-
XVIII. 1. META δὲ ταῦτα χωρισθεὶς 6 Παῦλος 1 ἐκ τῶν ᾽Αθηνῶν ἦλθεν εἰς Κόρινθον: 2. καὶ εὑρών τινα ᾿Ιουδαῖον ὀνόματι ᾽Ακύλαν,
1ΜΦΑΒ 13, 69, Vulg., Boh., Arm., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, omit Se. NBD, Vulg., Sah., Boh., Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt omit ο Πανλος.
dealing with idolatry and polytheism in Rom. i. 20, that it we compare with the Apostle’s own indications the fine survey of the world, and especially of history from a monotheistic standpoint, ascribed to him by the Acts at Lystra, xiv. 15, and afterwards at Athens, xvii. 24, the latter, whatever its source, also gives us a true idea of Paul’s method and teaching, Afos- tolic Age, i., p. 117, Ε.Τ. On the whole tone of the speech as incredible as a later composition, see Ramsay, St. Paul, p. 147 ff., whilst no one perhaps has drawn up more clearly than Wetstein, see on Acts xvii. 25, the consummate skill of the speech addressed to an audience com- prising so many varieties of culture and belief. (To the strange attempt of Holtzmann to reproduce at some length the argument of Zeller, who maintains that the scene at Athens was a mere counterpart of the scene of Stephen’s encounter with his foes at Jerusalem, a sufficient answer may be found in Spitta, Apostelgeschichte, p. 240.)
If we ask from whom the report of the speech was received, since Luke, Silas, Timothy all were absent, it is possible that a Christian convert like Dionysius the Areopagite may have pre- served it (Zéckler); but a speech so full of Pauline thoughts, and so expressive of Athenian life and culture, may well have been received at least in substance from St. Paul himself, although it is quite conceivable that the precise form of it in Acts is due to St. Luke’s own editing and arrangement (see for an analysis of the language of the speech Bethge, Die Paulinischen Reden der Apostelgeschichte, p- 82). The results of St. Paul’s work at Athens were small if measured by the number of converts, although even amongst them it must not be forgotten that it was something to gain the alle- giance to the faith of a man holding the position of Dionysius the Areopagite (see further an interesting account of the matter in Expository Times, April, 1898). But in addition to this, it is also important to remember that St. Paul has given us ‘an invaluable method of missionary preaching” (Lechler, Das Apost. Zeitalter, p. 275), that to the Church at Athens Origen could appeal
against Celsus as a proof of the fruits of Christianity (Bethge, p. 116), that its failing faith was revived in time of per- secution by its bishop Quadratus, the successor of the martyr-bishop Publius; that in the Christian schools of Athens St. Basil and St. Gregory were trained ; and that to an Athenian philosopher, Aristides, a convert to Christ, we owe the earliest Apology which we possess (Athenagoras too was an Athenian philosopher), see Farrar, St. Paul, i., p. 551; Humphry, Commentary on the Acts. It is significant that St. Paul never visited Athens again, and never ad- dressed a letter to the Saints at Athens, although he may well have included them in his salutation to “the Saints which are in the whole of Achaia,” 2 Cor. 1. I. ;
CuHaPTER XVIII.—Ver. 1. pera δὲ ταῦτα : ἵη continuation of the narrative, cf. Luke x. τ.--χωρισθεὶς: in i. 4 with ἀπό, and so usually—only here with ἐκ, departure from Athens emphasised, be- cause events had compelled the Apostle to alter his intended plan (Ramsay, St. Paul, p. 240, and Blass, in loco), cf. 1 Chron. xii. 8 (A al.); 2 Macc. v. 21, xii. 12, with an accusative of place.—Képw- θον: Corinth from its position as the capitalof the Roman province Achaia was the centre of government and commerce, while Athens was still the great educa- tional centre of Greece. St. Paul, with his keen eye for the most important and prominent stations of Roman govern- ment and the meeting points of East and West, might be expected to choose a place from whence the influence of the Gospel could spread over the whole province. Like Ephesus, Corinth lay on the great highway between East and West; like Ephesus it was, as Professor Ramsay terms it, one of the knots on the line of communication, the point of convergence for many subordinateroads. But Corinth, with all its external beauty, its wealth and fame, had become a byword for vice and infamy, cf. Κορινθιάζεσθαι, Κορινθιάζειν, Wetstein, 1 Cor. i. 2, and references in Farrar, St. Paul, i., 557 ff., and it has not been unfairly termed the Vanity Fair of the Roman empire: at once the London and the Paris of the first century after Christ