THE STRANGER IN ATHENS:

ECHOES OF PLATOS SOPHIST AND STATESMAN IN ACTS 17

Philosophy Interest Group
Robert R. Wadholm
Trinity Bible College & Graduate School
Presented at the 46th Annual Meeting of the Society for Pentecostal Studies

ABSTRACT
Pauls speech before the Areopagus recorded in Acts 17:22-31 serves as an echo
of earlier Hellenistic sources, including Socrates trial in Athens in Platos
Apology and poems by the sage Epimenides and Aratus the Stoic. It is here argued
that these rhetorical and literary echoes resound also with reference to central
patterns identified dialectically by the Stranger in Platos Sophist and Statesman.
These echoes point to the men of Athens as sophists, to Paul as a stranger, and to
Christ as the divinely ordained statesman. Pauls incorporation of themes from
these two Platonist dialogues highlights an ancient Christian negotiation with
culture in propagation of the kerygma; it is the stranger that speaks to culture,
with culture, against culture, and toward new culture; it is the stranger that
identifies the sophist and the statesman, who sets aright the myth of a world
turned backward.

INTRODUCTION

In classical Greek literature, the motif of the stranger is ubiquitous and vital. Chief among

examples is Homers Odyssey, a tale of Odysseus reception as a stranger by lust-filled

goddesses and gift-giving kings, over-burdening and abusive suitors, a loyal and gracious pig-

herder, man-eating monsters of the one-eyed and the many-legged varieties, and mournful,

hopeful, and waning kin: Homer incorporates into his epic individual illustrations of the proper

(and improper) care of strangers to bring home the central theme of his overarching

metanarrative, the moral imperative of care for the stranger. The reception history of this story

shows its power over Greek thought: as time passes, this story of the stranger ties the far-flung
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 2

peoples of the Greek world into a family of sorts (albeit a squabbling one, following the example

of the Iliad) and continues to provide archetypes for the care of strangers as well as to answer

why this care is important, giving a voice (and kindness) to the other, telling of the function of

polity, the means for peace and goodwill among the peoples of the earth, and the allowance of

strange words from afar, for from God are all strangers (Odyssey 6.207-208).

Two of Platos dialogues, the Sophist and the Statesman, similarly feature an unknown

foreigner from whom we learn, whose only moniker is the Eleatic Stranger. Though amid a

dialogue on the nature of knowledge, Socrates allows the unnamed stranger the pride of place to

begin anew a dialogue with his younger companions on the theme of distinguishing the sophist,

the statesman, and the philosopher. The stranger is given room and voice, and in his questioning

polemic continues almost without interruption to unfold a description about what wisdom does,

and does not, look like. Two dialogues of Plato are taken up with this mostly one-sided

conversation, providing a final definition of the sophist at the end of the first, and introducing the

statesman at the beginning of the second. The Stranger seems not afraid to offend, but unfolds

his words step by step toward the hunted truth: sophists are willfully ignorant imitators of truth-

tellers to man, and statesmen are exampled by the gods care of the world and men throughout

history.

Paul is also oft the stranger in the Greco-Roman world. Though he speaks the lingua

franca, yet he comes from afar, a constant traveler, and shows us through his own adventures

what hospitality does and does not look like. His voice, through Lukes narrative of the

Areopagus speech recorded in Acts 17:22-31 echoes that of the Eleatic Stranger. By echo, I

mean here the re-production of a previous concept or thought in another text, the tones of
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 3

which lead the reader to re-hear the source, to absorb and transform its meaning.1 Paul, when

stranger, teaches and preaches from the sacred scripts of the people to whom he speaks. As rabbi

before the synagogue, he echoes Isaiah, Moses, David; and as the unknown stranger from Tarsus

before the leaders of Athens he now echoes Aratus, Epimenides, Plato; but always he speaks

Christ, the stranger in his own world (John 1:10).

PAUL AS STRANGER

It is generally acknowledged that in Acts 17:17-19 Luke alludes to Socrates in his narrative of

Pauls reception at Athens.2 The Areopagus speech is also set in the context of Stoicism and

Epicureanism, the reigning philosophical schools in Athens and the wider Greco-Roman world.

The speech seems to function in Acts as a living model of contextualization and apologetics that

advances the intellectual respectability of the gospel,3 and as such has attracted more

scholarly attention than any other passage in Acts.4 Paul means to establish common ground

between Judaism and Hellenistic philosophy,5 following a particularly Stoic bent:

Stoics would argue that gods exist, then define their character, then demonstrate

that they govern the world (against Epicureans) and, finally that they care for

humanitys needs. This basic outline of argument was well enough known that it

1
David M. Reis, The Areopagus as Echo Chamber: Mimesis and Intertextuality in Acts 17, Journal of Higher
Criticism 9 ,2 (2002), 259-277.
2
Craig S. Keener, Acts: An Exegetical Commentary, Vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2014), 2565, 2580;
Ernst Haenchen, The Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1971),
517; Hans Conzelman, Acts of the Apostles (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1987), 219; James D. G. Dunn, The Acts of
the Apostles (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996), 232; Reis, The Areopagus.
3
Keener, Acts, 2565, 2568, 2570.
4
Ben Witherington, The Acts of the Apostles: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1998), 511.
5
Keener, Acts, 2614.
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 4

may serve as a model for the outline of Pauls Areopagus speech, naturally again

commending the speech more to the Stoics than the Epicureans.6

Pauls ideas parallel Epicurean doctrines of the self-sufficiency of the divine, as well as Stoic

belief in god as the source of all life.7 At the same time, Paul frames much of his speech with

declarations of the Athenians ignoranceignorance of true religion, the nature of the divine,

human duty to God, the coming resurrection and judgement (17:23, 30)8a bold move to make

in the city that served as a showpiece of Hellenistic philosophy, religion and culture. Pauls

speech serves as a model in the sense of provoking [his readers] to think creatively how to

engage their intellectual milieu.9 Pauls engagement is as a learned stranger who speaks of the

ignorance and sophistry of Athenians: his hearers were willfully ignorant of what they ought to

know, they were mere imitators and neither philosophers nor true worshippers themselves, in

need of repentance before a God whose nature they knew, and yet did not.

TRIAL OF THE STRANGE

As Socrates was charged with disbelief in the gods of Athens and belief in other gods (Apology

24B; Euthyphro 3B; Timaeus 378D; Xenophon, Memorabilia, 1.1.1; Cicero, de Legibus, 2.8), so

too, it seems, Paul is accused of discussing foreign gods in Athens.10 Paul also must defend

himself against the charge of being a spermologos, a seed-picker or babbler, one who picked up

discarded items in the marketplace,11 scraps of wisdom here and there, as one lacking true and

6
Keener, Acts, 2595.
7
F. F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles, Rev. Ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,
1988), 342.
8
Keener, Acts, 2634.
9
Keener, Acts, 2670. Paul may be using standard rhetoric when in 17:22 he includes a complimentary exordium and
in 17:23 provides a propositio. Keener, Acts, 2618-2619.
10
Keener, Acts, 2604; J. B. Lightfoot, The Acts of the Apostles: A Newly Discovered Commentary (Downers Grove,
IL: IVP Academic, 2014), 229.
11
S. J. Kistemaker, New Testament Commentary; Exposition of the Acts of the Apostles (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker
Academic, 1990), 627; Witherington, Acts, 514.
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 5

full learning. Pauls Areopagus speech may function as a kind of formal court procession, akin to

Socrates own. The Areopagus12 was the ruling council and court of highest importance in

Athens at the time, but the event was not a formal trial per se and Paul was probably in no

physical danger.13 The meeting does not seem to have been concerned with the legality of Pauls

discussions in the marketplace, but with his proprietywhat could be taught by an unlicensed

philosopher? Should Paul be allowed to teach these new ideas (and perhaps new gods) openly in

an officially sanctioned capacity?14 It seems that Paul, like Socrates, had interested and perhaps

annoyed the Athenians with strange ideas.15

Pauls words at this event did not turn out to be as strange as his former interlocutors may

have imagined they would be. Pausanias (5.14.8) refers to statues of multiple unknown gods,

gods actively worshiped in Athens, perhaps even by some of Pauls hearers. Stoics already

taught that God is a breath () permeating all (Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Pyrrhonism,

3:218), and Epicurus told of a god that was anthropomorphic and made of matter (even the

Stoics believed this to a point).16 Zeno, the founder of Stoicism, taught that temples and images

of the gods were not worthy of the gods.17 Socrates in Platos Euthyphro (12E-15E) discusses

whether God can be served by human hands. God is not far; therefore it is no foreign

divinity (Acts 17:18) that Paul proclaims.God is near even through his image in humanity

(17:28-29), but the Athenians very worship of other images reveals that they have not

12
The Areopagus at this time was likely a meeting of about 100 aristocratic members of a judging political council
of the city, likely taking place at a colonnade by the Roman agora. Keener, Acts, pp. 2600-2602.
13
Keener, Acts, p. 2602.
14
Keener, Acts, 2604.
15
Keener, Acts, 2609.
16
Keener, Acts, 2589; Witherington, Acts, 514.
17
Keener, Acts, 2639. Temples made with hands echoes Acts 7:41, 48-49, Isaiah 66:1, and is alluded to later in
19:26 as relating to 17:29. Keener, Acts, 2641.
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 6

recognized him (17:29).18 While groping after God is not positive, and is used in classical

texts and the LXX for a blind person or someone who stumbles in the darkness,19 yet Athenians

knowledge of the divine was not completely lacking, for God had left them witness. As

Witherington comments, what has happened is that Greek notions have been taken up and given

new meaning by placing them in a Jewish-Christian monotheistic contextusing Greek thoughts

to make monotheistic points.20

UNSTRANGE REASONS: THE WITNESS OF GOD IN THE SCRIPTURES & LIVES

OF THE GREEKS

In the synagogues, Paul reasoned with the Jews from the scriptures (17:2) and from their history,

and in the marketplace he likewise reasoned with the Athenians. But upon what basis could he

reason with those unfamiliar (and perhaps even antagonistic toward) the Hebrew scriptures? To

illustrate his education and to provide a basis for reasoning, Paul would have been expected to

use classical quotations in his proofs,21 using evocative language and themes from great literature

through mimesis or direct citation.22 Tarsus, Pauls hometown, was well-known for its

rhetoricians and philosophers,23 and Aratus (whom Paul likely quotes in his speech) was a

famous Cilician. Keener argues that if a Galilean fisherman can echo Socrates (perhaps

unknowingly in the narrative world), how much more should it be expected of Paul, who is

18
Keener, Acts, 2651. The theme of Gods nearness and ability to be sought can be found in Ps. 139: 7-12, 145:18,
and Isaiah 55:6.
19
Keener, Acts, 2652.
20
Witherington, Acts, 524.
21
Keener, Acts, 2653.
22
Keener, Acts, 2653. Explicit classical quotations in the New Testament are few, only occurring in Pauls writings
(1 Cor. 15:33; Tit. 1:12) and this speech (17:28) (Keener, Acts, 2656). As an apostle to the Greeks, Pauls
knowledge of Greek literature was important, not only in propagation of the gospel, but in defense of its truth,
lending intellectual credence to his views. Lightfoot conjectures that Paul might have studied Greek poetry while at
Tarsus after his conversion, or perhaps while under Gamaliels care (Lightfoot, The Acts of the Apostles, 233).
23
Keener, Acts, 2580.
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 7

ministering in the Diaspora?24 While not all members of the Areopagus council would have

been philosophers,25 yet they were likely philosophically literate26 and would have picked up

on Pauls allusions, especially given the wide readership of the authors that are referenced.

Possible quotes and/or allusions presented in this narrative include Socrates/Plato, Epimenides,

and Aratus (and/or Cleanthes), all of whom deal with knowledge of God and his relation to

humanity.

In him we live and move and have our being is commonly attributed to the 6th century

B.C. Cretan poet Epimenides,27 whom Maeandrius of Miletus, Plutarch and Clement of

Alexandria speak of as having been listed among the seven sages. Keener acknowledges that

while this quotation may possibly be from Epimenides, this is uncertain, though Titus 1:12 may

be a reference to the same poet28 who might also have been associated with the altar to the

unknown god that Paul identifies in his speech.29 Pauls language in this quotation/allusion,

however, is more philosophic than poetic,30 which may point to a different source.31 The

24
Keener, Acts, 2604.
25
Presumably most would not be. Keener, Acts, 2614.
26
Keener, Acts, 2614.
27
Keener, Acts, 2657; F. L. Arrington, The Acts of the Apostles: An Introduction and Commentary (Peabody, MA:
Hendrickson Publishers, 1988), 180; Stanley M. Horton, Acts (Springfield, MO: The Complete Biblical Library,
1987); D. J. Williams, Acts (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1990); F. F. Bruce, Commentary on the Book of
Acts (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1971); Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles.
28
These both may be from the same poet and poemthe quote here is likely a modification of the fourth line of the
same quatrain that Paul may be referencing as being from a prophet of the Cretans in his letter to Titus, where he
references the second line of the quatrain. J. Munck, Rev. by W. F. Albright & C.S. Mann. The Acts of the Apostles
(Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967), 171. The words of the poem are found in a ninth century Syriac commentary
on Acts by Ishodad: The Cretans said as truth about Zeus, that he was a lord; he was lacerated by a wild boar and
buried; and behold! His grave is known amongst us; so therefore Minos, son of Zeus made a laudatory speech on
behalf of his father; and he said in it, The Cretans carve a tomb for thee, O Holy and high! Liars, evil beasts, and
slow bellies; for thou art alive and risen; for in thee we live and are moved, and have our being. Kistemaker,
Exposition of the Acts of the Apostles, 636.
29
Keener, Acts, 2657, 2659.
30
Keener, Acts, 2658. The three-fold structure in the allusion may be an instance of a tricolon, a three-fold
parallelism of words or phrases, an example being Caesars Veni, vidi, vici, another example of which may be
found near the end of the Sophist (248E-249A). The tricolon was a conventional pattern found in but not limited to
philosophers; the structure might (though need not) reflect Lukan editing. Keener, Acts, 2658. Keener argues that
the allusion to Epimenides might have been merely attributed to him and have postdated him (i.e., it may have been
written after him using more philosophic language).
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 8

referenced quotation is used in the Epimenides context as proof that Zeus is not dead but risen

and alivehow could the power of our life and movement and being be dead yet we be alive?

For Paul, Epimenides Zeus is the one God, the creator and sustainer of the heavens and earth

spoken of in the Jewish scriptures, but not the Zeus worshiped in the temples or with the statues

of the Athenianshe has no need of human handsand of this God the Athenians are ignorant.

God needs nothing; rather, we need him for life and breath and everything.

The poets words for we are his offspring are said to have come from Aratus,32 Aratus

and Cleanthes,33 or from Cleanthes and later attributed to Aratus.34 Cleanthes was Zenos

successor at the head of the Stoic school for over thirty years in the third century B.C. His Hymn

to Zeus, 35 from which this text may have been taken, praises God as the progenitor of humans,

31
Keener, Acts, 2658.
32
Chrysostom, Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, 38; Munck, The Acts of the Apostles, 171; Arrington, The
Acts of the Apostles, 180; Horton, Acts; Bruce, Commentary on the Book of Acts; Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles.
33
A. C. Gaebelein, The Acts of the Apostles (Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1961), 308; Williams, Acts; Lightfoot,
The Acts of the Apostles; C. C. Caragounis, Stone, Cornerstone, in R. P. Martin & P. H. Davids (Eds.), Dictionary
of the Later New Testament & its Development, pp. 1126-1129 (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1997), 1126;
J. D. Charles, Pagan Sources in the New Testament, in C. A. Evans & S. E. Porter, Dictionary of New Testament
Background, pp. 756-763 (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2000), 760; Kistemaker, Exposition of the Acts of
the Apostles, 636.
34
Keener, Acts, 2657.
35
The Hymn of Zeus is here given in full English translation: Most glorious of Immortals, mighty God, invoked by
many a name, sovereign King of universal Nature, piloting this world in harmony with Lawall hail! Thee it is
meet that mortals should invoke, for we Thine offspring are, and sole of all created things that live and move on
earth receive from Thee the image of the One. Therefore I praise Thee, and shall hymn Thy power unceasingly.
Thee the wide world obeys. As onward ever in its course it rolls where'er Thou guidest, and rejoices still beneath
Thy sway: so strong a minister is held by Thine unconquerable handsthat two-edged thunderbolt of living fire that
never fails. Under its dreadful blow all Nature reels; therewith Thou dost direct the Universal Reason which,
commixt with all the greater and the lesser lights, moves thro' the Universe. How great Thou art, the Lord supreme
for ever and for aye! No work is wrought apart from Thee, God, or in the world, or in the heaven above. Or on the
deep, save only what is done by sinners in their folly. Nay, Thou canst make the rough smooth, bring wondrous
order forth from chaos; in Thy sight unloveliness seems beautiful; for so Thou hast fitted things Together, good and
evil, that there reigns One everlasting Reason in them all. The wicked heed not this, but suffer it to slip, to their
undoing; these are they Who, yearning ever to secure the good, mark not nor hear the law of God, by wise obedience
unto which they might attain a nobler life, with Reason harmonized. But now, unbid, they pass on divers paths each
his own way, yet knowing not the truthsome in unlovely striving for renown, some bent on lawless gains, on
pleasure some, working their own undoing, self-deceived. Thou most bounteous God that sittest throned in clouds,
the Lord of lightning, save mankind from grievous ignorance! Oh, scatter it far from their souls, and grant them to
achieve true knowledge, on whose might Thou dost rely to govern all the world in righteousness; that so, being
honored, we may Thee requite with honor, chanting without pause Thy deeds. As all men should: since greater
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 9

the orderer of the world, the one against whom humans sin, he who repels ignorance and brings

knowledge, whose law and deeds deserve our praise. This hymn was well-known in the first

century as part of an anthology that was used in Hellenistic educational settings and was quoted

extensively by Stoics.36 Pauls words are nearly identical to line 4 of the hymn.37

Aratus, a third century poet, wrote the astronomical poem Phaenomena which contains a

line also nearly identical with that of Pauls (the relevant text reads: )38 in the

context of a passage about God setting the times and seasons of human life.39 Aratus was

apparently more widely quoted than Cleanthes, including by the early diaspora Jewish apologist

Aristobulus;40 the only classical work read more widely than Aratus Phaenomena in the

Hellenistic world was Homer.41 The similarity between the Cleanthes and Aratus sources may be

attributed to the fact that both studied Stoic philosophy in the same period, possibly under Zeno;

they may thus depend on a common source, or one may have borrowed from the other.42 For

Zeno, their common teacher, nothing without a share in mind and reason can give birth to one

who is animate and rational. But the world gives birth to those who are animate and rational.

Therefore the world is animate and rational (Cicero, On the Nature of the Gods, 2.22). The

world gives birth to humans as it is governed by the counsel of the gods (2.75-6), and is the

guerdon ne'er befalls or man or god than evermore duly to praise the Universal Law. Trans. E. H. Blakeney, The
Hymn of Cleanthes (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1921).
36
Keener, Acts, 2659.
37
The words of Cleanthes Hymn to Zeus, line 4 are: or while Pauls
words are .
38
The relevant text from Aratus Phaenomena runs thus: From Zeus let us begin; him do we mortals never leave
unnamed; full of Zeus are all the streets and all the market-places of men; full is the sea and the havens thereof;
always we all have need of Zeus. For we are also his offspring; and he in his kindness unto men giveth favorable
signs and wakeneth the people to work, reminding them of livelihood. He tells what time the soil is best for the labor
of the ox and for the mattock, and what time the seasons are favorable both for the planting of trees and for casting
all manner of seeds. Trans. A.W Mair, & G. R. Mair, Callimachus, Hymns and Epigrams. Lycophron. Aratus
(London: William Heinemann, 1921).
39
Keener, Acts, 2660.
40
Keener, Acts, 2657.
41
Keener, Acts, 2660.
42
Keener, Acts, 2660.
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 10

divine nature (Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers, 7.148) that produces and

preserves the being of its offspring (149).

Plato, a century before Cleanthes and Aratus, similarly has his Eleatic Stranger say that

all things, including mankind, are the offspring and creations of God (

, Sophist 266B) near the beginning of the summary of the

Strangers definition of the sophist. From Plato to the Stoics, we find this idea carried over and

further elaborated, taken up by Paul in his words to the elite. Let us listen to the Strangers words

ourselves, those that resound within Pauls speech.

ECHOES OF THE STRANGER FROM THE SOPHIST & STATESMAN

Using the method of dialectic, the Stranger in Platos Sophist begins his summary definition of

the sophist by dividing art into the productive and the acquisitive (Sophist 265). Examples of the

acquisitive include the hunter and the fisherman, those who seek and find (see Acts 17:17). The

productive is the creative art, which may be split again into the creations of images (the imitative

art) and the creations of real things, by both God and by man (the divine and human arts)

(Sophist 265). Humans and all other natural things are Gods workmanship, created by divine

reason and knowledge, and are his offspring (265C-266B). Corresponding with the real things

that God has made are the images: dreams and pictures of the real (266B-C). So too humans

build real things such as houses, and create images of real things, such as paintings of houses

(266C). Within the image-making art, we may find the fantastic and the likeness-making, and

within the fantastic, that produced using instruments, and that produced by the maker as the

instrument, the mimetic art, the art of imitation (266C-267A). Some who imitate know of that

which they imitate, while others are ignorant, and imitate by opinion only; further, some of these

ignorant imitators do not know that they are ignorant, while others know that they do not know
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 11

what they imitate (267B-268A). Of those who know they are ignorant, yet who dissemble and

pretend to know, there are those who do so in long public speeches, and those who do so in short

private speeches in order to force the person who converses with him to contradict himself

(Sophist 267B). The popular orator is he who speaks in public, while the other, we must truly

call him the absolutely real and actual sophist (267C). And here ends the definition of the

sophist, as well as the dialogue after his name.

But what have we learned from the Stranger? Was it right of us to listen? Paul saw in

Athens many idolsimages of gods, images even to a god unknown. What art is this? It is

productive. It is human, not divine. Gods art is the world, and we are that art, his offspring; that

is why he does not need human art. These idols are human art, from those who ignorantly imitate

the nature of a God they do not know, but whom they profess to know. The Stoics, Epicureans

and other philosophers should know this God and his nature. They speak privately convincing

others about the nature of God, but they know that they do not know this God (he is the unknown

God whom Paul preaches, whom they imitate fantastically with their idols of gold and silver and

stone but do not know). He is the God who cares for creation throughout history (not the God of

Epicureans, who cares nothing for us), with the purpose that we might seek and find him (the

human art, the acquisitive art). How ought the sophists to respond as they are confronted with

these strange words?

It is here that our ears may come to the words of the Stranger in Platos Statesman, to a

conversation transpiring after the Sophist and continuing in another direction. To define the

statesman is to declare what and who he is. To begin, there are sciences, both practical and

intellectual, and among the intellectual are the arts of commanding and of judging, among the

commanding are those who do so on their own authority and those who command on behalf of
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 12

another, and among the commanding by ones own authority are those who supervise living

things and those who rule over non-living, and among the rulers of the living are those who tend

many or one, and among the rulers of many living those who herd aquatic and those who herd

land animals, and among the land animals those who rule over walking and flying animals, and

among rulers of walking land animals those who tend bipeds and quadrupeds, and among those

who tend bipedal walking land animals those who tend feathered and unfeathered creatures, and

thus we have the statesman who commands from his own authority as shepherd of men, the

unfeathered bipedal walking land animals that they are. But this definition is incomplete, for it

does not define the statesman alone, but also others, including athletic trainers and physicians,

who may be said to likewise tend to mankind. How shall we distinguish the statesman from these

others?

The Stranger then tells his young discussion partner a story, as a childs tale, for of the

portents recorded in ancient tales, many did happen and will happen again (Statesman 268E).

There are old stories of the rising and setting of the sun turned backward (the conflagrations of

history), of Gods direct rule over creation, and of the ancient folk born from the ground instead

of from humans,43 and these stories are from a singular event, one that had not yet been told in

full, and so I must tell it now; for that will help us to make clear the nature of the king (269B-

C). God the creator has put the universe on a revolving course, and it changes over time. At

times it is governed immediately by Godit is acquiring the power of living again and

receiving renewed immortality from the Creator (270A), and at this time it moves backward

through the agesthe world is run in reverse. When the world is turned (,

273A), all stands still, and then age turns to youth, and youth to birth, and souls disappear from

43
While it was a common myth that Athenians were born from the soil, the Strangers myth has all humans thus
born by God from the soil, a fact not often noted by Acts commentators.
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 13

there. But where did the humans arise in this time, when the world was turned backward? From

the graves, the earth-born rise ( , 271A): those who are dead and

lying in the earth take shape and come to life again, since the process of birth is reversed along

with the reversal of the worlds revolution; for this reason they are inevitably earth-born (271B-

C). In a previous revolution, when the world ran in reverse, God ruled the universe directly, as a

shepherd (Statesman 271E), but as he left it to men to shepherd in his stead (though he still

rules), the world has filled with evil and humans grew forgetful, and the ancient condition of

disorder prevailed more and towards the end of time reached its height, and the universe,

mingling but little good with much of the opposite sort, was in danger of destruction for itself

and those within it. Therefore at that moment God, who made the order of the universe,

perceived that it was in dire trouble, and fearing that it might founder in the tempest of confusion

and sink in the boundless sea of diversity, he took again his place as its helmsman, reversed

whatever had become unsound and unsettled in the previous period when the world was left to

itself, set the world in order, restored it and made it immortal and ageless. So now the tale is

told (273C-E). And what more might we have learned?

It is God, our creator and father, who is our shepherd (Acts 17:24-26). Why does he

shepherd us thus? So that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him,

though he is not far from each one of us (v. 27). In the past, God overlooked the ignorance of

the sophist, who imitates what he does not know of the divine nature, but now he commands all

people everywhere to repent (v. 30), to turn in reverse and go backward, back to Gods rule and

to right knowledge of him, right action under his command as the great statesman of the world.

There is a day that he has set, a day when the world will be judged by the great statesman, by

Gods immediate rule (v. 31). How can we know this? He has given proof of this to all men by
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 14

raising him from the dead (v. 31). From the grave the great statesman has arisen to judge the

world and rule it, and God has called the world to stop and turn to him (v. 31). God has found the

world unsound and unsettled, but he will reverse this and make the world immortal and ageless

(Statesman 273E)through the grave-born Christ, the one appointed to turn the world, and he

has proved this through his own turning to life from death. Death has reversed itself in him, and

his risen body proves his place at the head of the worlds turning, when God will judge and right

the world he created and sustains.

Apollo, in Aeschylus Eumenides (647-648) says at the founding of the Areopagus:

When the dust has soaked up a mans blood, once he is dead, there is no resurrection

(anastasis). To an Epicurean, there is not a thing that survives the body or that exists beyond it,

and after death there is nothing to be resurrected. To repent for ignorance would mean for the

Epicurean to admit ignorance of God (that there is one who providentially created, sustains,

guides and judges humans) and ignorance of humans (that they live on after death). The Stoic

must admit ignorance of the true nature of God, that he is personal and is not like idols or mere

material objects. Resurrection and the nature of God as major themes of Pauls address are

pointed again and again at his interlocutorsfor the Epicureans, as for the Sadducees, there was

no resurrection, afterlife or judgement, while for the Stoics, as for the Pharisees, the actions of

God in this world and beyond were believed, but the nature of God was not clearly seen. For the

Stoics, God was the soul of nature, and the gods (as well as the creator) were composed of highly

refined matter, while for the Pharisees, Jesus was not recognized as God in flesh, the divine

made material. For the Stranger, humans survive death, and live again, to be judged after the

turning of the world by the God that is not mere matter, but that is beyond and who yet tends his

creation, as a shepherd his sheep.

Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 15

QUESTIONING THE STRANGER

Given the preceding account of Lukes narrative as echoing the dialogues of the Stranger, several

questions ought to be raised. First, why would Paul (and/or Luke in his editorial formulation)

make use of Platos Sophist and Statesman in this way? Second, can we be certain that this is the

case? Third, why have no earlier interpreters of Acts made this connection if it were so clear? 44

Fourth, cannot we find all supposed parallels in other speeches recorded in Acts? Fifth, is this not

mere parallelomania?

First, why would Paul and/or Luke make use of two small sections of Platos works as a

structure for a defense of Pauls teachings? It is commonly held by interpreters that Paul uses

allusions and perhaps quotations to other earlier Greek philosophical and poetic sources as

evidence for his argument in this speech, a practice that was expected by educated audiences.

The claim that Paul makes use of Plato, the most important Athenian in all of history, seems not

to be out of the question and should not be dismissed out of hand given his use of other popular

Hellenistic sources of wisdom, including Stoic sources (Aratus/Cleanthes) that draw from

Platonist foundations. Plato (and his inspiration, Socrates) was the fount of philosophizing in

Athens, a major source for all of the foremost schools of the time, who refined his earlier ideas,

or rejected them, or more often than not dogmatized subsets of his conclusions. It is possible that

Paul, as a rabbi in the synagogues throughout the empire, was here likewise reasoning from the

scriptures of his audience. There is no evidence (that I know of) that meetings of the Areopagus

included formal or informal readings, but my explanation above might be (weak) evidence that

such was perhaps the case (at least in this instance). This is a short set of readings that occur in

immediate succession in the Platonist canon (the end of the Sophist and beginning of the

Statesman), and the readings are apropos given both the audience (the statesmen of Athens and
44
Here I assume that none have left written accounts of a similar interpretation because I have yet to find one.
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 16

probably also philosophers from the marketplace) and the reason for the meeting, which might

be said to be an evaluation of the sophistry of Paul, judging the legitimacy of his philosophizing

as well as the content of his teaching. Paul may have encountered these writings from the Sophist

and Statesman for the first time during the meeting itself (and taken mental or physical notes,

from which he derived his structure), or he may have been informed of the expected readings for

the meeting and prepared his remarks beforehand (or the readings may have occurred in earlier

encounters with the Epicureans and Stoics in the agora). He may even have chosen these

readings himself as the context for his speech. This would follow the common practice in the

synagogues and in Hellenistic schools of philosophy where reasoning from the scriptures was

expected, with the explanation of readings already shared at the meeting along with additions of

other quotes and allusions in exposition of the main themes brought out by one or more central

texts.

Second, can we be certain that Paul (and/or Luke) made use of Platos Sophist and

Statesman as a framework for the Areopagus speech (and/or echoed these works)? We cannot

know this for certain, but we may conjecture that this is the case based upon evidence. The

evidence that Paul (and/or Luke) uses these texts includes: 1) the resemblance to themes in the

same order as the Sophist and Statesman, 2) the contiguity of the context (Athens), themes (see

above) and words (Gods offspring, images, creation, ignorance, earth-born, turning) with that of

Pauls own speech, 3) the previous allusions to Socrates in the narrative of Luke, 4) the

similarities between the role of the Stranger and Paul in the narrative, 5) the use of other sources

that drew from Platonist foundations, making it plausible that Platonist allusions would be likely

to be understood, and 6) Pauls and Jesus recurring examples of using readings in synagogues as

a meta-context for further elaboration of the gospel. While none of this, by itself, can be taken as
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 17

proof (or perhaps even as strong evidence), we may yet leave ourselves open to the idea that use

of these texts is a possibility, one that helps us to explain the speech in a fuller way.

Third, why have no earlier interpreters of Acts made this connection? Novelty of

interpretation is no absolute sin, but questions of validity arise in such circumstances (how can a

key to understanding scripture be unknown for so long, yet still be helpful in interpretation of the

main points of a sacred text?). I do not claim that the connection between these texts is extremely

clear, nor that understanding the connection is central to understanding the point of Luke-Acts

(though I do think understanding the connection is central to interpreting and framing Pauls

speech to the Areopagus, even outside of Lukes use of the speech). I also do not think that

earlier interpreters of Acts have tended to be as well-informed of Platonist writings as the

original audience of the speech might have been.45 Given the examples of other New Testament

writers quotations and allusions to earlier texts, Lukes use of explicit allusions in this narrative

of the speech followed common conventions of leaving out the details concerning the names of

the authors and/or publication titles and the original contexts of the allusions and/or quotations,

and he uses loose quotations (perhaps even from memory). Luke also commonly fails to identify

foundational texts (framework texts) for speech events in Luke-Acts. However, Lukes potential

lack of identification (or ignorance) regarding echoes from the Sophist and Statesman in Pauls

speech is no reason to deny the existence of suchPaul may have intended these echoes

originally, and not have remembered these details in his narration of the events to Luke (or

others, if Luke did not receive this account first-hand), or Paul (and/or Luke) may not have seen

why this would be important for Lukes purposes (these details may not be central to the plot of

Luke-Acts). It may be that many modern interpreters of Acts have not studied these Platonist

45
It may be that even Luke does not see the connection to these Platonist texts; additionally, Pauls account of the
event to Luke might have omitted these details.
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 18

texts with an eye to their importance for understanding this speech, and these particular Platonist

texts were not in circulation by Christians scholars for a long period of history; however, some

exegetes of this passage have noted the Attic flavor of the passage and the possibility of its

dependence on an external model.46 Similarly, very few of the early Christian interpreters of

scripture would have had access to these texts, and perhaps even fewer may have wanted such

access. Details surrounding the Qumran community were likewise unknown for millennia, until

evidence was brought forth in modern times. These Qumran details help us to interpret the

Gospels and Acts, yet were unknown to Christian interpreters until recently. If this is possible, it

may also be possible that echoes of the Sophist and Statesman have been culturally buried

beneath the dust of time. Recognizing these echoes is not groundbreaking, as were the Qumran

finds, but it may help us to piece together a very small piece of history and to understand an

important event recorded in Luke-Acts from the context in which it occurred.

Fourth, cannot all of the supposed echoes identified in the speech be found in earlier

speeches in Acts, as characteristic of Lukes narration of apostolic witness? Let us look briefly

at the echoes of earlier Lukan speeches (as well as their earlier, often biblical, sources) and see if

we discern in them all that might be accounted for in the present speech (without requiring

echoes of the Sophist and Statesman). A close (perhaps the closest) parallel narrative is Pauls

speech in Lystra (Acts 14: 15-17). In the context of idolatry and ignorance (a common theme in

Acts, see 3:17; 13:27) of the true nature of God, Paul points his hearers to the witness of history

with reference to the providence of God shown through nature. Gods nature is not merely

human (v. 15), though in Acts 17 humans are said to be Gods offspring, so that the nature of

humans is to be compared with that of God (we can know based on our own nature that he is not

46
F. F. Bruce, Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company,1973), 243.
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 19

gold, silver or stone, and that he is not a mere human artifact of design or craft, a mere image).

Paul tells the Lystrans to turn away from futile worship (of Paul and Barnabas) to seek the living

God; and again to the Athenians it is in God (the living Zeus) we live and move and have our

being (Acts 17) and repentance is due him. To the Lystrans he speaks of the God who made

heaven, earth and sea and all that is in them (14:15; compare with Jonah 1:9, Gen. 14:19 and

Gen. 1), and to the Athenians he speaks of the God who made the world and everything, who is

Lord of heaven and earth (17:24). Similarly, Stephen tells the Sanhedrin that God does not dwell

in Temples made with hands (Acts 7:48-50) because Gods own hands made all these things

(quoting Is. 66:1-2). In former speeches of Acts, we have echoes of ignorance, idol worship, the

witness of divine nature with reference to human nature and the providence of God in nature,

repentance, resurrection and judgement, with bases in the Hebrew scriptures. What is distinctive,

then, about this passage, this speech among philosophers? The language is more formal and

philosophical, the words and quotations are those of Greek philosophers, the context and events

point to philosophical models (such as the trial of Socrates), the hearers are potentially

philosophers or are likely familiar with Hellenistic philosophical concepts, and there are several

themes from this speech that are not to be found in other sermons or speeches in Acts (See Table

1 below):

1- God has no needs (17:25);

2- Humans were made to inhabit the whole earth (v. 26);

3- Humans live and move and have their being in God (v. 28);

4- Hellenic poets are said to know and speak rightly of God (at least in a small measure;

v. 28);

5- Humans are the offspring of God;

Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 20

6- The divine being is not material (like gold, silver or stone), is not an image, and is not

made by mans design and skill (v. 29).

Themes 3, 4 and 5 are accounted for by the Epimenides and Aratus quotations discussed above,

theme 1 was a doctrine accepted by both Stoics and Epicureans, and themes 1, 2, 5 and 6 are to

be found in the Sophist and Statesman in addition to other themes echoed in these Platonist texts

as identified above (philosophy, ignorance, proclamation, creator, God is lord and gives to

humans and all creatures everything, we are his offspring, God controls where we live on the

earth, production of images, mans artistic craft, in times past God overlooked ignorance, but he

now commands all people, there is a future turning, judgement, and resurrection from the dead).

There seem to be thematic gaps filled by these Platonist echoes, distinctive elements of this

speech not accounted for by parallels from earlier speeches or sermons in Acts, and the themes

seem to have greater overlap with these Platonist texts than with any of the previous speeches or

sermons in Acts. Comparing themes from the contexts of the explicit quotations/allusions from

Greek poets in Acts 17 with the echoes identified from the Sophist and Statesman above seem

also to point in the direction of an influence by the later texts, as these later seem to overlap with

the speech in potentially more substantive ways and may help us further in our understandings of

v. 29 (concerning the divine nature and art) (see Table 2 below).

Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 21

TABLE 1. A Comparison of Earlier Speeches and Sermons in Acts

Acts 2:14- Acts 3:12- Acts 7:2- Acts Acts Acts 14:15-17 Acts 17:22-31
39 26 53 10:34-43 13:16-41 (Paul & Barnabas (Paul before Areopagus
(Peter on (Peter in (Stephen (Peter at (Paul to at Lystra) at Athens)
Pente- Jeru- to San- Corne- Syna-
cost) salem hedrin in lius gogue at
Temple) Jeru- House in Pisidian
salem) Caesa- Antioch)
rea)
v. 14 v. 12 v. 2 v. 28 v. 16 v. 15 Notes audience (v. 22)
v. 16 Notes
religiosity/superstitious-
ness (v. 22)
vv. 40-42 v. 15 Images of worship/idols
(v. 23)
v. 15 v. 12 v. 27 v. 15 Ignorance (v. 23)
v. 14 v. 15 v. 36 vv. 26, 31- v. 15 Proclamation (v. 23)
32
v. 15 God is the Creator (v.
24)
v. 36 God is Lord of all (not
just Creator) (v. 24)
v. 15 Living God (v. 24)
vv. 48-50 God does not live in
temples built by humans
(v. 24)
God has no needs (v. 25)
God made Jesus is the Gods kindness to God gives to men
known to author of humans shown Life (v. 25)
me the life (v. 15) through his Breath (v. 25)
paths of providence in Everything (v.
life (v. 28) nature (v. 17): 25)
Food
Hearts
filled with
joy
All nations (v. 16) One man, every nation
(v. 26)

Humans are to inhabit

the whole earth (v. 26)
v. 6 v. 18 God determined times to
live (v. 26)
vv. 3-4 vv. 17-19 God determined places
to live (v. 26)
Moses Seek God (v. 27)
sees Reach out
burning Find God
bush,
hears
Gods
voice (v.
31)
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 22

God was God is not far from each

with human (v. 27)
Joseph (v.
9)
God gave Humans live in God (v.
living 28)
words
through
Moses (v.
38)
Humans move in God
(v. 28)
Humans have their being
in God (v. 28)
Hellenistic poet knows
and speaks rightly of
God (v. 28)
Davids Abrahams Davids Humans are offspring of
descendant offspring descendant God (v. 28-29)
is the brings is the
savior (v. blessing to savior (v.
23) all the 23)
earth (v.
25)
Divine nature (v. 29):
Not material
(gold, silver,
stone)
Not an image
Not made by
mans design or
skill
v. 17 v. 41 v. 16 Times past (v. 30)
v. 17 v. 42 v. 16 God overlooked
ignorance (v. 30)
v. 19 Present time (now, v.
30)
v. 38 v. 22 God God commands all
commands people (v. 30)
apostles to
preach (v.
42)
v. 38 v. 19 v. 15 Repent (v. 30)
v. 21 Future day/epoch (v. 31)
God will God will judge the world
judge his (v. 31)
people (v.
23)
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 23

Jesus turns Gods Gods judgement is

us from judgement according to justice and
our wicked through comes by a man (v. 31)
ways (v. Moses (v.
26) 35) and
the
righteous
one (v.
52)
vv. 20-23 Moses God The judge is appointed
appointed appointed (v. 31)
by God as Jesus
judge (v. judge of
35) living and
dead (v.
42)
vv. 22, 32, vv. 35-36 v. 41-43 The
36 appointing/judgement is
proved (v. 31)
v. 24 v. 15 v. 41 vv. 30, 33 Raising from the dead
(v. 31)

TABLE 2. A Comparison of Hellenistic Texts with the Areopagus Speech

Epimenides Cleanthes Aratus Platos Sophist Acts 17:22-31

Hymn of Zeus Phaenomena & Statesman (Paul before Areopagus at
Athens)
Cretans Notes audience (v. 22)
said that Zeus was him do we Notes
lord mortals never religiosity/superstitiousness (v.
leave unnamed 22)
humans receive full of Zeus are production of Images of worship/idols (v. 23)
from Zeus the all the streets images
image of the and all the (Sophist 265B)
one market-places of
men
his grave is there reigns Zeus needed to ignorance of the Ignorance (v. 23)
known, liars One ever-lasting tell humans the sophist
Reason in them times (Sophist 267B)
all. The wicked
heed not
this., yet
knowing not the
truth, self-
deceived, save
mankind from
grievous
ignorance
Minosmade a I praise thee, him do we (Sophist 268B) Proclamation (v. 23)
laudatory speech and shall hymn mortals never
thy power leave unnamed
unceasingly
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 24

No work is For we are also They are God is the Creator (v. 24)
wrought apart his offspring created by
from Thee, God, reason and by
or in the world, divine
or in the heaven knowledge from
above God (Sophist
265C-266B)
Zeus was a lord thee the wide he in his The statesman is God is Lord of all (not just
world obeys, kindness unto lord (Statesman Creator) (v. 24)
sovereign king men giveth 260C, E),
of universal favorable signs God is lord
nature and wakeneth (Statesman
the people to 270A-B, 271E)
work
thou art alive The power of Living God (v. 24)
life is from God
(Statesman
270A)
full of Zeus are God does not live in temples
all the streets built by humans (v. 24)
and all the
market-places of
men; full is the
sea and the
havens thereof
always we all God has no needs (v. 25)
have need of
Zeus
In him we live and he in his (Sophist 266B), God gives to men
move and have our kindness unto The statesman Life (v. 25)
being men giveth rules over the Breath (v. 25)
favorable signs living Everything (v. 25)
and wakeneth (Statesman
the people to 261C), God is
work, reminding the source of life
them of (Statesman
livelihood 270B), God
raises humans to
life from the
dead (Statesman
272A)
Discussion of One man, every nation (v. 26)
divisions or
unity of
humanity
(Statesman 262-
265), one breed
of man
(Statesman
271A), man
without states or
families
(Statesman
271E-272A)
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 25

all the streets Humans are to inhabit the

and all the whole earth (v. 26)
market-places of
men, the sea
and the havens
thereof
Thou dost direct He tells what Prescribed times God determined times to live
the Universal time the soil is (Statesman (v. 26)
Reason best for the labor 272D)
of the ox and for
the mattock, and
what time the
seasons are
favorable both
for the planting
of trees and for
casting all
manner of
seeds.
Thou dost direct (Statesman God determined places to live
the Universal 272A) (v. 26)
Reason
yearning ever to full of Zeus are The world was Seek God (v. 27)
secure the all the streets renewing and Reach out
goodwith and all the practicing the Find God
reason market-places of teachings of the
harmonized men Creator and
Father to the
extent of its
power
(Statesman
273A)
In him we live and full of Zeus are The world God is not far from each human
move and have our all the streets became (v. 27)
being and all the separated from
market-places of God (Statesman
men 273)
In him we live and full of Zeus are Humans live in God (v. 28)
move and have our all the streets
being and all the
market-places of
men
In him we live and full of Zeus are Humans move in God (v. 28)
move and have our all the streets
being and all the
market-places of
men
In him we live and Humans have their being in
move and have our God (v. 28)
being
In him we live and For we are thine For we are also offspring Hellenist poet knows and
move and have our offspring his offspring (Sophist 266B) speaks rightly of God (v. 28)
being
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 26

For we are thine For we are also All are his Humans are offspring of God
offspring his offspring offspring (v. 28-29)
(Sophist 266B),
these are central Divine nature (v. 29):
themes in Not material (gold,
defining the art silver, stone)
of imitation Not an image
(Sophist 266A- Not made by mans
266E) design or skill
(Statesman Times past (v. 30)
273B-D)
Save mankind (Statesman God overlooked ignorance (v.
from grievous 273B-E) 30)
ignorance! Oh
scatter it far from
their souls
at that moment, Present time (now, v. 30)
God (Statesman
273E)
govern all the wakeneth the God again took God commands all people (v.
world in people to work, his place as the 30)
righteousness reminding them worlds
of livelihood helmsman
(Statesman
273E)
Save mankind God reversed Repent (v. 30)
from grievous whatever had
ignorance! Oh become unsound
scatter it far from and unsettled in
their souls the previous
period
(Statesman
273E)
(Statesman Future day/epoch (v. 31)
273E)
govern all the (Statesman God will judge the world (v.
world in 273E) 31)
righteousness
on whose might (Statesman Gods judgement is according
Thou dost rely to 275A-C) to justice and comes by a man
govern all the (v. 31)
world in
righteousness
(Statesman The judge is appointed (v. 31)
275B)
The appointing/judgement is
proved (v. 31)
Thou art alive and (Statesman Raising from the dead (v. 31)
risen 272A)
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 27

Fifth, is this identification of themes from the Sophist and Statesman with Pauls speech

not mere parallelomania, the exaggeration of similarities across texts? This interpretation may

indeed fall into the category of an exaggeration of similarities across texts, and may be found to

be less than convincing (I ask you to judge whether or not this is so). I offer it here as a

possibility; if rejected, I offer it as a mere interesting connection in my own reception of the

textsI leave it to others to judge its adequacy as an explanatory schema that may enlighten our

reading of the speech.

LEARNING FROM THE STRANGER IN ATHENS

I have here presented rhetorical and literary echoes that resound through Pauls speech before the

Areopagus, following the central patterns identified dialectically by the Stranger in Platos

Sophist and Statesman. These echoes point to the men of Athens as sophists, to Paul as a

philosopher and stranger, and to Christ as the true statesman. Paul references productive art in

Athens (statues of the gods), and contrasts the human with the divine, the divine bearing likeness

in humans, who are the offspring and creations of God (Sophist 266), the human art bearing

false witness to the nature of divinity (that he is made of gold or silver or stone) (Acts 17:29). As

Origen opines: What reasonable man can refrain from smiling when he sees that one who has

learned from philosophy such profound and noble sentiments about God or the gods, turns

straightway to images and offers to them his prayers, or imagines that by gazing upon these

material things he can ascend from the visible symbol to that which is spiritual and immaterial

(Against Celsus 44). This human art is mimetic, fantastic, ignorant, and dissembling (Sophist

268). God has in times past acted as a providential shepherd over humanity (Statesman 267), but

the time for ignorance is at an end: all are called to repent, to move backward (Statesman 270).

Justice will come by a future statesman, a man who lived and died and was resurrected as proof
Wadholm, Stranger in Athens 28

of his role as ruler, born of the earth, resurrected from the grave, who will rightly rule a world

reversed.

Pauls seeming incorporation of themes from these two Platonist dialogues provides

example of an ancient Christian negotiation with culture in propagation of the kerygma, and also,

I think, of reasoning from the scriptures of the Greeks. It is the stranger that speaks strange ideas

to culture, with their own words, from their own literature. It is the stranger who speaks against

culture and its ignorance and evils, the stranger who speaks toward new and renewed culture. It

is the stranger that identifies the sophist and the statesman, who sets aright the myth of a world

turned backward, who proclaims a God in whom we live, our progenitor under whom we are

responsible, and who may be found not far from each. He will judge the world in righteousness,

earth-born in proof of that near future epoch. It is his life, his death, his resurrection and future

glory that turn the world beneath to above, a Savior spoken from the lips of the stranger in

Athens.