HELLENISTIC PHILOSOPHIES AND THE PREACHING OF THE RESURRECTION (ACTS 17:18, 32) by N. CLAYTON CROY Decatur, GA The Acts of the Apostles traces, somewhat sporadically, the advance of Christian missions from Jerusalem through Judea and Samaria, to Syria, Asia Minor, Greece, and ultimately to Rome, the political cen­ ter of the Mediterranean world. But long before the narrator reaches the great capital city, he describes the Gospel's encounter with certain pagan schools of thought in a Greek polis which in some respects could claim to be the cultural center of the Mediterranean world, Athens. This city's fame as the showpiece of Greek democracy had dimmed by the NT era, but Athens could still claim to be an important center of archi­ tecture, art, and philosophy. The dimension of philosophy is the chief concern of this paper. In Acts 17:16-34 Luke offers his account of Paul's brief missionary experience in Athens. The centerpiece of this passage is Paul's sermon before the Areopagus (vss. 22-31). This sermon's skilful composition starts with an acknowledgement of pagan piety, moves deftly through natural revelation, faint allusions to Jewish ideas and a quotation of Hellenistic poetry, and culminates with a message of eschatological judg­ ment highlighting the role of Christ and the significance of his resur­ rection.1 Such a combination of topoi and technique, along with the perception that Luke is here presenting a paradigm of Paul's mission­ ary preaching to Gentiles, has rightfully elevated this passage to one of celebrated status. With fame comes the attention of many expositors. "Probably no ten verses in the Acts of the Aposdes have formed the text for such an abundance of commentary as has gathered round Paul's Areopagitica"2 1 For a recent analysis of the structure -of the speeches in Acts, see Marion L. Soards, The Speeches in Acts. Their Content, Context, and Concerns (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1994). For a rhetorical analysis, see Karl Olav Sandnes, "Paul and Socrates: the Aim of Paul's Areopagus Speech," JSNT 50 (1993) 13-26. 2 F.F. Bruce, Commentary on the Book of the Acts (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981) 353. © EJ. Brill, Leiden, 1997 Novum Testamentum XXXDC, 1 22 Ν. CLAYTON CROY This study does not attempt to add to the vast scholarship focusing on the sermon itself. I do, however, wish to examine a closely related issue, namely the hearers of the sermon and their responses. A rhetor­ ical setting has at least three foci: the speaker, the message, and the audience; my primary interest is the audience. The portions of the text which will receive the greatest attention are therefore those which bracket the sermon, vss. 16-21 and 32-34. After examining the general setting and the description of the audience in vss. 16-21, I will con­ sider two specific questions arising from vss. 32-34. They are: (1) How should we understand the two responses mentioned in vs. 32? and (2) Do these two responses correspond to the two philosophical schools rep­ resented in the crowd, i.e. the Epicureans and Stoics (vs. 18)? The Setting and the Audience Luke devotes a considerable number of words to introducing this important speech. According to his account, Paul had been escorted to Athens from Beroea after Jewish opposition had made further ministry in Beroea impractical; Silas and Timothy had remained behind (vs. 14). While Paul awaited his friends' arrival he became aware of Athen's extensive religious iconography. The idols which filled the city were a source of vexation to the strict, monotheistic apostle. This depiction of Athenian religion anticipates the exordium of Paul's sermon (vss. 22- 23), in which the city's many idols serve as a springboard for the preach­ ing of the Christian gospel.3 There were two arenas for Paul's preaching in Athens: the syna­ gogue and the marketplace (vs. 17). The former was Paul's typical, evangelistic strategy upon entering a new city; in the present context, however, the author's concern is the latter. It is not the encounter with Jews and "godfearers" which Luke amplifies in the remainder of Acts 17, but^rather the encounter in the marketplace (αγορά)4 with "those who happened to be present" (τους παρατυγχάνοντας). Ned Stonehouse [Paul Before the Areopagus and Other New Testament Studies (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957) 1] employs great understatement in calling it "not... a largely neglected field of investigation." 3 On which, see D. Zweck, "The Exordium of the Areopagus Speech, Acts 17.22, 23," NTS 35 (1989) 94-103. 4 Probably the pottery market (Κεραμεικός), the center of public life in Athens. See Ernst Haenchen, Die Apostelgeschichte (MeyerK; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1968) 454, η. 8 [ET « The Acts of the Apostles (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1971) 517, n. 8]; also BAGD, 12. HELLENISTIC PHILOSOPHIES AND RESURRECTION 23 In vs. 18 Luke introduces specific groups in the marketplace crowd, namely Epicurean and Stoic philosophers. Both of these rival schools traced their origins to late fourth century B.C.E. Athens. In 306 Epicurus established the school named after him in what became known as "the Garden," a plot of ground northwest of the city. At about the same time, the foundations of Stoicism were laid by Zeno of Citium, who had come to Athens in 313. Members of these two philosophical schools were present in Paul's audience and engaged him in conversation. Already the reaction seems to take two different forms. Some (τίνες) asked disparagingly,5 "What does this babbler wish to say?"6 Paul is condescendingly referred to as a σπερμολόγος, an idle and worthless character who collects the "scraps" of others' ideas and disseminates them.7 Other people in the audience (οι δε) respond differendy saying, "He seems to be a preacher of for­ eign divinities." Luke explains this remark by saying that Paul was preaching Jesus and the Resurrection. The causal link (δτι) between the two clauses (18c and d) and the emphatic position of "foreign divini­ ties" suggests that 'Jesus and the Resurrection" are, in fact, the foreign divinities.8 "Jesus" could easily have been associated with Ίησώ (or Ίασώ), daughter of Aesculapius and goddess of healing.9 Άνάστασις, which would not have conveyed its Christian meaning to Greek philoso­ phers, might also be construed as the name of a deity. The tone of the second response differs from the first.10 The first is unmistakably negative; it makes light of the apostle and his message. The second response is by no means a rousing commendation of the 5 Not only does the following epithet involve disparagement, but the demonstrative ούτος is contemptuous (cf. Latin iste). See BDF, §290 (6). 6 This response is stylistically shaped for its cultured Athenian speakers by means of a potential optative. See BDF, §385 (1). 7 See Haenchen, Apostelgeschichte, 455, n. 3 [ET « 517, n. 11], and BAG, 762. 8 Haenchen, Apostelgeschichte, 455, n. 5 [ET « 518, n. 1], notes that this interpreta­ tion appears first with Chrysostom, and has been adopted by a number of modern scholars. See, for example, J.H. Maclean, "St. Paul at Athens," ET 44 (1932-33) 550. For the contrary argument that only Jesus is in view and the plural "deities" is merely stylistic, see K.L. McKay, "Foreign Gods Identified in Acts 17:18?" TynBul 45.2 (1994) 411-12. McKay's argument depends, however, on his view of what would have been plausible language for Paul's actual speech rather than the language that Luke has man­ ifestly used in portraying the scene. 9 Bruce, Commentary, 351, n. 21. See LSJ, 816. 10 Bruce, Commentary, 351, writes, "Stoics and Epicureans alike, much as they might differ from each other, agreed at least in this, that the new-fangled message brought by this Jew of Tarsus was not one that could appeal to reasonable men." But this com­ ment blurs the distinction between the two reactions and may be too negative with respect to the second. 24 Ν. CLAYTON CROY Gospel, but neither does it have a scoffing tone. It reveals perplexity at this new proclamation and may even betray a touch of curiosity.11 The correlation of the clauses (και τίνες... οι δέ) also implies that the responses are different (without, of course, requiring them to be opposite). In either case the sermon was provocative. The crowd is not con­ tent with a little verbal repartee; they take hold of12 Paul and escort him to the Areopagus for a more careful hearing. Two closely related issues in this passage which have occasioned much discussion are the exact character of this hearing and the very meaning of the word "Areopagus" in this context. The hearing is thought by some13 to be virtually a trial, but the language in vss. 19f. favors something less for­ mal. The motivation is the desire "to know" or "understand" (γνώναι, twice) the "new teaching," the "surprising things" which Paul is pro­ claiming. There is no reference to a legal accusation. Furthermore, Luke's editorial remark in vs. 21 clearly understands the scene as stem­ ming from the Athenians' proverbial curiosity, not their litigiousness. "At issue here is not a legal problem, but an epistemological one."14 The second issue concerns the term "Αρειος πάγος. Literally "the hill of Ares," this term referred first to the rocky outcropping northwest of the Acropolis, but also denoted the Council which met there.15 But the Council also met in other locations, such as the Stoa Basileios.16 Certain 11 Granted, any interest at this point is latent, but the following verses will bear out this interpretation.