Areopagus Speech Research Articles

“For on Him We Depend”

Abstract Most scholars have interpreted Acts 17:28a–c (“for in him we live and move and are”) within the context of the Aratus quotation in 17:28e. Yet in doing so, they overlooked the precise meaning of this statement and how it fits within the argument. This article considers the philological aspects and motifs contained in Acts 17:28a–c within their context. Thus, the statement expresses dependence on God by use of the Greek phrase ἔν τινι εἶναι, which appears widely across Greek literature. By taking the evidence from these sources into consideration, it becomes clear that the concise statement of Acts 17:28a–c bundles up various ideas of the Areopagus speech into one thought.

Paul the Middle Platonist? Exegetical Traditions on Timaeus 28c and the Characterization of Paul in Acts 17:16–31

AbstractPaul’s speech to the Areopagus in Acts 17 places the apostle in philosophical dialogue with Stoics and Epicureans. This article identifies important points of contact between Paul’s speech and Middle Platonic exegesis of a famous Platonic phrase from Timaeus 28c. There, the philosopher declares that the maker and father of the world is hard to find, and even more difficult to talk about. Many later interpreters of Plato commented on the dictum. Middle Platonists such as Plutarch mused about the theological implications of naming god both “maker” and “father.” Jewish and Christian interpreters like Philo and Justin employed Plato’s phrase to describe their access to divine revelation. The first portion of this article argues that the Areopagus speech contains evidence of similar exegesis, both in its references to god’s roles as maker and father and in Paul’s claim to declare the unknown god. These resonances do more than clarify the author’s philosophical background; they also have previously unexplored implications for our understanding of Paul’s characterization in Acts 17. The second half of the article argues that in aligning Paul with the Platonic tradition, the author participates in an established Greco-Roman practice of depicting the Platonists, Stoics, and Epicureans in theological dialogue.

Proclaiming the Judge of the Living and the Dead: The Christological Significance of Judgement in Acts 10 and 17

This volume is a revised version of the author’s Ph.D. thesis accepted by the University of St. Andrews in 2017. The research was initially directed by Grant MacAskill, then completed under David M. Moffitt. Akagi claims that previous research on Luke–Acts and the speeches in Acts has missed the significance of Jesus’s role as eschatological judge of all humanity. He selects the speeches of Acts 10:34–43 and 17:22–31 as his focal texts since both climax with statements that highlight Jesus’s role as final judge. Akagi’s conclusions carry implications for our understanding of Lukan theology, of the speeches in Acts, and of the Messianic dimensions of early Christology.The customary opening chapter defines the central problem, reviews previous research, treats issues of methodology, and outlines the argument to follow. Akagi contends for his thesis in chs. 2–5 before concluding with a short summary chapter that highlights key findings. Since Akagi’s focus lies in Jesus’s role as eschatological judge, chs. 2–3 locate Jesus within the context of judgment figures present in the literature of early Judaism. Chapter 2 looks at three writings from the pseudepigraphal literature: Similitudes of Enoch, 4 Ezra, and 2 Baruch. These writings share common features: eschatological judgment is essential, a human messianic figure who will conduct that judgment (even though their depiction of how it takes place differ), and this human figure acting with supernatural power. In ch. 3, Akagi conducts a similar investigation based on selections from the Qumran literature. He concludes that these texts add little to his findings from the pseudepigraphal literature, though they do reinforce his earlier conclusions from a different circle within early Judaism.In chs. 4 and 5, Akagi turns his attention to key NT texts, Acts 10:34-43 and 17:22-31, respectively. One strength of these chapters lies in Akagi’s work to read these speeches within their narrative context rather than in abstraction. At the climax of his speech in Acts 10, Peter makes three claims about Jesus: he identifies Jesus the Christos whom God raised from the dead, he claims God appointed Jesus to judge “the living and the dead” by God (10:42), and he asserts that forgiveness of sins through Jesus’s name will be extended to all who believe in him. In doing so, he attributes authority and activity to Jesus that goes far beyond portrayals of other figures involved in judgment within early Judaism. In ch. 5, Akagi turns to Paul’s Areopagus speech in Acts 17. This speech, though quite different from that of Acts 10, nevertheless also speaks of Jesus’s resurrection by God and divine appointment as judge of the world. Although this speech lacks explicit indications of Jesus as Messiah, Akagi claims the audience of Acts would have heard such associations based on parallels with messianic activity found earlier in Acts. Once again, this human figure Jesus judges the world with divine authority as a function of his messianic identity.In summary, Akagi argues that the implications of Jesus’s role as eschatological judge have been overlooked in Christological formulations. On the basis of his comparative work with other figures of judgment within early Judaism and on the narrative progression of Acts, Jesus’s messianic identity entails acting with an authority typically attributed to God alone. Thus, Akagi argues for a high Christology in Acts, in contrast to much academic work on the subject.Just when one thinks everything that could be said about the speeches in Acts (or Luke’s theology/Christology) has already been exhausted, along comes a carefully argued and clearly written thesis such as this that explicates an important though overlooked theme. Akagi’s work offers much to ponder for further research. In particular, one must ask if his proposed link between Jesus’s messianic identity and judgment is located (and developed further) elsewhere in Acts where the proposed connection will not be as explicit. In conclusion, this is a significant work for scholars working on Lukan Christology and the speeches in Acts.

Paul and Socrates in Dialogue: Points of Contact between the Areopagus Speech and the Apology

For many years, scholars have noted striking similarities between the account of Paul's visit to Athens in Acts and ancient accounts of the trial of Socrates. There have been at least five distinct proposals about the significance of these similarities, but each has substantial shortcomings. In this article, I argue that Luke's purpose is to place Paul's Areopagus speech in dialogue with the thought of Socrates as it is represented in traditions about his trial, especially Plato's Euthyphro and Apology.

The Areopagus Speech and Contextualization: Some Hermeneutical and Exegetical Considerations

The Areopagus Speech Is Commonly Seen As A Model Of Missionary Contextualization, An Exemplary Translation Of The Gospel Into The Language And Concepts Of Paul’s Athenian Audience. This Article Evaluates This Line Of Interpretation Using The Hermeneutical Concept Of “framing” That Is At The Heart Of Contemporary Linguistics, Narratology, Translation Theory, And Evangelical Contextualization Models. Looking Especially At The Work Of Colin Chapman And Kevin Higgins, Two Influential Missiologists, And Considering Seven Key Exegetical Cruxes, It Shows That Their Type Of Interpretation Fails To Read The Speech Contextually Because It Is Not Attentive To The Way Paul And Luke Frame The Text. KEYWORDS: Areopagus speech, contextualization, book of Acts, cognitive linguistics, narratology, missiology, biblical hermeneutics (or biblical interpretation), Colin Chapman, Kevin Higgins

Hidden Criticism of the Angry Tyrant in Early Judaism and the Acts of the Apostles by Drew J. Strait

Reviewed by: Hidden Criticism of the Angry Tyrant in Early Judaism and the Acts of the Apostles by Drew J. Strait Linda Maloney drew j. strait, Hidden Criticism of the Angry Tyrant in Early Judaism and the Acts of the Apostles (Lanham: Lexington Books/Fortress Academic, 2019). Pp. xiv + 423. $130. Drew Strait's book could use a snappier title, but the one it has is descriptive of its content. S. is a Mennonite scholar; Hidden Criticism is based on his doctoral thesis for Gert Steyn at the University of Pretoria (2015). He received his A.M.R.S. at the University of Chicago Divinity School and his indebtedness to Prof. Hans-Josef Klauck at that institution is both acknowledged and well footnoted. Strait's book is essentially aimed at demonstrating that Paul's Areopagus speech (Acts 17) is an attack on idols, icons, and the emperor cult and by no means an apologia for them. In a foreword, David P. Moessner describes the work as "nothing less than an iconoclastic blast through a time-honored evaluation of Paul's classic speech against pagan idolatry to illuminate a new discovery from Hellenistic legitimations of divine kingship" (p. x). Probably the book's greatest strength is its deep and detailed examination of postexilic Jewish authors' veiled verbal resistance to Greek and Roman veneration for idols and, ultimately, for idolized emperors. It seems to me that S. is more indebted than he acknowledges to Todd Penner's earlier In Praise of Christian Origins: Stephen and the Hellenists in Lukan Apologetic Historiography (Emory Studies in Early Christianity 10; New York: T&T Clark, 2004), which has prepared the ground well in its treatment of the character, background, and purposes of Stephen's speech in Acts 7. After a first chapter introducing the subject and method, part 1, "Objects of Resistance," sets out the ways in which honor was bestowed on divine beings in the ancient world by means of images and sacrifices, and how such honors were ultimately hybridized to revere rulers. S.'s command of the ancient record, both written and epigraphic, is remarkable. In part 2, "Strategies of Resistance," he focuses on the means by the worship of idols and idolized rulers from Alexander onward was covertly undermined—by Greek philosophers but also and primarily in the Books of Maccabees and in Alexandria, especially by Philo. Special attention is paid to Roman imperial figures, particularly Augustus. S. examines how Philo and other Jewish writers of the period refined their approach to the First Commandment (which S. treats in Protestant fashion as two). In this presentation, the First Commandment asserts monotheism, the Second monolatry; thus there are separate treatments of the ways Jewish writers accommodated divine sovereignty with earthly rule and of how they coped with the question of images. For me the most interesting part of the book was chap. 7, "The Wisdom of Solomon and Empire." In S.'s portrayal, "Ps.-Solomon is an acculturated Hellenistic Jew who is more likely responding to local ethnic tensions under the hegemony of imperial power"—in Alexandria. Cited in support of this location (which is generally accepted) are "Wisdom's invective toward Egyptian theriolatry (Wis 13–14), animosity toward Egypt through its retelling of the Exodus narrative (Wis 10–19), and parallels with Philo" (p. 248). In particular, the Book of Wisdom paints a portrait of the ideal king of Israel (Solomon) as a counterexample to the earthly rulers the author knew. It begins (1:1): "Love righteousness, you rulers of the earth" and concludes its introductory section with chap. 6: "Listen therefore, O kings, and understand. … For your dominion was given you from the Lord, and your sovereignty from the Most High" (6:1-2). "Most High" is a key expression; Jews of the Hellenistic period were encouraged to see their God as supreme, and in a cultural climate [End Page 723] in which monotheism was scarcely understood by ordinary people that was a good strategy. Unjust rulers are equated with the wicked (cf. Wis 5:17-23), and God's condemnation of the wicked was a familiar theme in the Hebrew Bible as in the LXX. Still, according to S., "The...

Paulinisches Marketing zwischen Inkulturation und Ironie. Argumentationsstrategien in der Areopagrede (Apg 17,22b–31)

Abstract This contribution discusses the understanding of inculturation that is operative for Luke’s Paul in the Areopagus speech. It combines philological analysis of conspicuous features of the text with an evaluation of archeological data to situate the Areopagus speech within the socio-cultural context of Athens. An interpretation of verse 31 is proposed that does not include reference to an eschatological event and which could help to clarify the often discussed soteriological and christological difficulties of the argumention. Thus it becomes evident that the adopted stance of the Lukan Paul before the Areopagus is marked by ironic inversions and anti-imperial critique.

The God of glory: Explicit references to God in discourses in the Acts of the Apostles (7:2–53; 14:15–18; 17:22–31)

This essay offers insight into Luke’s concept of God by analysing three sections in which God is explicitly a topic of discussion. These sections are Stephen’s apology (Acts 7:2–53), the account of Paul’s and Barnabas’ mission in Lystra (Acts 14:8–18), and the Areopagus speech (Acts 17:22–31). Because these texts share similar motifs, they can be said to constitute an argumentative series. In these sections, Luke provides a coherent concept of God comprised of many motifs from Luke-Acts. The central motif is that God created the world, which results in God’s self-sufficiency. Therefore, a worship with neither sacrifices nor temple is the appropriate response to God as a selfsufficient, transcendent, spiritual, and perfect being that is completely different from every mortal being on earth.

Reading the Areopagus Speech in Acts 17 from the Perspective of Sacral Manumission of Slaves in Ancient Greece

This article suggests that the metaphor of Paul as seed-picker who gathers dirt from the market in Athens (Acts 17:18) is part of the broad slave metaphor found in Greco-Roman literature and in the New Testament. The stigma of depersonalization, desocialization, and religious marginalization is attached to enslavement. Slaves are excluded from authentic personhood. The article explores the rhetoric in Paul's Areopagus speech. It demonstrates Pauline influence on the narrative in Luke-Acts. The essence of the Areopagus speech is the universal unity of humanity and the life-giving effect of the resurrection belief. Building on the notions of fictive kinship and quasi-kinship the article compares the practice of sacral manumission for slaves with that of manumissio in ecclesia.

The Wisdom of Solomon, Ruler Cults, and Paul's Polemic against Idols in the Areopagus Speech

Despite recent attempts to read Luke-Acts as subverting Roman imperial ideology and power, the Areopagus speech in Acts 17:16–34 remains politically elusive. If Luke's attitude toward Rome was negative, one would expect to find anti-imperial motifs in Paul's Missionsreden , especially in Athens, where we know imperial cult media existed and where Luke most explicitly criticizes Greco-Roman religion. In this study, I investigate the political referents of the Areopagus speech through (1) an examination of the hybrid material representation of gods and kings in the urban spaces of empire, including Roman Athens; and (2) a comparative analysis of the Areopagus speech with the Wisdom of Solomon's polemic against imperial cult media (Wis 14:16–21). In contrast to scholars who read the Areopagus speech as a critique of the traditional gods sensu stricto , I suggest that Paul's polemic against sebasmata (objects of worship, Acts 17:23) and precious materials (Acts 17:29) critiques the iconic spectacle underlying the visibility and euergetism of gods and imperial authority.

The Wisdom of Solomon, Ruler Cults, and Paul's Polemic against Idols in the Areopagus Speech

The Wisdom of Solomon, Ruler Cults, and Paul's Polemic against Idols in the Areopagus Speech

Fine Tuning Mission to reach those influenced by Darwinism

The scientifically aware section of the South African population is increasing. Many are being exposed to the concept of Darwinian evolution. Exposure has generated a religious sub �people group� who have problems with Christianity because they have been influenced by the naturalistic element in Darwinian philosophy. Christian antagonism towards evolution has often prejudiced them unfavourably towards the gospel. Recent discoveries concerning the fine-tuning of the universe have now presented a window of opportunity for overcoming this. It may enable the church to �fine-tune� its missionary approach to present them with the gospel in a more acceptable manner. It is suggested that Paul�s Areopagus speech provides a model for such cross-cultural evangelism. A section is included at the end, describing some objections that have been raised against the cosmological fine-tuning apologetic.

„Mitten auf dem Areopag“. Überlegungen zu den Schnittstellen zwischen antiker Philosophie und Neuem Testament

In front of the Areopagus speech of Acts 17 this essay queries which historical and herme-neutical aspects are to be considered when one deals with the relationship of ancient phi-losophy and early Christian literature. With that, different perspectives must be joined: Both, Christian reception of philosophical contents and methods on one hand and ap-proaches for an explicit dialogue respectively controversy on the other hand, can be drawn into the discourses in the overarching context of Hellenistic culture, in which both philoso-phy and Christianity present themselves as guides to an extensive orientation of life.

»Mitten auf dem Areopag«. Überlegungen zu den Schnittstellen zwischen antiker Philosophie und Neuem Testament

In front of the Areopagus speech of Acts 17 this essay queries which historical and herme-neutical aspects are to be considered when one deals with the relationship of ancient phi-losophy and early Christian literature. With that, different perspectives must be joined: Both, Christian reception of philosophical contents and methods on one hand and ap-proaches for an explicit dialogue respectively controversy on the other hand, can be drawn into the discourses in the overarching context of Hellenistic culture, in which both philoso-phy and Christianity present themselves as guides to an extensive orientation of life.

Paul's Areopagus Speech of Acts 17:16—34 as Both Critique and Propaganda

Interpretations of Pauls Areopagus discourse in Acts 17:16-34 are often rad ically incongruous. They range from seeing it as a placid pantheistic sermon on natural theology all the way to seeing it as a scathing demonization of Gentile reli gion.1 Interpreters who emphasize the speech's similarities to Greco-Roman phi losophy incline toward the former view, while those attuned to the Jewish context incline toward the latter. Both types have a significant amount of supporting evi dence and are able to provide strong readings for their argument, given that the speech does indeed utilize Hellenistic philosophical concepts and Jewish critiques of idolatry. I suggest, however, that matters are more complex than an either/or interpretation of the Areopagus discourse and that Luke's purposes are more sub tie than either accommodation or critique/resistance would allow.2

Die Areopagusrede (Hand. 17:22-31) – ’n verkenning van homiletiese elemente

The Areopagus speech (Acts 17:22-31) – an exploration of homiletical elements In this article certain guidelines are developed from a selection of definitions for preaching and also from relevant data about the process of compiling and evaluating sermons. The aim in developing these guidelines was to establish parameters for the exploration of the Areopagus speech. It was established that the way in which listeners is addressed, and also the link-up with the situation of the listeners to the speech, can be considered as important homiletical elements. Together with these elements the structure of the speech as well as the transitions in the speech can be regarded as major homiletical elements in the body of the sermon. The trinitarian revelation of God in this speech and also the balance between indicative, imperative and promise mark this speech as a sermon. The elements of cohesion and progression are perceptibly present in this speech with the result that the introduction (God creates and grants life) links up well with the climax (eternal life through the resurrection of Christ).

Acts 17:27 - "that they might feel after him and find ... "

The aim of this article is to investigate the allusion to the possibility of touching God ψηλαϕάω in Paul's Areopagus speech (Acts 17:27). The article aims at assessing the Lukan notion of God's nearness in space and time. The Areopagus discourse is investigated against the background of its imbeddednes in the holistic context of Acts. God's nearness is studied in light of common Hellenistic parallel epiphanies. It focuses on dream types in Acts, epiphanies of Jesus, epiphanies of God, and in conclusion the expression ''filled with the Spirit".

Not Either/or But Both/and in Paul's Areopagus Speech

AbstractPaul's Areopagus speech has long fascinated New Testament readers. Historical-critical issues have received the most attention as scholars focused on "the question whether the Paul who speaks here is the Paul of the letters." Investigations of narrational and rhetorical techniques have played a subservient role. This essay eclectically combines ancient and modern literary-critical methods in order to lift narrational and rhetorical matters out of their role of subserviency. A literary-critical investigation of the narrative of Paul in Athens allows us to appreciate better its subtlety and sophistication and suggests that historical and theological arguments both for and against the essential authenticity of the speech are based on inadequate reading strategies. Specifically, historical-critical scholars have failed to occupy the position of the implied reader when interpreting the Areopagus speech, a position that distinguishes between the oratees of the speech-a group of philosophically inclined pagans who are uninformed outsiders in relation to Christianity-and the narratee-Theophilus-who is an informed insider on the basis of his reading of Luke/Acts to this point. We often speak of the omniscient narrator, but in this case we would do well to speak of the omniscient narratee. This sets up a situation which the narrator fully exploits to create a highly entertaining reading experience. Much of that entertainment is derived from the deliberate use of double entendre, words and phrases which have one set of associations for insiders in the Christian movement, such as the orator, and another for outsiders, such as the oratees of the speech.

Paul and Socrates: the Aim of Paul' s Areopagus Speech

Paul's Areopagus speech is in many ways a riddle. This article approaches the speech with Paul's aim in view. If Paul hoped his audience would respond by conversion, he did not have much success. It is argued that Paul's aim was to arouse curiosity and create an interest in further information; indeed, some responded to him for this very reason and later became believers. This article presents three arguments: (1) the rhetorical strategy to be used by a speaker faced with a critical audience was insinuatio, subtle approach, to speak with concealment; (2) Paul's way of introducing Jesus in this speech is surprisingly cryptic, and leaves the audience with questions; (3) the use of Socrates traditions found quite clearly in the prelude to the speech is seen as shedding light on Paul's indirect speaking in the speech itself. Paul's aim was to promote curiosity and elicit questions.

The Speeches of Acts: II. The Areopagus Address

By Colin J. Hemer,. Careful study of the Athenian background of motifs in Paul’s Areopagus speech reveals a richer tapestry of connecting thought which cannot be explained as a Lukan theological emphasis.