fact that some time after this Paul sailed to Ephesus, and thence to the Holy Land. But long–voyage sailing ended in October (27:9), so it must have been in the summer months after Passover that Paul did this travelling.

 

Evidently Crispus, whose household also to a man gave obedience to the Faith, resigned from his office in the synagogue or was peremptorily sacked, for within a short while his place was filled by one Sosthenes (v.17), and when the persua­sion of the gospel was turned on him, in due time he too forsook the synagogue for the ecclesia, (1 Cor. 1:1), but not before facing the music for his Christian sympathies.