Deeper Commentary
ACTS CHAPTER 17
17:1
Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and
Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica- Having been seriously abused in Philippi,
Paul continued. He recognizes this when later writing to the
Thessalonians, commenting that despite the shame suffered there, he
continued boldly preaching, and thus arose the ecclesia at Thessalonica (1
Thess. 2:2). Keeping on keeping on is a hallmark of not only the true
preacher but of all spiritual endeavour.
Apollonia was in Illyricum, and Paul later comments that he
preached there (Rom. 15:19), so we can assume he didn't merely pass
through but witnessed to the Gospel there too.
Where there was a synagogue of the Jews-
Gk. the synagogue. It has been claimed that there was no other
synagogue in Macedonia, although there may have been smaller Jewish prayer
houses or meeting places (as in 16:13). It has also been conjectured that
there were no Jewish communities in Amphipolis and Apollonia. The
impression is therefore given of Paul focusing upon preaching to the Jews,
making a specific focus upon the largest concentration of Jews in
Macedonia. Amphipolis was the capital of Macedonia, and Paul had been
beckoned to preach in Macedonia; the city was the most strategic in Greece
and would've been the logical place to concentrate upon in order to fulfil
a mission to Gentile Macedonia. But he is presented as passing through
this capital city, where the largest concentration of population was, and
homing in on Thessalonica. See on 17:2 As his custom was.
17:2 And Paul, as his custom was- Paul was called to preach to
the Gentiles, and yet he repeatedly focused upon the Jews. Many of his
sufferings were as a result of this; if he had served as the Lord
intended, many of these issues would likely have been avoided. But the
Lord still worked with Paul; and that is a lesson for us. I have noted
elsewhere that the travel details provided by Luke are not incidental; the
wind / spirit was so often against Paul as he travelled to Jerusalem, and
so often with him when he travelled towards the Gentiles.
Went in to them- Paul uses the same word in telling the
Thessalonians that the testimony of other converts showed "what manner of
entering in we had unto you" (1 Thess. 1:9; 2:1 AV). Clearly the 'going
in' to the Thessalonian synagogue has more than some literal descriptive
reference to Paul passing in through the doors of the building. The word
is used several times in Acts of Paul's 'entering in' to various homes,
towns and synagogues. The Lord Himself 'entered in' to synagogues and
taught (emphasized by Luke in his first volume, e.g. Lk. 6:6). Thus Paul
was manifesting the person of the Lord Jesus in his preaching, just as we
likewise are Him to this world; for the Lord Jesus 'enters in' to His
people (Jn. 10:1,2; Rev. 3:20 s.w.). Our entering in to people and
communities with the Gospel is a reflection of God's outgoing entering in
to our lives in Christ. This is why there must be a sense of proactive,
outgoing entering in to others in our witness, rather than a passive
'witness by example' alone.
For three Sabbath days and reasoned with them from
the Scriptures- The simplicity of what Paul preached
can be seen from reflecting how he was only three weekends in Thessalonica
(Acts 17:1-9), but in that time he converted and baptized pagans and
turned them into an ecclesia. Given the long hours worked by people, his
number of contact hours with the people would've been quite small. His
letters to the Thessalonians make it clear that during that time, he
himself was working "night and day" supporting himself and those with him,
who were presumably unable to work or maybe in Timothy's case too weak to
work. He then
had to write to them in 1 Thessalonians, addressing basic questions which
they had subsequently asked, such as 'What will happen to dead believers
when Christ returns?', 'When will Christ return?'. The level of their
instruction before baptism must have been very basic. It is rare
today to see such focus upon the urgency of baptism. Yet I submit that if
we have the spirit of the early church, we will be pushing baptism up
front to all we meet. And this was one of the first century keys to
success.
So Paul stayed a few weeks or months in cities like Lystra and
Thessalonica, returning, in the case of Lystra, after 18 months, and then
again a few years later. Here in Acts 17:2, he spent three consecutive
Sabbaths in Thessalonica, baptized the converts, and then didn’t come back
to see them for about five and a half years (Acts 20:1,2). How were they
kept strong? By the good shepherd, by the grace of God, by the Father and
Son working with Paul. He seems to have drilled them with the basics of
the Gospel and the life they needed to live, ordained immature elders who
were literate and able to teach the word, and then left them what he
repeatedly calls “the tradition”, a document or set of teachings relating
to practical life in Christ (1 Cor. 11:2,23; 2 Thess. 2:5; 3:6; 1 Tim.
6:20; 2 Tim. 1:13; 2:2; 3:14; Tit. 1:9). It was perhaps the simplicity and
brevity of the message that was its strength in the lives of the early
converts. Their lives were based directly upon reflection upon the
implications of the basic elements of the Gospel. It is today amazing how
simple men and women remember and reflect upon the things taught them even
verbally, and show an impressive appreciation of them when they are
visited again after some months or years. Interestingly, Corinth had the
most evident problems and immaturity, even though Paul spent 18 months
there, whereas ecclesias like Philippi which he established far quicker
seem to have been far sounder. It therefore follows that length of
pastoral work is not necessarily related to spiritual strength
17:3- see on Acts 13:24,25.
Explaining and proving that it was necessary that
the Christ suffer and rise from the dead- The idea of a
suffering, murdered Messiah is hard for Jews to accept to this day. Paul
sought to persuade them from the Old Testament that this was indeed a
requirement for the true Messiah. Once that is established, it becomes
easier to connect Jesus of Nazareth with the Biblical picture of Messiah.
Jesus thus becomes the Christ.
AV "opening and alleging". 'Opening' translates a Greek word meaning just that. The idea may be that he opened their minds. "Proving" is literally 'to place alongside'; the idea may be that he as it were placed the experiences of the historical Jesus alongside the Old Testament prophecies. "This Jesus" suggests Paul painted a picture of Jesus who was alive and real almongst them; and he was "the Christ" of the ancient prophecies. Truly, the Jesus of history is the Christ of faith.
"It was necessary that the Christ suffer" is the very phrase used of how Paul was to be made to understand that it was necessary [AV "must"] that he too suffered for Christ's sake (Acts 9:16). Just as Christ had to ["must"] suffer, so Paul "must"; and so we must. Herein lies the myth of the prosperity Gospel. We are called to carry a cross, not be pampered with great health and wealth.
Saying, This Jesus, whom I proclaim to you, is the Christ- Paul
could describe his own preaching as “this Jesus, whom I proclaim to you…”,
as if Jesus was right there before their eyes, witnessed through Paul. It
was like screening a Jesus film, but in words. But it was more than words-
Paul himself manifested the Lord Jesus, and was His face and body to his
audience. As
the Lord was Paul’s representative, so Paul was Christ’s. The idea of
representation works both ways: we see in the Gospel records how the Lord
experienced some things which only we have; and we show aspects of His
character to the world which nobody else can manifest. Likewise Paul could
tell the Galatians that in him they had seen Jesus Christ placarded forth,
crucified before their own eyes (Gal. 3:1). Paul knew that when people
looked at his life, they saw something of the crucifixion of the Lord. The
Galatians therefore accepted him "even as Christ Jesus" (Gal. 4:14).
17:4
And some of them were persuaded, and joined Paul
and Silas, as did many of the devout Greeks- First of
all there must be an intellectual understanding if there is to be
conversion. Men were “persuaded”, not just emotionally bullied (Acts 17:4;
18:4; 19:8,26; 28:23,24). The intellectual basis of appeal is made clear
in the way we read of accepting ‘truth’ as well as accepting the person of
Jesus. Thus converts believe the truth (2 Thess. 2:10-13), acknowledge
truth (2 Tim. 2:25; Tit. 1:1), obey truth (Rom. 2:8; 1 Pet. 1:22 cp. Gal.
5:7), and ‘come to know the truth’ (Jn. 8:32; 1 Tim. 2:4; 4:3; 1 Jn.
2:21). Preaching itself is ‘the open statement of the truth’ (2 Cor. 4:2).
And so it is perfectly in order to seek to intellectually persuade our
contacts.
And not a few of the chief women- Paul had to later remind the
Thessalonians that he isn't preaching because he wants to take money and
have relationships with women (1 Thess. 2:3-12). There were some wealthy
women in Thessalonica who accepted the Gospel (Acts 17:4 Western Text),
and no doubt gossip spread from this.
17:5 But the Jews, being moved with jealousy, taking along some
wicked men from the market place and having assembled a mob, set the city
in an uproar and attacked the house of Jason, seeking to bring them out to
the people- Jealousy was the leading reason for the Jewish
crucifixion of the Lord, and also of their persecution of Paul. The
surrounding of a house by an inflamed mob and wanting to "bring them out
to the people" recalls the situation of the Angels in Lot's house in
Sodom. Isaiah described the Jerusalem cult as Sodom, as does Rev. 11:8.
The Jews were acting in a similar way.
17:6 And when they did not find them, they dragged Jason and some
brothers before the rulers of the city, crying: These that have turned the
world upside down have come here also- This is a tacit recognition of
the extent and power of Paul's ministry; he and his team had "turned the
world upside down". They had hardly done so the Roman world, but they had
indeed done so to the Jewish world. And in that observation we have a
basic insight into human psychology; we tend to assume that 'our' world is
the entire world. Time and again, the Roman authorities responded to the
Jewish accusations that they could see no wrong in Paul. But for these
bitter minded opponents, their immediate world was the whole world. The
"rulers of the city" are called the politarchs; exactly the
correct word, in comparison to the word used for the governors of Philippi
which was a colony, whereas Thessalonica was a "free city".
17:7- see on Acts 16:21.
Jason has received them, and they all act contrary
to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, Jesus-
Paul in the face of every discouragement could preach that “there is
another king, Jesus"- in conscious defiance of the credo of the Roman
empire, that "Caesar is lord" and the only, undisputed king. Our message
is no less radically countercultural. This was the core of his message; not so much that
there will be a coming King in Jerusalem, but that there is
right now a King at God’s right hand, who demands our total allegiance.
The Acts record associates the height of Jesus with a call to repentance
too. This is the message of Is. 55:6-9- because God's thoughts
are so far higher than ours, therefore call upon the Lord whilst
He is near, and let the wicked forsake his way. Because the Father and Son
who are so high above us morally and physically are willing to deal with
us, therefore we ought to seize upon their grace and repent.
17:8 And they agitated the crowd and the rulers of the city, when
they heard these things- The rulers were agitated when they heard
that this was a question of the destabilization of the Roman empire;
Pilate was likewise agitated by the crowd in handing the Lord over to
death. Time and again, Luke is emphasizing that the sufferings of the Lord
are replicated in spirit in all who are in Him.
17:9 And when they had taken security from Jason and the rest, they
let them go- Jason and the others had to pay a bond, guaranteeing
their keeping of the peace. This is another indication that not all the
early Christians were dirt poor. We recall how Felix often summoned Paull,
hoping to get a bribe out of him (24:26). Jason had presumably also bound
himself in his bond to not accommodate Paul and to get him to leave the
city- hence the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away (:10).
17:10 And the brothers immediately sent away Paul and Silas by
night to Berea; who when they arrived there, went into the synagogue of
the Jews- The immediate sending away may have been a condition of the
bail paid in :9. There were several times when brethren sent Paul away
from danger- as if he himself would have remained. The way situations
repeat in our lives is all evidence that the Lord's hand is at work with
us, and nothing is random event in our experiences. We note that Paul
immediately enters the synagogue and preaches, when many would have been
suffering post-traumatic stress and would have felt unable to face Jews in
a synagogue let alone preach to them. But Paul's love was greater than
that.
17:11 Now these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that-
"In that" has been added by the translators and reflects nothing in
the original text. The context before and after this record about Berea is
that noble / higher ranking individuals had accepted Paul's message in
Thessalonica (:4) as the same class were to do in Athens (:34). So the
reference may simply be to the same class who responded. Even these "more
noble" had a predisposition to believe; the message made intuitive sense
to them. And so it is with those we might otherwise consider too worldly
to respond to the message.
They received the word with all readiness of mind, examining the
Scriptures daily, whether these things were so- The "examining"
probably speaks of daily visits to the synagogue where the Old Testament
scrolls were kept, asking to examine them. Paul would have been preaching
from the Old Testament, quoting from memory. And they would have wanted to
check out his quotations and their context in the actual scrolls. It was
"therefore" that they believed (:12), for faith comes by hearing the word
of God. It was their attitude to God's word which meant that they received
the word with such prothumia, 'a mindset in advance', "predisposition", to believe.
Paul's message of Jesus as Christ meshed perfectly with the scriptures
which they so respected.
17:12
Therefore, many of them believed, including Greek
women of high standing and many Greek men- Lydia in Philippi
was a wealthy woman, trading in luxury garments (“purple”), and a female
head of household. The attraction of the Gospel for wealthy women has been
often commented upon in the historical literature. We are left to imagine
wealthy sisters marrying poorer brethren, or remaining single, with all
the scandal attached to it in the first century world, pining for
children, comforted only by each other and the surpassing knowledge of
Jesus their Lord.
It is worth noting that the NT does reflect the fact that a number of
wealthy individuals came to the Truth too; and that these were bound
together in fellowship with the poor. There were wealthy women amongst the
earliest followers of Jesus (Lk. 8:3); and James and John came from a
family who owned their own fishing boat and could employ servants (Mk.
1:19,20). Zacchaeus was wealthy- and note that he wasn't commanded to
divest himself of all that wealth (Lk. 19:1-10). Consider the Philippi
ecclesia- the wealthy lady from Lydia, the homeless slave girl, the middle
class, respectable jailer, and the slaves of his and Lydia’s household.
There was nowhere else in the ancient world that all these classes could
come together in such unity. Paul himself was not poor- “to be a citizen
of Tarsus one had to pass the means test of owning property worth at least
500 drachmae”. He was thought wealthy enough to be able to give a bribe
(Acts 24:26). He assured Philemon that he personally would meet any debts
arising from the situation with Onesimus. Consider the other wealthy
converts: the Proconsul of Cyprus (Acts 13:12), Lydia, Jason who was
wealthy enough to put down security for Paul, assisted by prominent women
(Acts 17:4,9), Greek women of high standing at Berea (Acts 17:12),
Dionysius and Damaris in Athens (Acts 17:16-34), Crispus the ruler of the
Corinth synagogue (Acts 18:8 cp. 1 Cor. 1:14), Erastus the city treasurer
(Rom. 16:23). Marta Sordi quotes evidence for there being Christians
amongst the Roman aristocracy even during the first half of the first
century. These few wealthy converts would have bonded together with the
mass of poor and slaves who had also come to Christ. It was a unique
unity.
17:13 But when the Jews of Thessalonica had knowledge that the word
of God was proclaimed by Paul at Berea also, they came there, likewise
stirring up and inciting the crowds- This is another indication of
the organized Jewish opposition to Paul's mission. Paul's proclamation was
of the Messiah according to the Old Testament scriptures- for the Bereans
compared his message against the Old Testament scrolls (see on :11). If he
had been teaching some Eastern philosophy, they wouldn't have bothered.
But it was his supposed subversion of their sacred documents which was so
infuriating to them.
17:14 Then the brothers immediately sent Paul off on his way to the
sea, but Silas and Timothy remained there- This is exactly what
happened in :10. This desire to send Paul away was not for his personal
safety as much as for their own safety. And so there was only a very short
period of contact time with Paul; and again, belief and the baptism which
goes with New Testament belief all occurred after a very brief encounter
with the message. Paul it seems would have stayed longer, so eager was he
to proclaim the Gospel further and strengthen the converts. If he had done
so, their faith may have become stronger; for we read nothing further of
any ecclesia in Berea. Silas and Timothy therefore risked their lives by
remaining, so important did they perceive the work of strengthening
converts to be. And we also should give and risk all for the sake of
strengthening such babes in Christ.
17:15 But they that escorted Paul brought him as far as Athens, and
after receiving instructions for Silas and Timothy (that they should came
to him with all speed), they departed- The escort was not only for
Paul's safety, but perhaps to ensure that he really did leave Berea.
"Escorted" is literally 'to bring to the spot'. We sense here the fear of
the new converts. It seems that Paul only gave instruction for Silas and
Timothy to join him after he had arrived in Athens. We could read this :15
as a summary of events, and then :16 explains why this situation came
about. Paul was immediately struck by the idolatry, made a witness, which
had some response- and he needed help. He was a man alone in Athens. And
so he asked for Silas and Timothy to immediately come to him.
17:16- see on Acts 15:39.
Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was provoked
within him as he saw the city full of idols- God can work directly
within the mind of men, psychologically provoking them. He stirred up the
spirit of Cyrus and the Jewish leadership to enable the restoration, and
there are many other Old Testament examples (1 Chron. 5:26; 2 Chron.
21:16; Ezra 1:1,5; Jer. 51:11; Hag. 1:14). Some of these involve
the provoking of the spirit of total unbelievers. How much more will God
provoke the spirit of those who are open to His leading. Paul's own spirit
was provoked by all the idol worship, for he had a heart that bled for
human salvation. And God's Spirit works with our spirit, time and again.
17:17 So he reasoned in the synagogue with Jews and the religious
persons, and in the marketplace
every day with those that met him- Paul says himself that he
was not an eloquent speaker; and the Corinthians were acutely aware of
this. And yet it was through his public speaking that many were converted
in places like Athens. The lesson is clear- God uses us in our weaker
points in order to witness powerfully for Him. Uneducated Peter was used
as the vehicle with which to reach the intelligentsia of Jerusalem- and
you and I likewise in and through our very points of weakness are likewise
used to reach people.
17:18
And some of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers
also encountered him. And some said: What will this babbler say? Others:
He seems to be a preacher of strange gods! Because he preached Jesus and
the resurrection- “A
preacher” is Gk. 'a setter forth'. It is clear that we are to
seek to relate to our audience in a way they can relate to. Using their
terms, shewing our common binds with them. Paul did this when he was faced
with the rather mocking comment that he was a “setter forth” of a strange
God. He replied that he ‘set forth’ to them the One whom they ignorantly
worshipped (Acts 17:18,23 RV). He seized upon something they all knew- the
altar to the unknown God- and made his point to them from that. And he
picked up the noun they used for him and turned it back to them as a verb.
17:19 And they took hold of him and brought him to the Areopagus,
saying: May we know what this new teaching is, which is spoken by you?-
There were many passing preachers who turned up in Athens and tried to get
a hearing. But the audience physically dragged Paul off to the Areopagus
to ensure he had the widest audience for his message. There was therefore
something in his message, probably reflected in him as a person too, which
was unique and powerfully compelling. Our message too must be fearlessly
presented as the unique thing it is, rather than ever seeking to soften
the edges so that it appears more acceptable to secular hearers. It is the
baldness of the message which attracts, rather than any sophisticated
packaging.
17:20 For you bring certain strange things to our ears. Therefore, we
would like to know what these things mean- As noted on :19, there was
about every possible philosophy and religion being pedalled in Athens. But
there was something startlingly new and "strange" in Paul's message about
the crucified, resurrected Jesus who now demands our total commitment, far
beyond the realms of religious curiosity or hobby level theology. There is
no hint that Paul used miracles to grab attention here; it was the power
and nature of the Gospel message which struck such a deep chord with the
hearts of the hearers.
17:21 (Now all the Athenians and the strangers living there spent
their time in nothing else, but either to tell or to hear some new thing)-
As noted on :19 and :20, there was something radically gripping in the
message of this Jesus of Nazareth, crucified and resurrected. The hearers
were used to a diet of new things, they were not conservatives, they were
wide open minded. Therefore the fact they were so gripped by this new
message is all the more a testament to its power.
17:22 And Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said: You
men of Athens, I perceive you are very religious in all things-
Although as mentioned on :19-21, Paul's message was a stark presentation
of the Gospel in Christ, he still tried to bridge build with his audience.
He appealed to their sense of being religious. He commends them for what
they themselves were proud of- their religious interest. But his message
then sought to take them on from that common starting point, in explaining
that the dead and now living Lord Jesus required a following far beyond
such religious curiosity.
17:23
For as I walked along, I observed the objects of
your worship; and I found an altar with this inscription: To the unknown
god. Whom you worship in ignorance, Him I proclaim to you-
Paul’s positivism is a wonderful thing to study. When he met people
believing in “the unknown [Gk. agnostos] God”, he didn’t mock
their agnosticism. He rejoiced that they were as it were half way there,
and sought to take them further. His position regarding the Sabbath and
observance of the Law is a prime example of his patient seeking to bring
men onward.
17:24
The God that made the world and all things
therein, He, being Lord of heaven and earth, dwells not in temples made
with hands- Solomon's frequent emphasis on the fact that he built
the house makes a telling connection with the principle that God does not
live in houses built by men.
17:25 Neither is He served by men's hands, as though He needed
anything, seeing He gives to all life and breath and all things- That
God needs nothing is something very hard for the standard religious
mindset to grasp. The whole psychology of works, of legalism rather than
acceptance of grace, is rooted in this assumption that God is in need.
Instead, He is a giver, a gifter, the very core idea of charis,
"grace"; and He dearly wishes us to receive that gift. The reasoning used
here was absolutely relevant to the Judaist mentality too. Note that God
gives life and breath to all things- every breath taken by every organism
is consciously out given by Him, rather than the assumption that somehow
God wound the world up on clockwork and leaves it running without any
conscious input from Him.
17:26
And He has made from one, every nation of men to
dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined the times set for
them and the bounds of their habitation- "One blood", according
to some manuscripts. This surely invites us to accept Adam as the first
man, and Eve was the mother of all living human beings.
17:27 That
they should seek God; so that they might feel after Him and find Him,
though He is not far from each one of us- How does geographical
distribution etc. lead to men seeking the Lord? We must draw near to Him
(Ps. 73:28); and yet He is already near, not far from every one of us
(Acts 17:27). David often speaks of drawing near to God, and yet he
invites God to draw near to him (Ps. 69:18). Yet David also recognizes
that God “is” near already (Ps. 75:1). I take all this to mean that like
us, David recognized that God “is” near, and yet wished God to make His
presence real to him. Truly can we pray David’s prayers. So often, prayer
is described as coming near to God (Ps. 119:169 etc.)- and yet God “is”
near already. Prayer, therefore, is a way of making us realize the
presence of the God who is always present.
17:28 For in Him we live and move and have our being- as some even of
your own poets have said: For we are also his offspring- Many New
Testament quotations of the Old Testament- many of those in the early
chapters of Matthew, for example- are picking up words and phrases from
one context and applying them to another, often slightly changing them in
order to fit the new context. Paul himself did this when he quoted the
words of the poet Aratus “We are all the offspring of Zeus” about our all
being the offspring of the one true God.
Paul quoted from Greek poets, famous for the amount of unbiblical nonsense
they churned out, in order to confound those who believed what the poets
taught (Tit. 1:12; Acts 17:28). What we are suggesting is epitomized by
Paul’s response to finding an altar dedicated to the worship of “The
Unknown God”, i.e. any pagan deity which might exist, but which the people
of Athens had overlooked. Instead of rebuking them for their folly in
believing in this, Paul took them from where they were to understand the
one true God, who they did not know (Acts 17:22–23).
Paul sought by all means to close the gap which there inevitably is
between the preacher and his audience. Thus in Athens and Lystra he mixes
quotes from the Greek poets with clear allusions to God’s word. His
speeches in those places quote from Epimenides and Aratus, allude to the
Epicurean belief that God needs nothing from men, refer to the Stoic
belief that God is the source of all life… and also allude to a whole
catena of OT passages: Ex. 20:11; Gen. 8:22; Ecc. 9:7; Jer. 5:24; 23:23;
Is. 42:5; 55:6; Ps. 50:12; 145:18; 147:8; Dt. 32:8. This was all very
skilfully done; surely Paul had sat down and planned what he was going to
say. He tries to have as much common ground as possible with his audience
whilst at the same time undermining their position. He wasn’t baldly
telling them their errors and insisting on his own possession of truth;
even though this was the case. He didn’t remove the essential scandal of
the Gospel; instead Paul selected terms with which to present it which
enabled his hearers to realize and face the challenges which the scandal
of the Gospel presented. And Paul’s sensitive approach to the Jews is just
the same. If we are out to convert men and women, we will be ever
making our message relevant. If we tell the world, both explicitly and
implicitly, that we don’t want to convert them, then we won’t. If we want
to convert them, if we earnestly seek to persuade them and vary our
language and presentation accordingly, then we will.
17:29 Being then the offspring of God, we should not think that the
Divine is like gold, or silver, or stone, something crafted by art and the
imagination of man- If we truly realize that we are made in God’s
image, then we will not worship any idol. Thinking this through, there is
the implication not that humanity alone is made in God’s image;
nothing else is His image. Yet idolatry, in all its forms and guises
throughout history, is based around the supposition that those idols are
in fact an image of God and as such demand worship. God has revealed
Himself through people, not through things which they have
created.
17:30
Therefore, the times of ignorance God overlooked,
but now He commands men that they should all everywhere repent-
Paul seems to have seen in Christ's prophecy that the Gospel would be
fully known world-wide in the last as being a specific, personal command
to him (Mt. 24:14 = 2 Tim. 4:17). He saw prophecy as command more than
solely prediction; and this is why prophecy has a degree of variation in
how and when it is fulfilled. The words of Mk. 16:15,16 are clear: "Go ye
into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that
believeth and is baptized shall be saved". Commands to repent, all men,
the Lord’s resurrection... these ideas all recur in Acts 17:30, proving
they are not solely relevant to those who first heard them; God now
commands all men to repent, through our words. These words clearly don't
apply to the first century only, for they are intended to be linked with
Mt 24:14, which uses the same language about the preaching work of the
very last days (even though the context may imply that as a community we
will only be obedient to this command once egged on by major persecution).
What all this means is that the great commission will be fulfilled in the
last days. The connection with the great commission means that the Lord
sent out the disciples in order to fulfil this aspect of the Olivet
prophecy; but their failure to do the job fully meant that the prophecy
had to be delayed and rescheduled in fulfilment. On account of the Lord’s
resurrection, God has commanded all men everywhere to repent (Acts
17:30,31)- again, a reference to the great commission. But God’s command
of men to repent is only through our preaching of that message. Matthew
and Mark record how the apostles were sent to preach the Gospel
and baptize, for the forgiveness of sins (cp. Acts 2:38). Luke
records the Lord stating that the apostles knew that forgiveness of
sins was to be preached from Jerusalem, and therefore they should be
witnesses to this.
17:31 Inasmuch as He has appointed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness by the man whom He has ordained; of which He has given assurance to all men, in that He has raised him from the dead-
The great commission was based upon the Lord's resurrection. His body are witnessing to His living body. In this sense, His resurrection is an appeal to repent and thereby those who hear the message are responsible to judgment. Otherwise, His resurrection would not be of itself an appeal to anyone in distant places and times. The obedience to the great preaching commission is the means by which the appeal is made in practice.
Preaching is motivated by His resurrection (1 Cor.
15:14). Baptism saves us “by the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Pet.
3:21 cp. Rom. 4:25; Col. 2:13). We who were dead in sins were “quickened
together with Christ" (Eph. 2:5). If we believe in Christ’s resurrection,
we will therefore repent, confess our sins and know His forgiveness. Thus
believing in His raising and making confession of sin are bracketed
together in Rom. 10:9,10, as both being essential in gaining salvation.
Because He rose, therefore we stop committing sin (1 Cor. 6:14).
We can’t wilfully sin if we believe in the forgiveness His resurrection
has enabled. Men should repent not only because judgment day is coming,
but because God has commended repentance to us, He has offered / inspired
faith in His forgiveness by the resurrection of Christ (Acts
17:30,31 AV mg.). The empty tomb and all the Lord’s glorification means
for us should therefore inspire personal repentance; as well as of itself
being an imperative to go and share this good news with a sinful world,
appealing for them to repent and be baptized so that they too might share
in the forgiveness enabled for them by the resurrection. Because the Lord
was our representative, in His resurrection we see our own. We are
therefore born again unto a living and abounding hope, by our
identification with the resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Pet. 1:3).
The very fact that judgment day will surely come is therefore in itself
a command to all men to repent (Acts 17:30,31)- and therefore it
is a command to preach repentance. The resurrection of Jesus was to give
assurance “to all men”. But how? They hadn’t seen Him. There was no
Euclidean reason for them to believe in His resurrection. How is it an
assurance to all men? Surely in that we are the risen Lord’s
representatives “to all men”, and through us they see the evidence of
Christ risen, and thereby have assurance of God’s plan for them. In the
same way, the wicked and adulterous generation to whom the Lord witnessed
were given the sign of the prophet Jonah- that after three days, the Lord
would re-appear. But that sign was only given to them through the
preaching of the apostles- that generation didn’t see the risen Lord
Himself (Mt. 16:4). But the witness of the disciples was as good as- for
in their witness, they represented the Lord.
Acts 17:31 reasons that the very existence of the future judgment seat and
the Lord ordained as judge of living and dead is a command to repent. At
the Lord's resurrection, a day was appointed for human judgment, and
therefore a knowledge of the Lord's resurrection means we are accountable
to that day, and must therefore repent and prepare. It is by this logic
that Paul argues that the Lord's resurrection is a guarantee that judgment
day will come. "For to this end Christ both died and rose and revived,
that he might be Lord... [which involves that] we shall all [therefore]
stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written... Every knee
shall bow to me [as Lord and judge]..." (Rom. 14:9,10).
We will be judged by or in the man Christ Jesus (Acts 17:31 R.V. Mg.).
This means that the very fact Jesus didn't pre-exist and was human makes
Him our constant and insistent judge of all our human behaviour. And
exactly because of this, Paul argues, we should right now repent. He is
judge exactly because He is the Son of man.
17:32 Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some
mocked; but others said: We will hear you concerning this yet again-
It was particularly the message of future resurrection and judgment which
put an end to their religious fascination with Paul's message. The Lord's
resurrection can be ours; He wishes to live in and through us, through His
Spirit. And no man can have stood before the cross of the Lord and then
walk away with a shrug, assuming he shall not have to stand judgment with
eternal consequence for his response to the Man who hung there for him.
When the audience started to get a whiff of the reality of these things,
they pulled out of the dialogue, and didn't want to hear any more. Rather
like Israel begging not to hear any more of God's words, as they were too
demanding for them.
17:33 Thus Paul went out from among them- Paul's initial
message had been so provocative that men had literally dragged him to the
Areopagus in order to explain himself at more length and to a greater
audience (:19). The comment that he "went out from among them" may mean
that he was as it were released, once they were challenged with the
personal implications of believing in and committing to a resurrected
Jesus, whose Spirit living in His people demanded all of their living and
thinking.
17:34
But some people joined him and believed, among
whom was Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris, and others
with them- People heard Paul’s preaching and joined or ‘clave’
unto him, as they did in :4 to other preachers (Acts 17:34; 5:13); but
conversion is a cleaving unto the Lord Jesus (Acts 11:23; 1 Cor.
6:17 Gk.). Thus Paul “spoke boldly in the Lord [Jesus], which gave
testimony unto the word of his grace” (Acts 14:3). To this extent does the
preacher manifest his Lord.
Previous Chapter
Next Chapter 
