Ver. 17. μὲν ovv... τινὲς δὲ, see Rendall, Ρ. 162, Appendix on μὲν οὖν, for the antithesis; a simple instance of two parties acting in opposition. Page however finds the antithesis to μὲν οὖν in ver. 19. ἐπιλαβ. δὲ (5ο W. H.), and regards τινὲς δὲ . . . συνέβαλλον αὐτῷ
16—18.
παρατυγχάνοντας.
Φιλοσόφων συνέβαλλον αὐτῷ: καί τινες ἔλεγον, Τί ἂν θέλοι ὁ
365
a 3 , a .. 18. τινὲς δὲ τῶν ᾿Επικουρείων καὶ τῶν Στωϊκῶν 1
1 After δε SBDHLP, Syr. Pesh., Chrys., Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, Blass, Hilg. add και; instead of Ἐπικουρειων W.H. read Επικονριων, and Weiss, W.H. alt., Hilg. Στοΐκων for Στωικων; see W.H., pp. 159, 161, App.
as almost parenthetical, see below on νετ. 10. --- διελέγετο: ‘‘he reasoned,” R.V. (so Ramsay), see above on ver. 2. —év τῇ συν.: on the synagogue see ** Athens,” Ε, C. Conybeare, in Hastings’ B.D., but St. Paul did not confine himself to the synagogue, although undeterred by their hatred he went first to his own countrymen, and to the proselytes. But probably they were not numerous (see Farrar, St. Paul, i., 533), and the Apostle carried the same method of reasoning into the market-place—as was natural in the city of Socrates, he entered into conver- sation with those whom he met, as the same philosopher had done four hundred years before. Thus he became an Athenian to the Athenians: see the strik- ing parallel in the description of Socrates, «πε was to be seen in the market-place at the hour when it was most crowded,” etc., and the words used by Socrates of himself, Plato, Apol., 31 A, quoted by Grote, viii., 211, 212, small edit., p. 212. F. C. Conybeare, uw. s., compares the ex- periences in Athens of the Apostle’s con- temporary Apollonius with those of St. Paul’; he too reasoned διελέξατο with them on religious matters, Philostr., Vit. Apol- lonii Tyan@, iv., το. The words ἐν τῇ συν. are placed in brackets by Hilgenfeld, and referred by Clemen to his Redactor Anti- judaicus, whilst Jiingst retains the words but omits 16b, and with Van Manen and Clemen regards the whole of Paul’s sub- sequent speech to the philosophers as the interpolation of a Redactor, p. 161 ff.— ἐν τῇ ἀγορᾷ: not the market-place like that which fills a bare space in a modern town, but rather to be compared with its varied beauty and its busy crowd to the square of some Italian city, e.g., the Piazza di Marco of Venice. There the Apostle’s eye would fall on portico after portico, adorned by famous artists, rich in noble statues, see F. C. Conybeare, u. s.,and Renan, Saint Paul, p.180. On the west lay the Stoa Pecile, whence the Stoics received their name, and where Zeno met his pupils, whilst the quiet gardens of Epicurus were probably not far distant (see on the site of the Agorato which St. Luke refers, “' Athens,” B.D.?, i., 292, 293, and also C. and H.,
smaller edition, p. 273, Hackett, in loco, for different views as to its site).—kxaTa πᾶσαν ἡμέραν: every day, for he could take advantage by this method not only of the Sabbaths and days of meeting in the synagogues, but of every day, cf. the words of Socrates, Plato, uw. s., in de- scribing his own daily work of conver- sation with every one τὴν ἡμέραν ὅλην πανταχοῦ προσκαθίζων. The phrase seems to denote some time spent at ΑίΠΕΠ6. --- παρατυγχάνοντας: ‘“ chance comers”’ (like another Socrates), used only here in N.T., but cf. Thuc., i., 22, not in LXX or Apocrypha. Athens was full not only of philosophers, but we can imagine from the one phrase applied to it, Tac., 4ππ., ii., 55, what a motley group might surround the Apostle, illa colluvies nationum.
Ver. 18. συνέβαλλον αὐτῷ: a word peculiar to St. Luke; three times in his Gospel, four times in Acts; it need not have necessarily a hostile sense as in Luke xiv. 31, but simply means that amongst the chance comers in the Agora there were some who “‘ engaged in discussions” with him (so Blass like Latin, consilia conferre, sc. λόγους), a meaning perhaps suggested by the imperfect. Grotius and others take it as ‘“‘translatio de prceliis sumpta, ut apparet, Luc. xiv. 31. Utitur ita sepe Polybius, quem sequi amat Lucas.” ᾿Ἐπικουρείων: so called from Epicurus, 342-270 B.c.; his disciples were known also as the School of the Garden, from the garden in Athens where the master instructed them, in distinction from the disciples of the Porch or the Academy. We must be careful to remember that as in numberless other cases, so the system of the founder suffered at the hands of his successors, and that the life of Epi- curus himself was far removed from that of a mere sensualist, or ‘‘ Epicure” in its later sense. But it was evident that a life which made pleasure and happiness the be-all and end-all of existence, how- ever safeguarded by the conditions im- posed at the outset by Epicurus, was liable to degenerate into a mere series of prudential calculations, or a mere indul- gence of the senses and appetites. In his determination to rid men of the