Acts 17

Acts 17:2

John Chrysostom: “Three sabbath-days,” it says, being the time when they had leisure from work, “he reasoned with them, opening out of the Scriptures”: for so used Christ also to do: as on many occasions we find Him reasoning from the Scriptures, and not on all occasions urging men by miracles. Because to the working of miracles indeed they stood in a posture of hostility, calling them deceivers and jugglers; but he that persuades men by reasons from the Scriptures, is not liable to this imputation. And on many occasions we find Paul to have convinced men simply by force of teaching: and in Antioch “the whole city was gathered together” (ch. xiii. 44): so great a thing is this also, for indeed this itself is no small miracle, nay, it is even a very great one. — Homily on Acts 37

Acts 17:3

Bede: Explaining and demonstrating that Christ had to suffer and rise from the dead, and that this Jesus is the Christ. Among the Scriptures, the Father indicated both that Christ must suffer and rise, and that this very suffering and resurrection pertains to no one other than Jesus of Nazareth. For there were some of the Jews, as there are today, so perfidious, that although they cannot deny the suffering and resurrection of Christ inserted in the Scriptures, yet they totally deny that these refer to Jesus, preferring rather to expect the Antichrist than to believe Jesus Christ. And therefore Paul not only preached the mysteries of Christ but also taught that these were fulfilled in Christ Jesus. — Commentary on Acts

John Chrysostom: “Opening,” it says, “from the Scriptures, he reasoned with them for three sabbaths, putting before them that the Christ must suffer.” Do thou mark how before all other things he preaches the Passion: so little were they ashamed of it, knowing it to be the cause of salvation. — Homily on Acts 37

John Chrysostom: “That the Christ,” he says, “must needs have suffered.” If there was a necessity for His suffering, there was assuredly a necessity for His rising again: for the former was far more wonderful than the latter. For if He gave Him up to death Who had done no wrong, much rather did He raise Him up again. — Homily on Acts 37

Acts 17:4

Bede: And a great multitude of worshipers and Gentiles; that is, both those who had exchanged their gentile rites for Judaism and those who had remained entirely Gentiles, many joined to Christ. — Commentary on Acts

John Chrysostom: “And some of them believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few.” The writer mentions only the sum and substance of the discoursing: he is not given to redundancy, and does not on every occasion report the sermons. — Homily on Acts 37

John Chrysostom: And that they might not think that they did it all by their own strength, but rather that God permitted it, two things resulted, namely, “Some of them were persuaded,” and others did the contrary: the Jews moved with envy. And from the fact that the being called was itself a matter of God’s fore-ordering, they neither thought great things of themselves as if the triumph were their own, nor were terrified as being responsible for all. — Homily on Acts 37

John Chrysostom: The “devout Greeks” would include such as were Jewish proselytes and such as were worshippers of the true God and attended the synagogue services, without being connected with Judaism. The “first women” were probably female proselytes to Judaism. These heard the Apostle with interest, but the more ardent and fanatical Jews, reinforced by the baser element - the loungers from the market place, made a tumult of opposition. — Homily on Acts 37

Acts 17:5

John Chrysostom: “But the Jews which believed not, moved with envy, took unto them certain lewd fellows of the baser sort, and gathered a company, and set all the city on an uproar, and assaulted the house of Jason, and sought to bring them out to the people. And when they found them not, they drew Jason and certain brethren unto the rulers of the city, crying, These that have turned the world upside down are come hither also; whom Jason hath received: and these all do contrary to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, one Jesus.” Oh! what an accusation! again they get up a charge of treason against them, “saying, there is another king one Jesus.” — Homily on Acts 37

John Chrysostom: “But the Jews which believed not, moved with envy, took unto them certain lewd fellows of the baser sort, and gathered a company, and set all the city on an uproar, and assaulted the house of Jason, and sought to bring them out to the people.” So that the Gentiles were more in number. The Jews thought not themselves enough to raise the disturbance: for because they had no reasonable pretext, they ever effect such purposes by means of uproar, and by taking to themselves base men. — Homily on Acts 37

Acts 17:6

Bede: And when they did not find them, they dragged Jason and some brothers to the rulers of the city. It is written in Greek: And some other brothers; whence it is understood that Jason was also a brother, that is, faithful to Christ. — Retractions on Acts

John Chrysostom: “And when they found them not,” it says, “they haled Jason and certain brethren.” O the tyranny! dragged them without any cause out of their houses. — Homily on Acts 37

Richard Challoner: City: Urbem. In the Greek, the world.

Acts 17:7

Ammonius of Alexandria: In the same manner, their fathers accused Jesus by saying that he called himself king. The former, however, even though they had a kind of charge that was, on the surface, likely to deceive because the one charged was living, how could these latter hide their lying when they were saying that they, the apostles, were proclaiming Jesus a king, who, according to these accusers, was dead? That is, unless he was alive but was not visible. Concerning such a one, the kings of the earth never had need to fear, unless they should see him when entirely visible. But, as it seems from their proclamation of the truth, they knew that even though he was not visible, he was still truly king, and of his kingdom there shall be no end. — CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 17.8

John Chrysostom: “These all,” say they, “do contrary to the decrees of Caesar”: for since they spoke nothing contrary to what had been decreed, nor made any commotion in the city, they bring them under a different charge: “saying that there is another king, one Jesus.” And what are ye afraid of, seeing He is dead? — Homily on Acts 37

John Chrysostom: The accusation is artfully made. They are accused of the crimen majestatis - treason against Caesar. The Jews knew well that to accuse them of disturbing their worship or opposing their opinions would produce no effect. To arouse the Roman feeling against them it was necessary to present their teaching concerning the Kingship of Jesus so as to make it seem to the rulers of this free city as a treasonable doctrine against the Roman state. — Homily on Acts 37

Acts 17:8

John Chrysostom: “And they troubled the people and the rulers of the city, when they heard these things.” — Homily on Acts 37

Acts 17:9

John Chrysostom: “And when they had taken security of Jason, and of the other, they let them go.” A man worthy to be admired, that he put himself into danger, and sent them away from it. See how by giving security Jason sent Paul away: so that he gave his life to the hazard for him. — Homily on Acts 37

John Chrysostom: “When they had taken security” - a legal term - satisfactionem accipere, it is doubtful if, as Chrysostom supposes, Jason became surety in person. The surety was more probably a deposit of money and had for its object the guaranty that the peace should be kept, and nothing done contrary the Emperor and the state. — Homily on Acts 37

Peter of Alexandria: For after that they had been very burdensome to them for his name, and had troubled the people and the rulers of the city, “having taken security “he says, “of Jason, and of the others, they let them go. And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea.” — Peter of Alexandria Canonical Epistle

Acts 17:10

John Chrysostom: “And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble,” it says, “than they of Thessalonica: more noble,” i.e. more gentle in their behavior: “in that they received the word with all readiness,” and this not inconsiderately, but with a strictness wherein was no passion, “searching the Scriptures whether these things were so.” — Homily on Acts 37

John Chrysostom: “And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.” See how the persecutions in every case extend the preaching. — Homily on Acts 37

Acts 17:11

Bede: These people were nobler than those who are in Thessalonica. He speaks of the nobility of soul which they had displayed in hearing and scrutinizing the word. — Commentary on Acts

Cyprian: More strength will be given you, and the intelligence of the heart will be effected more and more, as you examine more fully the Scriptures, old and new, and read through the complete volumes of the spiritual books. For now we have filled a small measure from the divine fountains, which in the meantime we would send to you. You will be able to drink more plentifully, and to be more abundantly satisfied, if you also will approach to drink together with us at the same springs of the divine fulness. — Treatise XII Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews

John Chrysostom: “Now these,” it says, “were more noble than those in Thessalonica”: i.e. they were not men practising base things, but some were convinced, and the others who were not, did nothing of that sort. “Daily,” it says, “searching the Scriptures whether these things were so:” not merely upon a sudden impetus or burst of zeal. “More noble,” it says: i.e. in point of virtue. — Homily on Acts 37

Justin Martyr: And Trypho said, “Prove this; for, as you see, the day advances, and we are not prepared for such perilous replies; since never yet have we heard any man investigating, or searching into, or proving these matters; nor would we have tolerated your conversation, had you not referred everything to the Scriptures: for you are very zealous in adducing proofs from them; and you are of opinion that there is no God above the Maker of all things.” — Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter LVI

Richard Challoner: More noble: The Jews of Berea are justly commended, for their eagerly embracing the truth, and searching the scriptures, to find out the texts alleged by the apostle: which was a far more generous proceeding than that of their countrymen at Thessalonica, who persecuted the preachers of the gospel, without examining the grounds they alleged for what they taught.

Acts 17:12

Ammonius of Alexandria: They did not investigate like skeptical people, because they had already believed, but like people who were unaware of the prophets’ ancient doctrine. Or rather, they believed more because, after examining the Scriptures, they saw that the circumstances of the incarnation of the Lord agreed with the words of the ancient prophets. — CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 17.12-13

Bede: Many indeed believed from among them and from the honorable Greek women, and not a few men. Some manuscripts have better and more consistently according to the Greek example: And not a few men. — Retractions on Acts

John Chrysostom: “Therefore many of them believed; also of honorable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.” And here again are Greeks. — Homily on Acts 37

Acts 17:13

Cassiodorus: “And when the Jews of Thessalonica had knowledge that the word of God was also preached at Berea.” When the Thessalonian Jews had knowledge that the apostles were preaching about Christ in Berea, they came there and stirred up the people with constant uproar, saying that they should beware of those men who threw the world into confusion with new preaching. Then the brethren saw fit to send Paul over to Athens, while keeping Silas and Timothy there for a time. Coming to Athens, Paul disputed vigorously in every single place, seeing the city wholly given to idolatry. As the news spread, some citizens seized him and brought him to the Areopagus, where a gathering of philosophers was assembled. Some called him a word sower, others a preacher of new gods. Then the wise, having set Paul in the middle, desired to hear the doctrine that he was spreading far and wide. — Complexiones on the Acts of the Apostles

John Chrysostom: “But when the Jews of Thessalonica had knowledge that the word of God was preached of Paul at Berea, they came thither also, and stirred up the people.” Because there were lewd persons there. And yet that city was greater. But it is no wonder in the greater city the people were worse: nay, of course to the greater city there go the worse men, where the occasions of disturbances are many. And as in the body, where the disease is more violent for having more matter and fuel, just so is it here. — Homily on Acts 37

John Chrysostom: But look, I beg you, how their fleeing was providentially ordered, not from cowardice: otherwise they would have ceased to preach, and would not have exasperated them still more. But from this flight two things resulted: both the rage of those Jews was quenched, and the preaching spread. But in terms befitting their disorderly conduct, he says, “Agitating the multitude.” Just what was done at Iconium - that they may have the additional condemnation of destroying others besides themselves. (ch. xiv. 2, 19.) This is what Paul says of them: “Forbidding to preach to the Gentiles, to fill up their sins alway, for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.” (1 Thess. ii. 16.) — Homily on Acts 37

Acts 17:14

John Chrysostom: “And then immediately the brethren sent away Paul to go as it were to the sea: but Silas and Timotheus abode there still.” See how he at one time gives way, at another presses on, and in many things takes his measures upon human considerations. — Homily on Acts 37

John Chrysostom: Why did he not stay? For if at Lystra, where he was stoned, he nevertheless stayed a long time, much more here. Why? The Lord did not wish them to be always doing signs; for this is itself a sign, not less than the working of signs - that being persecuted, they overcame without signs. So that just as now He prevails without signs, so was it on many occasions His will to prevail then. Consequently neither did the Apostles run after signs: as in fact he says himself, “We preach Christ crucified” (1 Cor. i. 23) - to them that crave signs, to them that crave wisdom, we give that which cannot even after signs persuade, and yet we do persuade! So that this was a mighty sign. See then, how when the preaching is extended, they are not in a hurry to run after signs. — Homily on Acts 37

John Chrysostom: “And immediately,” it says, “the brethren sent away Paul.” Here now they send Paul alone: for it was for him they feared, lest he should suffer some harm, the head and front of all being in fact none other than he. “They sent him away,” it says, “as it were to the sea:” that it might not be easy for them to seize him. For at present they could not have done much by themselves; and with him they accomplished and achieved many things. For the present, it says, they wished to rescue him. — Homily on Acts 37

Acts 17:15

John Chrysostom: “And they that conducted Paul brought him unto Athens: and receiving a commandment unto Silas and Timotheus for to come to him with speed, they departed.” For though he was a Paul, nevertheless he needed them. And with good reason are they urged by God to go into Macedonia, for there lay Greece moreover bright before them. (ch. xvi. 9.) — Homily on Acts 37

John Chrysostom: So far is it from being the case, that supernatural Grace worked all alike on all occasions: on the contrary, it left them to take their measures upon human judgment, only stirring them up and rousing them out of sleep, and making them to take pains. Thus, observe, it brought them safe only as far as Philippi, but no more after that. — Homily on Acts 37

Acts 17:16

John Chrysostom: Observe how he meets with greater trials among the Jews than among the Gentiles. Thus in Athens he undergoes nothing of this kind; the thing goes as far as ridicule, and there an end: and yet he did make some converts: whereas among the Jews he underwent many perils; so much greater was their hostility against him. “His spirit,” it says, “was roused within him when he saw the city all full of idols.” Nowhere else were so many objects of worship to be seen. — Homily on Acts 38

John Chrysostom: “And while Paul waited,” etc. It is providentially ordered that against his will he stays there, while waiting for those others. “His spirit,” it says, “within him was roused.” It does not mean there anger or exasperation: just as elsewhere it says, “There was sharp contention between them.” Then what does “was roused” mean? Was roused: for the gift is far removed from anger and exasperation. He could not bear it, but pined away. — Homily on Acts 38

Acts 17:17

John Chrysostom: “He reasoned therefore in the synagogue,” etc. Observe him again reasoning with Jews. By “devout persons” he means the proselytes. For the Jews were dispersed everywhere before Christ’s coming, the Law indeed being henceforth, so to say, in process of dissolution, but at the same time the dispersed Jews teaching men religion. But those prevailed nothing, save only that they got witnesses of their own calamities. — Homily on Acts 38

Acts 17:18

Bede: Some of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers were conversing with him. The Epicureans, following the slowness of their teacher, placed human happiness solely in bodily pleasure, while the Stoics placed it solely in the virtue of the soul. Although they disagreed among themselves, they unanimously attacked the Apostle because he taught that man consisted of both soul and body and therefore should be happy in both; but this would be achieved neither in the present time nor by human virtue, but by the grace of God through Jesus Christ in the glory of the resurrection. — Commentary on Acts

Bede: What does this idle babbler want to say? Rightly is he called an idle babbler, that is, σπερμόλογος, because the word of God is a seed. And Paul the Apostle himself says: “If we have sown spiritual things among you,” etc. (1 Cor. 9). — Commentary on Acts

Bede: And some were saying: What does this word-seedling want to say? Concerning this name, Saint Augustine said: “We read,” he said, “that the apostle Paul was called a seed-sower of words. It was indeed said by those mocking, but it should not be rejected by those who believe. For he was truly a seed-sower of words, but a reaper of conduct. And although we are so small, and by no means comparable to his excellence, in the field of God, which is your heart, we sow the word of God and expect an abundant harvest of your conduct.” — Retractions on Acts

Clement of Alexandria: “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ;” branding not all philosophy, but the Epicurean, which Paul mentions in the Acts of the Apostles, which abolishes providence and deifies pleasure, and whatever other philosophy honours the elements, but places not over them the efficient cause, nor apprehends the Creator. — The Stromata Book 1

John Chrysostom: By the term resurrection the Athenians understood a god, for they were accustomed even to worship females.… They called their gods daimones, for their cities were full of daimones. — CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 17.18

John Chrysostom: It is a wonder the philosophers did not laugh him to scorn, speaking in the way he did. “And some said, What does this babbler mean to say?” insolently, on the instant: this is far from philosophy. “Other some said, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods,” from the preaching, because he had no arrogance. They did not understand, nor comprehend the subjects he was speaking of - how should they? affirming as they did, some of them, that God is a body; others, that pleasure is the true happiness. “Of strange gods, because he preached unto them Jesus and the Resurrection”: for in fact they supposed “Anastasis” (the Resurrection) to be some deity, being accustomed to worship female divinities also. — Homily on Acts 38

John Chrysostom: “And certain philosophers,” etc. How came they to be willing to confer with him? They did it when they saw others reasoning, and the man having repute in the encounter. And observe straightway with overbearing insolence, “some said, What would this babbler say? For the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit.” Other some, He seemeth to be a setter-forth of strange deities: for so they called their gods. — Homily on Acts 38

Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius: If any master has in his household a good and a bad servant, it is evident that he does not hate them both, or confer upon both benefits and honours; for if he does this, he is both unjust and foolish. But he addresses the one who is good with friendly words, and honours him and sets him over his house and household, and all his affairs; but punishes the bad one with reproaches, with stripes, with nakedness, with hunger, with thirst, with fetters: so that the latter may be an example to others to keep them from sinning, and the former to conciliate them; so that fear may restrain some, and honour may excite others. He, therefore, who loves also hates, and he who hates also loves; for there are those who ought to be loved, and there are those who ought to be hated. And as he who loves confers good things on those whom he loves, so he who hates inflicts evils upon those whom he hates; which argument, because it is true, can in no way be refuted. Therefore the opinion of those is vain and false, who, when they attribute the one to God, take away the other, not less than the opinion of those who take away both. But the latter, as we have shown, in part do not err, but retain that which is the better of the two; whereas the former, led on by the accurate method of their reasoning, fall into the greatest error, because they have assumed premises which are altogether false. — A Treatise on the Anger of God, Chapter V

Acts 17:19

John Chrysostom: “And having taken him, they brought him to the Areopagus” - not to punish, but in order to learn - “to the Areopagus” where the trials for murder were held. Thus observe, in hope of learning they ask him, saying, “May we know what is this new doctrine spoken of by thee? For thou bringest certain strange matters to our ears”: everywhere novelty is the charge: “we would fain know therefore, what these things may mean.” It was a city of talkers, that city of theirs. “For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing.” — Homily on Acts 38

John Chrysostom: “And having taken him, they brought him,” etc. The Athenians no longer enjoyed their own laws, but were become subject to the Romans. Then why did they hale him to the Areopagus? Meaning to overawe him - the place where they held the trials for bloodshed. “May we know, what is this new doctrine spoken of by thee? For thou bringest certain strange things to our ears; we would fain know therefore what these things mean. For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing.” Here the thing noted is, that though ever occupied only in this telling and hearing, yet they thought those things strange - things which they had never heard. — Homily on Acts 38

Acts 17:21

Basil of Caesarea: “Be at leisure and know that I am God.” To the extent that we take our leisure in matters apart from God, we cannot attain knowledge of God. For who, concerned over the things of the world and immersed in fleshly distractions, can pay attention to discourses concerning God and measure up to the rigid discipline of contemplations so long and great? Don’t you see that the Word that falls among thorns is choked by the thorns? Now the thorns are fleshly pleasures and wealth and glory and cares of this life. The one who seeks knowledge of God must become separated from all these things, and, being at leisure apart from passions, thus receive the knowledge of God. For how can contemplation about God enter a mind crowded by thoughts that preoccupy it? Even Pharaoh knew that being at leisure is proper to the search for God, and for this reason he mocked the Israelites, “You are idling about, you men of leisure, and you say, ‘We will pray to the Lord our God.’ ” While this leisure is good and profitable for the one in leisure as it brings peace for the reception of the Savior’s teachings, the leisure of the Athenians was evil, since “they devoted their leisure to nothing more than saying or listening to something new.” — HOMILY ON Psalms 45

Tertullian: This admonition about false philosophy he was induced to offer after he had been at Athens, had become acquainted with that loquacious city, and had there had a taste of its huckstering wiseacres and talkers. In like manner is the treatment of the soul according to the sophistical doctrines of men which “mix their wine with water.” — A Treatise on the Soul

Acts 17:22

CS Lewis: I can’t say for certain which bits came into Christianity from earlier religions. An enormous amount did. I should find it hard to believe Christianity if that were not so. I couldn’t believe that nine hundred and ninety-nine religions were completely false and the remaining one true. In reality, Christianity is primarily the fulfillment of the Jewish religion, but also the fulfillment of what was vaguely hinted in all the religions at their best. What was vaguely seen in them all comes into focus in Christianity—just as God Himself comes into focus by becoming a man. — ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON CHRISTIANITY, from God in the Dock

Cassiodorus: “But Paul standing in the midst of the Areopagus, said,” etc. Paul, set in the midst of the Areopagus, poured out the honey of heavenly philosophy, starting his speech beautifully with the fact that among their various idols he had found an inscription that read “to the unknown god”. He said that they should, therefore, seek the one whom they themselves declared to be unknown to them. He preached, in order, the Lord Christ, who with all his power made the heaven and the earth and all things in them, and he showed to them that even examples from their own authors made it clear that, being the “offspring of God,” they should not worship things made with hands. When they heard, among other things, about the resurrection of the dead, many believed it, while others thought it was a lie. After these things, going down from Athens, he came to Corinth, where, preaching the Lord Savior to Jews and Greeks, he taught the dogmas of the Christian religion. — Complexiones on the Acts of the Apostles

John Chrysostom: Paul found an altar, on which the words “to an unknown god” were engraved: who was that unknown god but Christ? Do you see the wisdom in changing the name? Do you see the reason he released the inscription from captivity?… To save and benefit them. What else? Perhaps one might say that the Athenians wrote these words for Christ?… They certainly wrote that with a different meaning, but he was, nevertheless, able to change it.… Why did they write it? They had many gods, or rather many demons, “All the gods of the Gentiles are demons,” and some of them were native, others were foreign.… They had received some of their gods from their fathers, others from the neighboring nations, such as the Scythians, the Thracians and the Egyptians.… What did they do then? They erected an altar and inscribed it with the words “to an unknown god” in order to signify through the inscription: If by any chance there is another god who is still unknown to us, we will worship him too. See their immoderate superstition! For this reason Paul said from the beginning, “I see how extremely religious you are in every way … you not only worship the gods who are known to you, but also those who are still unknown to you.” Therefore they had written, “To an unknown god.” … The unknown God is none other than Christ. — CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 17.23

John Chrysostom: “Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I look upon you as being in all things” - he puts it by way of encomium: the word does not seem to mean anything offensive - “more religiously disposed.” For the cities were full of gods: this is why he says “more religiously disposed.” “For as I passed by and viewed the objects of your worship” - he does not say simply the demons or deities, but paves the way for his discourse. — Homily on Acts 38

Acts 17:23

Bede: I found an altar with the inscription: To the Unknown God. God is known in Judea but not received. God is unknown in Achaia, although earnestly sought through many means. Therefore, those who do not know will be ignored; those who transgress will be condemned. Neither is free from fault, but those who have not offered faith to Christ, whom they did not know, are more excusable than those who have laid hands on Christ, whom they knew. — Commentary on Acts

Clement of Alexandria: To talk about God is most difficult.… For how can that be expressed which is neither genus, nor difference, nor species, nor individual nor number; moreover is neither an event nor that to which an event happens? No one can rightly express him wholly. For on account of his greatness he is ranked as the All and is the Father of the universe. Nor are any parts to be predicated of him. For the One is indivisible and therefore also is infinite, not considered with reference to inscrutability but with reference to its being without dimensions and not having a limit. And therefore it is without form and name. And if we name it, we do not do so properly, terming it either the One, or the Good, or Mind, or Absolute Being, or Father, or God, or Creator or Lord. We speak not as supplying his name, but for need, we use good names, in order that the mind may have these as points of support, so as not to err in other respects. For each one by itself does not express God, but all together are indicative of the power of the Omnipotent.… Nor any more is he apprehended by logic. For that depends on primary and better known principles. But there is nothing antecedent to the Unbegotten. It remains that we understand, then, the Unknown, by divine grace and by the Word alone that proceeds from him; as Luke in the Acts of the Apostles relates that Paul said, “Men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are too superstitious. For in walking about, and beholding the objects of your worship, I found an altar on which was inscribed ‘To the Unknown God.’ Therefore, the one you ignorantly worship, I declare to you.” — The Stromata Book 5

Hippolytus of Rome: And (Cerinthus alleges) that, after the baptism (of our Lord), Christ in form of a dove came down upon him, from that absolute sovereignty which is above all things. And then, (according to this heretic,) Jesus proceeded to preach the unknown Father, — Hippolytus Refutation of All Heresies Book VII

John Chrysostom: He did not find in the city a holy book but an altar to an idol with the inscription “To an unknown god.” The holy Paul, who had the grace of the Spirit, did not pass by but turned the altar with its inscription on its head.… He did not omit what the idolatrous Athenians had written.… We see what great value that inscription produced.… Paul entered the town, found an altar on which the words “to an unknown god” were engraved. What did he have to do?… Did the words of the Gospels need to be declared? They would have mocked them. Or maybe the words from the books of the prophets or from the precepts of the law should have been talked about? But they would not have believed. What did he do then? He rushed to the altar and defeated them with the weapons of the enemies themselves. And that was what he said, “I became everything to everyone: to the Jews a Jew, to those outside the law as if I were outside the law.” — CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 17.23

John Chrysostom: “On which was inscribed, To an Unknown God.” The Athenians, namely, as on many occasions they had received gods from foreign parts also - for instance, the temple of Minerva, Pan, and others from different countries - being afraid that there might be some other god not yet known to them, but worshipped elsewhere, for more assurance, forsooth, erected an altar to that god also: and as the god was not known, it was inscribed, “To an Unknown God.” This God then, he tells them, is Christ; or rather, the God of all. “Him declare I unto you,” Observe how he shows that they had already received Him, and “it is nothing strange,” says he, “nothing new that I introduce to you.” All along, this was what they had been saying: “What is this new doctrine spoken of by thee? For thou bringest certain strange matters to our ears.” Immediately therefore he removes this surmise of theirs. — Homily on Acts 38

John Chrysostom: “I beheld an altar,” etc. This is why he says, “I look upon you as being more religiously disposed,” viz. because of the altar. For say, of whom would it be properly said, “To an Unknown God?” Of the Creator, or of the demon? Manifestly of the Creator: because Him they knew not, but the other they knew. Again, that all things are filled with the presence - of God? or of Jupiter - a wretch of a man, a detestable impostor! But Paul said it not in the same sense as he, God forbid! but with quite a different meaning. For he says we are God’s offspring, i.e. God’s own, His nearest neighbors as it were. — Homily on Acts 38

Tertullian: What absurdity! What need had they of uncertain gods, when they possessed certain ones? Unless, forsooth, they wished to commit themselves to such folly as the Athenians did; for at Athens there was an altar with this inscription: “To The Unknown Gods.” Does, then, a man worship that which he knows nothing of? Then, again, as they had certain gods, they ought to have been contented with them, without requiring select ones. — Ad Nationes Book II

Acts 17:24

Bede: God, who made the world and everything in it, being the Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands, and so on. The order of the apostolic discourse is to be carefully observed, in which he formed a way of dealing with the Gentiles: first teaching that there is one God, the author of the world and of all things, in whom we live and move and have our being, of whom we are the offspring. This shows that he ought to be loved not only for the gifts of light and life but also because of a certain kinship of race. Then he refuted that opinion about idols by clear reasoning, that the creator and lord of the whole world cannot be confined in stone temples, that the giver of all benefits does not need the blood of sacrifices, and that the creator and governor of all men cannot be created by the hand of man. Finally, that God, in whose image man was made, should not be thought to resemble metals, teaching that the remedy of error is the endeavor to repent. For if he had first sought to destroy the ceremonies of idols, the ears of the Gentiles would have rejected him. Therefore, when he persuaded them that there is one God, he then affirmed by His judgment that salvation had been given to us through Christ. He called Him more man than God, starting from the things He did in the body and describing them as divine, so that He seemed more than a man. He had conquered death by His power, and, rising from the dead, He (for faith grows gradually), as He was seen to be more than a man, was believed to be God. For what does it matter in what order one believes? Perfection is not sought in beginnings, but one progresses from beginnings to what is perfect. — Commentary on Acts

Irenaeus: Therefore God, winking at the times of ignorance, does now command all men everywhere to turn to Him with repentance; because He hath appointed a day, on which the world shall be judged in righteousness by the man Jesus; whereof He hath given assurance by raising, Him from the dead.” — Against Heresies Book III

John Chrysostom: “God that made the world and all things therein, He being Lord of heaven and earth” - for, that they may not imagine Him to be one of many, he presently sets them right on this point; adding, “dwelleth not in temples made with hands” - do you observe how, little by little, he brings in the philosophy? how he ridicules the heathen error? — Homily on Acts 38

John Chrysostom: “God,” he says, “that made the world.” He uttered one word, by which he has subverted all the doctrines of the philosophers. For the Epicureans affirm all to be fortuitously formed and by concourse of atoms, the Stoics held it to be body and fire. “The world and all that is therein.” Do you mark the conciseness, and in conciseness, clearness? Mark what were the things that were strange to them: that God made the world! Things which now any of the most ordinary persons know, these the Athenians and the wise men of the Athenians knew not. “Seeing He is Lord of heaven and earth”: for if He made them, it is clear that He is Lord. Observe what he affirms to be the note of Deity - creation. Which attribute the Son also hath. — Homily on Acts 38

John Chrysostom: For the Prophets everywhere affirm this, that to create is God’s prerogative. Not as those affirm that another is Maker but not Lord, assuming that matter is uncreated. Here now he covertly affirms and establishes his own, while he overthrows their doctrine. “Dwelleth not in temples made with hands.” For He does indeed dwell in temples, yet not in such, but in man’s soul. He overthrows the corporeal worship. What then? Did He not dwell in the temple at Jerusalem? No indeed: but He wrought therein. — Homily on Acts 38

Richard Challoner: Dwelleth not in temples: God is not contained in temples; so as to need them for his dwelling, or any other uses, as the heathens imagined. Yet by his omnipresence, he is both there and everywhere.

Tertullian: What, again, if He was One who was “crowned with glory and honour,” and He Another by whom He was so crowned, -the Son, in fact, by the Father? Moreover, how comes it to pass, that the Almighty Invisible God, “whom no man hath seen nor can see; He who dwelleth in light unapproachable; " “He who dwelleth not in temples made with hands; " “from before whose sight the earth trembles, and the mountains melt like wax; " who holdeth the whole world in His hand “like a nest; " “whose throne is heaven, and earth His footstool; " in whom is every place, but Himself is in no place; who is the utmost bound of the universe;-how happens it, I say, that He (who, though) the Most High, should yet have walked in paradise towards the cool of the evening, in quest of Adam; and should have shut up the ark after Noah had entered it; and at Abraham’s tent should have refreshed Himself under an oak; and have called to Moses out of the burning bush; and have appeared as “the fourth” in the furnace of the Babylonian monarch (although He is there called the Son of man),-unless all these events had happened as an image, as a mirror, as an enigma (of the future incarnation)? Surely even these things could not have been believed even of the Son of God, unless they had been given us in the Scriptures; possibly also they could not have been believed of the Father, even if they had been given in the Scriptures, since these men bring Him down into Mary’s womb, and set Him before Pilate’s judgment-seat, and bury Him in the sepulchre of Joseph. — Against Praxeas

Acts 17:26

Bede: And he made from one every kind of human being. What he says from one is clear, because he means from one human being. But it is fuller in Greek: He made from one blood, which no one doubts means the same. For by the name of blood, he indicates the propagation of the flesh; and by the flesh, according to the usual manner of Scripture, he wants a human being to be understood according to that of the Psalmist: All flesh will come to you (Psalms 64). — Retractions on Acts

John Chrysostom: “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth.” This is peculiar to God. Look, then, whether these things may not be predicated of the Son also. “Being Lord,” he saith, “of heaven and earth” - which they accounted to be God’s. Both the creation he declares to be His work, and mankind also. “Having determined,” he says, “the times assigned to them, and the bounds of their habitation.” — Homily on Acts 38

John Chrysostom: “And made,” he says, “of one blood every nation of men to dwell upon all the face of the earth.” These things are better than the former: and what an impeachment both of the atoms and of matter, that creation is not partial work, nor the soul of man either. If God, He made all: but if He made not, He is not God. Gods that made not heaven and earth, let them perish. He introduces much greater doctrines, though as yet he does not mention the great doctrines; but he discoursed to them as unto children. And these were much greater than those. Creation, Lordship, the having need of naught, authorship of all good - these he has declared. — Homily on Acts 38

Acts 17:27

Augustine of Hippo: If this were spoken in a material sense, it could be understood of our material world: for in it too, so far as our body is concerned, we lie and move and are. We must take the text, then, as spoken of the mind, which is made in his image, and of a manner of being more excellent, not visible but spiritual. What is there indeed that is not “in him,” of whom holy Scripture says, “for from him and through him and in him are all things”? If in him are all things, in whom, save in him in whom they are, can the living live or the moving move? Yet all people are not with him after the manner of the saying “I am always with you.” Nor is he with all after the manner of our own saying, “the Lord be with you.” It is a person’s great misery not to be with him without whom people cannot be. Certainly, people are never without him, in whom he is; yet if a person does not remember him, does not understand him or love him, he is not with him. — ON THE TRINITY 16

John Chrysostom: “That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after Him, and find Him, though He be not far from every one of us: for in Him we live, and move, and have our being.” This is said by Aratus the poet. Observe how he draws his arguments from things done by themselves, and from sayings of their own. — Homily on Acts 38

John Chrysostom: “And hath determined the times appointed, and the bounds of their habitation, that they should seek God, if haply they might feel after Him and find Him.” It means either this, that He did not compel them to go about and seek God, but according to the bounds of their habitation: or this, that He determined their seeking God, yet not determined this to be done continually, but determined certain appointed times when they should do so: showing now, that not having sought they had found: for since, having sought, they had not found, he shows that God was now as manifest as though He were in the midst of them palpably. “Though He be not far,” he saith, “from every one of us,” but is near to all. See again the power of God. What saith he? Not only He gave “life and breath and all things,” but, as the sum and substance of all, He brought us to the knowledge of Himself, by giving us these things by which we are able to find and to apprehend Him. But we did not wish to find Him, albeit close at hand. “Though He be not far from every one of us.” Why look now, He is near to all, to every one all the world over! What can be greater than this? See how he makes clear riddance of the parcel deities! — Homily on Acts 38

Origen of Alexandria: “You are near, Lord, and all your commandments are truth.” God says elsewhere, “I am a God who is near and not a God who is far away, says the Lord.” For the power of God is everywhere according to the word of creation and providence. Knowing this, Paul, addressing the Greeks as recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, says, “We do not seek God far from us, for in him we live and move and are,” and “the Spirit of the Lord has filled the earth.” He is thus, for his part, close, but if we ourselves make no effort, though he be close, to draw near to him, we will not enjoy his nearness. For this reason, sinners are far from God: “Behold, those who distance themselves from you perish.” But the just ones strive to approach God, for he is not present to them just as a creator, but he even shares himself with them: “And Moses alone draws near to God, but the rest do not draw near.” According to the degree of will and perfection, the one who approaches God is that one about whom Paul says, “The one joined to the Lord is one spirit.” — PALESTINIAN CATENA ON Psalms 118.151

Acts 17:28

Bede: For in Him we live and move and have our being. This verse, because it is difficult to understand, should be explained by the words of blessed Augustine. “The Apostle shows,” he says, “that God works unceasingly in the things He has created. For indeed we do not exist in Him as in His substance, as it is said that He has life in Himself; but certainly, since we are something other than Him, we exist in Him only because He works this. And this is His work by which He contains all things, and which His wisdom extends from end to end mightily and orders all things sweetly. Through this arrangement, we live, move, and exist in Him. From this it is inferred that if He withdrew this work from things, we would neither live, nor move, nor exist.” And a little later: “For neither heaven nor earth, and all things in them, namely the whole of spiritual and bodily creation, remain in themselves, but surely in Him of whom it is said: For in Him we live and move and have our being. For although each part can exist in the whole, which it is a part of, the whole itself does not exist except in Him by whom it was made.” The same blessed Augustine elsewhere says: “This, if the Apostle were speaking according to the body, could also be understood of this corporeal world. For in it according to the body we live, move, and exist.” Hence, according to the mind which is made in His image, this should be taken in a certain more excellent and not visible but intelligible mode. For what is not in Him, of whom it is divinely written: For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things (Rom. XI)? — Commentary on Acts

Bede: As some of your poets have said. This is what he says elsewhere: I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and him crucified. For to those who did not accept the faith of the prophets, not Moses, not Isaiah, or any of the prophets, but he speaks by the testimonies of their own authors, citing the verse of Aratus, confirming his truth from their falsities, which they could not contradict. Indeed, it is of great knowledge to give food to fellow servants at the right time, and to consider the persons of the hearers. — Commentary on Acts

Bede: For we are indeed his offspring. We are most rightly called the offspring of God, not born of His nature, but voluntarily created through His spirit, and recreated by adoption. — Commentary on Acts

Clement of Alexandria: It is clear that by using poetic examples from the Phaenomena of Aratus [Paul] approves the best statements of the Greeks. Besides, he refers to the fact that in the person of the unknown god the Greeks are indirectly honoring God the Creator and need to receive him and learn about him with full knowledge through the Son. “I sent you to the gentiles for this purpose,” says Scripture, “to open their eyes, for them to turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, for them to receive release from sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in me.” So these are the “opened eyes of the blind,” which means the clear knowledge of the Father through the Son, the direct grasp of the thing to which the Greeks indirectly allude. — The Stromata Book 1

Gregory of Nazianzus: I believe that if He is given the name ‘Son’, it is because He is of the same essence as the Father and also because He comes from the Father… He is called Logos (Word) because He is, in relation to the Father, what the word is to the mind… The Son makes known the nature of the Father quickly and easily, because everything begotten is an unspoken definition of the one who got it. If, on the other hand, we wish to call Him ‘Word’ because He is in everything, we shall not be mistaken: did not the Word create all that is?… He is called ‘Life’… because He gives life to everything. Indeed, ‘in Him we live and move and have our being’ (Acts 17.28)… It is from Him that we all receive the breath of life and the Holy Spirit Whom our soul contains to the limit of its openness. - “Fourth Theological Oration, 20-21”

John Chrysostom: “As certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also His offspring.” This is said by Aratus the poet. Observe how he draws his arguments from things done by themselves, and from sayings of their own. — Homily on Acts 38

John Chrysostom: “In him;” to put it by way of corporeal similitude, even as it is impossible to be ignorant of the air which is diffused on every side around us, and is “not far from every one of us,” nay rather, which is in us. For it was not so that there was a heaven in one place, in another none, nor yet a heaven at one time, at another none. So that both at every “time” and at every “bound” it was possible to find Him. He so ordered things, that neither by place nor by time were men hindered. For of course even this, if nothing else, of itself was a help to them - that the heaven is in every place, that it stands in all time. See how he declares His Providence, and His upholding power; the existence of all things from Him, from Him their working, from Him their preservation that they perish not. And he does not say, “Through Him,” but, what was nearer than this, “In him.” — Homily on Acts 38

John Chrysostom: That poet said nothing equal to this, “For we are His offspring.” He, however, spake it of Jupiter, but Paul takes it of the Creator, not meaning the same being as he, God forbid! but meaning what is properly predicated of God: just as he spoke of the altar with reference to Him, not to the being whom they worshipped. As much as to say, “For certain things are said and done with reference to this true God, but ye know not that they are with reference to Him.” — Homily on Acts 38

Origen of Alexandria: “Being as one outside the law to those outside the law.” He came to Athens, he found philosophers, and he did not use the words of the prophets or from the law, but as one perhaps recalling this pagan teaching from a school of rhetoric he spoke to the men of Athens. For [Paul] said, “Just as some of your poets have said, ‘For we are his offspring too.’ ” In this place, he was as one outside the law to those outside the law, in order to gain the lawless. It is as if he were to say “I was doing nothing contrary to the law in making this concession to them, but I was keeping myself bound by the law of Christ, in order to gain the lawless.” — COMMENTARY ON 1 CORINTHIANS 43

Acts 17:29

Ammonius of Alexandria: He teaches that the human mind cannot comprehend God as he is according to nature. Their mouths, which say the deity is of human form, are closed with these words. Indeed, one can mold or sculpt or draw people and images of people, or one can paint the likeness of any earthly thing. God, however, is similar to no human work. According to the word of the apostle, the deity is absolutely undetermined, incomprehensible, without image, incorporeal, not similar to human form or any other thing. — CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 17.29

John Chrysostom: “Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art.” And yet for this reason we ought. By no means: for surely we are not like to such, nor are these souls of ours. “And imagination of man.” How so? But some person might say, “We do not think this.” But it was to the many that he was addressing himself, not now to Philosophy. — Homily on Acts 38

John Chrysostom: For lest, when he says, “Being the offspring of God,” they should again say, Thou bringest certain strange things to our ears, he produces the poet. He does not say, “Ye ought not to think the Godhead like to gold or silver,” ye accursed and execrable: but in more lowly sort he says, “We ought not.” For what says he? God is above this? No, he does not say this either: but for the present this - “We ought not to think the Godhead like unto such,” for nothing is so opposite to men. “But we do not affirm the Godhead to be like unto this, for who would say that?” Mark how he has introduced the incorporeal nature of God when he said, “In Him,” etc., for the mind, when it surmises body, at the same time implies the notion of distance. Speaking to the many he says, “We ought not to think the Godhead like unto gold, or silver, or stone, the shaping of art,” for if we are not like to those as regards the soul, much more God is not like to such. So far, he withdraws them from the notion. But neither is the Godhead, he would say, subjected to any other human conception. For if that which art or thought has found - this is why he says it thus, “of art or imagination of man” - if that, then, which human art or thought has found, is God, then even in the stone is God’s essence. — Homily on Acts 38

John Chrysostom: How comes it then, if “in Him we live,” that we do not find Him? The charge is twofold, both that they did not find Him, and that they found such as these. The human understanding in itself is not at all to be relied upon. — Homily on Acts 38

Acts 17:30

John Chrysostom: Again, putting it upon their ignorance, he says, “Now the times of ignorance God overlooked.” Having agitated their minds by the fear, he then adds this: and yet he says, “but now he commandeth all men everywhere to repent.” — Homily on Acts 38

John Chrysostom: But when he has agitated their soul by showing them to be without excuse, see what he says: “The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent.” What then? Are none of these men to be punished? None of them that are willing to repent. He says it of these men, not of the departed, but of them whom He commands to repent. He does not call you to account, he would say. He does not say, Took no notice; does not say, Permitted: but, Ye were ignorant. “Overlooked,” i.e. does not demand punishment as of men that deserve punishment. Ye were ignorant. And he does not say, Ye wilfully did evil; but this he showed by what he said above - “All men everywhere to repent:” again he hints at the whole world. Observe how he takes them off from the parcel deities! — Homily on Acts 38

John Chrysostom: These words were spoken indeed to the Athenians: but it were seasonable that one should say to us also, “that all men everywhere must repent, because he hath appointed a day, in the which He will judge the world.” See how he brings Him in as Judge also: Him, both provident for the world, and merciful and forgiving and powerful and wise, and, in a word possessing all the attributes of a Creator. — Homily on Acts 38

Shepherd of Hermas: “And if any one, sir,” I said, “has been hitherto ignorant, before he heard these words, how can such man be saved who has defiled his flesh?” “Respecting former sins of ignorance,” he said, “God alone is able to heal them, for to Him belongs all power.” — Shepherd of Hermas, Commandment 4

Acts 17:31

Ammonius of Alexandria: Surely if God overlooked from the foundation of the world the transgressions committed by people out of ignorance, and he gives to each the forgiveness of transgressions, fittingly did he come among us at the end of the ages, in order that his boundless love of humankind might be received in accord with the measure that he reveals his presence. — CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 17.30

John Chrysostom: What do you do, Paul? You say nothing about the form of God nor that he is equal to God or anything concerning the splendor of his glory. Indeed the time to say these things had not yet come, but it was enough that they admitted that he was a man. And Christ did the same, and Paul actually learned these things from him. In fact, Christ did not reveal his divinity immediately, but first Christ was believed to be simply a man and a prophet; then he appeared to be what he really was. — CATENA ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 17.31

John Chrysostom: “Because He hath appointed a day, in the which He will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom He hath ordained; whereof He hath given assurance unto all men, in that He hath raised Him from the dead.” Observe how he again declares the Passion. Observe the terror again: for, that the judgment is true, is clear from the raising Him up: for it is alleged in proof of that. That all he has been saying is true, is clear from the fact that He rose again. For He did give this “assurance to all men,” His rising from the dead: this, also is henceforth certain. — Homily on Acts 38

John Chrysostom: “Because He has appointed a day, in the which He will judge the world in righteousness by that Man whom He hath ordained, whereof He hath given assurance to all men, in that He raised Him from the dead.” “Having given assurance to all men,” i.e. He has given proof in the rising of Jesus from the dead. Let us repent then: for we must assuredly be judged. If Christ rose not, we shall not be judged: but if he rose, we shall without doubt be judged. “For to this end,” it is said, “did He also die, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.” “For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ, that every one may receive according to that he hath done.” Do not imagine that these are but words. Lo! he introduced also the subject of the resurrection of all men; for in no other way can the world be judged. And that, “In that He hath raised Him from the dead,” relates to the body: for that was dead, that had fallen. — Homily on Acts 38

Acts 17:32

John Chrysostom: “And when they heard,” what great and lofty doctrines, they did not even attend, but jeered at the Resurrection! “For the natural man,” it saith, “receiveth not the things of the Spirit.” — Homily on Acts 39

Tertullian: He declared it then to be of such a character as the Pharisees had admitted it, and such as the Lord had Himself maintained it, and such too as the Sadducees refused to believe it-such refusal leading them indeed to an absolute rejection of the whole verity. Nor had the Athenians previously understood Paul to announce any other resurrection. They had, in fact, derided his announcement; but they would have indulged no such derision if they had heard from him nothing but the restoration of the soul, for they would have received that as the very common anticipation of their own native philosophy. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Acts 17:33

John Chrysostom: “And so,” it says, “Paul went forth.” How? Having persuaded some; derided by others. “But certain men,” it says, “clave unto him, and believed, among whom was also Dionysius the Areopagite and some others.” He did convert both Dionysius the Areopagite, and some others. For those who were careful of right living, quickly received the word; but the others not so. — Homily on Acts 39

Acts 17:34

Bede: Among whom also is Dionysius the Areopagite. This is Dionysius, who later gloriously ruled the Church as bishop of the Corinthians, and left many volumes of his genius beneficial to the Church, which remain to this day, taking his cognomen from the place he presided over. For the Areopagus is the court of Athens, deriving its name from Mars. For indeed in Greek, Mars is called ἄρης, and ‘pagos’ means hill. — Commentary on Acts