Teachers: the purpose of this lesson is to help students see Acts' constantly broadening scope as the news of Jesus' death and resurrection reaches out to include diverse people. As that outreach increased, the diversity increased. First, only the Jews [and Jewish converts] in Jerusalem heard. Then, Jewish people and proselytes in that area heard. Then, Samaritans heard. Then, people living in Palestine who were not Jews heard. Then, people living outside Palestine who were not Jews heard. In today's lesson, people far from Palestine who knew little or nothing of the living God heard.
Remember that Luke informed Theophilus he was "compiling an account of the things accomplished among us" (Luke 1:1, New American Standard translation). Luke's letter to Theophilus that we call Acts is a continuation of his compilation and research (Acts 1:1). Luke presented to Theophilus a systematic account of the spread of the "good news" of Jesus' death and resurrection. As we study Luke's researched account of the spread of the "good news," think people, not just geography.
As students grow in awareness that the "good news" was shared among peoples who were increasingly diverse, they need to understand what happened. Much more happened than giving diverse people new information. The resurrected Jesus challenged people to change the way they looked at life and the world. When people understood Jesus, they looked at the world differently.
If the Jewish people were to accept God's act of making Jesus the promised Messiah, they had to look at life and the world differently. They had to "see" the nation of Israel from a different perspective. They had to change their understanding of what it meant to be "God's people."
If those who worshipped idols [other gods] were to understand what the living God did in Jesus' death and resurrection, they had to look at life and the world differently. They had to "see" deity differently. Their understanding of what it meant to "listen to the gods" had to change.
The original language suggests the philosophers [students of the meaning of life] in Athens who heard Paul considered him and his information dangerous (Acts 17:18). It is possible that Paul was asked to speak to the council on Mars Hill [the Areopagus] to assess the danger. The majority's conclusion: "This man and his message are ridiculous, not dangerous." The Paul who often confronted hostile reactions now confronted indifference.
Why, initially, might they consider Paul and his message dangerous? Many factors could make his message dangerous. One primary factor was this: Paul challenged people to look at life and the world differently. Jesus Christ changed the way that Paul looked at the world. Jesus Christ changes the way any person looks at the world.
The circumstances in Athens were unlike those in any previously mentioned place. With Paul's sermon in Athens, Luke took Theophilus to God's complete objective. The fact of Jesus' death and resurrection was good news, and this good news was to be shared with everyone. Even those who did not know the living God's identity needed to hear about Jesus.
Paul was accustomed to strong reactions. Consider common reactions of unbelieving Jews who turned people against Paul (Acts 13:45). Consider the reactions of people who followed Paul to other cities to assure that Paul would be rejected (Acts 14:19; 17:13). Paul was accustomed to strong reactions [positive and negative], but not to apathetic responses.
Luke wanted Theophilus to understand that everyone--even those who did not know God--should have an opportunity to learn about the living God and His Son Jesus.
First, consider Luke's progression. In the gospel of Luke, Luke informed Theophilus about Jesus' origin, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension. In Acts, Luke began with Jesus' post-resurrection appearances and his ascension. Progressively, Theophilus learned about the presentation of the good news of salvation in Jesus Christ (1) to Jews and proselytes in Jerusalem, (2) to the Samaritans, (3) to people in Palestine who knew God but were not Jews, (4) to people outside Palestine who knew God but were not Jews, and, finally, (5) to philosophers and idol worshippers who did not know God.
First century Jews in Palestine reacted against giving people who were not Jews direct access to God through Jesus. Acts 11 records the first reaction. Leaders in the Jerusalem church criticized Peter for visiting Cornelius. Acts 15 records the second reaction. Some Christians in the Jerusalem church challenged the conversion of people who were not Jews. The third reaction is seen in the Jewish instigation of Paul's arrest and trials (Acts 21:17-chapter 26). In each of the three instances, some Jewish Christians objected to giving people who were not Jews direct access to God through Jesus Christ. That fact deserves serious consideration.
Many Jewish Christians opposed Paul's work among people who were not proselytes. That opposition is obvious in Acts 11 and Acts 15. Why was Paul arrested in the temple area in Acts 21? James and the elders (Acts 21:18) had Paul assist Christians who were taking a vow. This was the reason for Paul's assistance: to correct (among Jewish Christians) misimpression of Paul's work among people who were not Jewish (Acts 21:20,21).
Devout Jews regarded Paul's outreach to people who were not Jewish as dangerous. They were not merely being contrary or isolationist. Their concern was based on what they believed were God's desires. How could a person with a background formed by idolatrous concepts have a correct understanding of God and His ways? The process of inducting a proselyte into the Jewish community was a process of indoctrination. By controlling the convert's thinking and behavior, Jews were assured the convert thought and lived as he [or she] should. This was the "responsible way" to assure change in the convert. Paul's use of (1) faith in Jesus' death and resurrection and (2) God's grace bypassed this important control process. It did not replace their process with a better control system. It bypassed their control system.
With Paul's visit to and teaching in Athens, Theophilus was introduced to the reaction of educated people who knew nothing of God or Jesus. Paul toured this highly religious [superstitious] city (verse 23). He was distressed to see such concern for deity combined with such ignorance of God (verse 16). Initially, Paul taught in Athens as he taught previously in other cities. He taught in the synagogue and the market place (verse 17). Neither effort seemed to create fervent reaction or interest.
If you compare the Athens' response to Paul's teaching with previous responses to Paul's teaching, the Athens' response stands in contrast.
Some who heard his teachings in the market place were critical. His encounters with the philosophers were not curiosity reactions. They regarded Paul as an argumentative person who used foolish talk to discuss demonic thoughts (verse 18). Their invitation to Paul to address the council that met on Mars Hill was not an expression of polite interest. To them, Paul's message was strange, and they wanted to know its meaning (verse 20). Their attitude was more "how dangerous is this man" than "give the man an opportunity."
In verse 18 [New American Standard translation], "conversing" can be translated "disputing" or "arguing." The words "idle babbler" can be translated "one who makes his living by picking up scraps." The literal translation of "deities" is "demons." Paul did not receive a polite, curious invitation to speak to the renowned religious leaders of Athens. The terms they used in reference to Paul were derogatory. He was a pretender, a gossip, who, like some birds, picked up scraps of religious thoughts to share with others.
In Paul's address, he walked a "fine line." He tried to interest the council without endorsing their idolatrous concepts. He did not wish to alienate the council. He wanted them to give serious consideration to his message. However, Paul did not want them to think that Jesus represented another form of idolatry.
Paul's challenge was enormous. His understanding of deity and their understanding of deity were different in every consideration. When differences are that great, it is almost impossible to be understood. It is difficult for words to convey concepts the first time new concepts are shared. Paul wanted them to listen, but he wanted them also to see the differences. Mere condemnation was not Paul's objective. The objective was to teach.
The essential, basic understanding of every religious view, of every faith system is its concept of God. For first century Jewish people, their concept of God was their critical concept. If Jesus did not "fit" their concept of God, Jesus was foolishness. If Jesus "fit" their concept of God, Jesus was Savior. To the proselytes, the Godfearers, and the idol worshippers, their concept of God was critical. To those whose concepts of deity permitted a resurrected Savior, the news of Jesus was received as good news. To those whose concepts of deity excluded a resurrected Savior, the news of Jesus was ridiculous.
Our personal concept of God determines what we will and will not think, consider, or even understand. If what people hear is in radical contradiction to their understanding of who and what God is, rarely will those people give serious consideration to what they hear. Commonly, when Jesus does not "fit" a people's concepts of God, they refuse to give serious consideration of Jesus.
Note that Paul approached these people [Epicurean and Stoic philosophers] on a common ground: the concept of God. He did not talk about Israel's history; Israel's history meant nothing to them. He did not use Jewish prophecy; Jewish prophecy meant nothing to them. He did not cite historical Jewish figures; the Jews' ancestors meant nothing to them. He began on the only common ground they shared: the proper concept of God. Their many religious objects in Athens affirmed their interest in deity. Their desire to honor every god created an opportunity for Paul to present the God they did not know.
It was common practice for Paul to begin his teaching to a person or audience by starting with an understanding they held. He proved that he could think their thoughts and concepts before he challenged them to consider his thoughts and concepts (1 Corinthians 9:19-23).
Carefully note the distinctions Paul drew between their idolatrous concepts of deity and the living God. The living God existed in distinct contrast to their concept of deity.
He is the source of the world and everything in the world (verse 24).
The living God is the God who creates.
He rules the world (verse 24).
The living God is the God who rules the entire world, not just an aspect of it.
He sustains people; He is not dependent on people (verses 24, 25).
The living God takes care of people; people do not take care of the living God [as commonly was the situation with idols].
All people are dependent on Him and need to acknowledge him (verses 25, 26).
The living God should be acknowledged by all peoples of the world--He is not a Roman god, a Greek god, an Egyptian god, etc., but the universal God.
He is approachable (verse 27).
The living God wants to help, wants people to come to Him. He is the God who cares.
He is the source of life (verse 28).
Life itself originates in the living God.
In the correct view of God, it is inappropriate to picture God as an object of art formed through human workmanship using precious metals or stone (verse 29). To present God as an object of human art work is an act of ignorance (verse 30). God overlooked such ignorance in the past, but now expects people to repent. People should repent of reducing God to an object of human art because God will judge all inhabitants of the earth on a specific day. An appointed man who was raised from the dead will serve as that judge (verse 31).
Paul's basic point: God is not dependent on human acts of care. God is not maintained through human acts of provision. Idols depended on human provision. Idols had to receive human care. Humans even had to move them because they could not move themselves. The living God does not need humans to "meet his needs." God is the care giver, not the care receiver. To depict God as a object of human thought and design is an act of ignorance. People originated from God. God did not originate from people. If people did not exist, God would exist.
Paul's reference to the resurrected man who would be God's judge was a transition point. From that point Paul could make a transition from the concept of God to God's resurrected Jesus.
Paul's mention of resurrection prompted an immediate reaction. Some mocked. Others said, "We will listen to you later." The majority did not give Paul's message serious consideration. He and his concepts were not dangerous, merely ridiculous. Paul made no attempt to persist. He left. Paul responded to emotional reactions, not to apathy. One member of the counsel, Dionysius, and one woman, Damaris, believed.
Resurrection from the dead did not "fit" their concept of deity or humanity. To them, humans who physically died could not come back to life. A resurrected human could not be the judge of humans. To them, the concept of God was a valid concern worthy of thought and consideration. To them, the concept of a god resurrecting a human to judge people was ridiculous. Such was not a valid concern worthy of thought and consideration.
For thought and discussion:
Paul did not ask them to add Jesus to the gods they acknowledged. Paul challenged them to change the way they looked at the world. The basic challenge of Christianity is this: "change the way you look at the world."
In their view of the world, there were many gods who performed functions in identified areas of human existence. The gods interacted with human existence and world events. The degree of the god's interest in human affairs was unique to the god. However, many gods were indifferent to human affairs. They were primarily concerned about their own affairs. Yet, regardless of their concern or lack of concern for human existence, these gods' deeds and actions affected human lives and world events.
Paul wanted them to understand that one God existed. He was intimately concerned about people and interacted with people on an individual basis. God the care giver was close to everyone and intimately involved in human existence.
A common perspective held by the Jews was that God was concerned primarily with the nation of Israel, His chosen people. They thought they were "the chosen people" because they were special. They understood being "special" as being valued to the exclusion of other people. Paul challenged them to understand they were special as God's chosen people because God worked through them to bring Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ would bring all people [not just Jews] to God (consider Romans 3:1-30).
Paul's challenge to the Jews was to see that God loved and wanted everyone (consider Peter's realization in Acts 10:34,35), not just Israel. To the Jews that required a completely different view of Israel and the world.
A deep faith in Jesus Christ will change the way we look at existence, at the purpose of life, at good and right, at evil and its destructiveness, at the value of people (regardless of who they are, where they live, or what their status in this world is), at death, and at life after death. Faith in Jesus Christ will change the way we look at everything (including marriage, parenting, and jobs).
Faith sees a person as an eternal soul. Faith sees one's use of life as preparation for death. Faith sees death as a transition. Faith sees one's treatment of people as the primary means of expressing love for God. Faith sees physical pleasure, intellectual achievements, and material prosperity as temporary experiences confined to existence on earth (these things are insignificant after death). Faith measures success and importance by a different set of criteria.
Link to Student Guide
Quarter 2, Lesson 10