Discovering Paul – Chapter 7: Paul the Philosopher
7. Paul the Philosopher
‘Have you heard the latest?’ We are immediately all ears. We fear being behind someone else in our knowledge. We enjoy being a voyeur on the troubles of another, and we have a desperate hope that in the latest will be something that will give meaning and coherence to our lives.
‘What’s new?’ That question brings us the verbal equivalent of junk mail! Robert Persig said: ‘“What’s new?” is an interesting question but one which results only in an endless tirade of trivia and fashion, the silt of tomorrow. I would like to instead to be concerned with the question “What is best?”, a question which cuts deeply rather that broadly, a question whose answers tend to move the silt downstream.’
Most of us would do better to turn off the media with the latest news and instead ponder about the meaning of what is happening to us. To think clearly, critically and constructively, to possess a value system based upon past thought, to have a philosophy of life is the highest function of the brain.
All of us have the capacity and the obligation to come to a cohesive understanding of the meaning of life at our own level of competence. This often leads to conflict with others who are doing the same, as Paul found.
A conflict of philosophies
First, Paul had a conflict with some of the first disciples. Although Peter, together with James, had already achieved status within the church as apostles, Paul did not hesitate to correct both of them on a matter of dispute concerning the reception of the Gentiles into the church. How good it would have been to have had some letter written by James or Peter giving their side of the events! As it is, we have Paul writing to the Galatians:
But when Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him in public, because he was clearly wrong. Before some men who had been sent by James arrived there, Peter had been eating with the Gentile brothers. But after these men arrived, he drew back and would not eat with the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who were in favour of circumcising them. The other Jewish brothers also started acting like cowards along with Peter; and even Barnabas was swept along by their cowardly action. When I saw that they were not walking a straight path in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, ‘You are a Jew, yet you have been living like a Gentile, not like a Jew. How then can you try to force Gentiles to live like Jews?’ 1
Paul was a persuasive arguer and with both James and Peter he carried the argument.
We do not know that rest of the context of the dispute, but it is obvious that the more conservative James and the uncertain Peter were both wanting to hold back the development of the faith among the Gentiles in a way that was not pleasing to Paul because he had seen a great growth of the faith among the Gentile believers.
A second kind of theological and philosophical dispute occurred frequently with people who belonged to other religions. Paul debated with the animists, the devotees of various Greek and Roman gods such as in Crete or in Ephesus, and on occasions with magicians. In the case of one of them, Elymas, Paul confronted him: ‘“You son of the Devil!... The Lord’s hand will come down on you now; you will be blind and you will not see the light of day for a time.” And at once Elymas felt a dark mist cover his eyes, and he walked about trying to find someone to lead him by the hand.’ 2
A third group opposing Paul were the leaders of Judaism who were in deep philosophical conflict with Paul. This reaction is typical:
When the Jews saw the crowds they were filled with jealousy; they disputed what Paul was saying and insulted him…3
One example of Jewish arguments against Paul is that presented by the lawyer Tertullus before Felix at Caesarea:
‘We found this man to be a dangerous nuisance; he starts riots among the Jews all over the world and is a leader of the party of the Nazarenes. He also tried to defile the Temple, and we arrested him. If you question this man, you yourself will be able to learn from him all the things that we are accusing him of.’ The Jews joined in the accusation and said that all of this was true. 4
His philosophy of history, of Jewish theology and of interpretation of the scriptures were totally unacceptable.
A fourth group of people with whom Paul found constant theological conflict were the Judaisers. These were Jewish Christians who believed that Jesus was the Messiah and the fulfilment of the Old Testament prophets, but who opposed strongly the introduction of Gentiles within the church. However they believed that Paul was a dangerous radical who was changing the customs handed down from Moses, was a threat to the Temple and denied the tradition of the people. It might be remembered that these were the same charges that led to the stoning of Stephen and the crucifixion of Jesus. The Judaisers were Christian believers who wanted to keep Christianity a sect within Judaism. They followed Paul wherever he went and tried to undercut his teaching and undermine his authority:
Some men came from Judea to Antioch and started teaching the believers, ‘You cannot be saved unless you are circumcised as the Law of Moses requires’. Paul and Barnabas got into a fierce argument about this matter. 5
Paul encountered similar problems in a number of places.
A fifth group with whom Paul had argument and debate were the philosophers, usually Greek, who believed that the way of salvation came through wisdom and understanding. Sometimes they were people who, according to Paul, just rationalised their behaviour:
There are many whose lives make them enemies of Christ’s death on the cross. They are going to end up in hell, because their god is their bodily desires. They are proud of what they should be ashamed of, and they think only of the things that belong to this world. 6
Others were like the philosophers in Athens who came from the Epicurean and Stoic schools of philosophy and who debated with Paul, claiming him to be ‘this ignorant show-off’. 7 Paul debated with them and proclaimed Jesus and his resurrection before them.
It is to this last group we now turn.
Philosopher on the turn
Following the decade of Alexander the Great’s conquest (334-323 BC), there spread through the conquered world the benefits of the Golden Age. Greek civilisation, Greek language and Greek philosophy spread through the captured territory and settled with those Greek generals who, after the death of Alexander, ruled the Egyptian, Syrian and Macedonian kingdoms. The Roman conquerors from 31 BC politically dominated the world by their armed might and superior armies, but the Roman world was in turn captured by Greek philosophy. Hellenism, to give it its correct name, conquered the Roman world.
Many early Christians were influenced by Hellenic culture which gave birth to the Christian faith. In the early church we see the seeds of conflict between the Hellenic and Jewish cultures. Judea was part of the Hellenic world, and in some Jewish synagogues the worship was even conducted in Greek. This conflict of cultures came to a focus in the early church: ‘Some time later, as the number of disciples kept growing, there was a quarrel between the Greek-speaking Jews and the native Jews. The Greek-speaking Jews claimed that their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution of funds.’ 8 This concern about the inequality of charity resulted in seven deacons being elected to oversee the charitable works of the early church. But the conflict arose because of the favouritism of one culture over another.
When the church developed in Antioch and was spread by Paul and others throughout the Gentile world, Hellenic culture began to dominate it. It is in this context that Paul entered Athens, the home of Hellenic culture. By the time of Paul, Greek philosophy was sceptical, humanist and sophisticated. The great Academy of Plato (found 387 BC) and the Lyceum of Aristotle (founded 335 BC) were in decline as a force in the thought world of the Greeks. Three groups of philosophers were present the day Paul arrived in Athens.
There were the Epicureans. They were the followers of Epicurus (342-270 BC) who taught that man was made to achieve noble forms of pleasure, where virtue led to true happiness. However, by the first century much of his teaching had been perverted, particularly by the Romans who followed his teachings to the point of believing that everything that gives pleasure is good. This was hedonism at its clearest. Paul characterised it by quoting to the Christians in nearby Corinth: ‘as the saying goes,’ “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we will die”.’ 9 The Epicureans believed that gods could exist but if they did they were far removed from this mortal life. They did not believe in immortality, arguing strongly against Platonists, and they thought that the concept of resurrection from the dead was ridiculous.
The second group of philosophers who were present when Paul entered Athens were the Stoics. The Stoics were followers of Zeno who in the third century BC lectured in contemporary wisdom. The Stoics lived by acknowledging the priority of reason. Behind everything was the eternal Logos – mind or providence. By subduing passion and disciplining emotion, the Stoic removed himself from the changing fortunes and attitudes of life and sought to align himself with that Logos. Christians emphasised that Jesus was the Logos. 10 To align yourself with the eternal mind behind the universe required not human reason, but acceptance of Jesus and his death and resurrection. Paul came from Tarsus, a noted Stoic-training centre. He knew the classical authors, poets and literature, as is evidenced by his quoting them, though it is unlikely that he was specifically trained in them.
A third group of philosophers who heard Paul in Athens were the believers of the mystery religions who followed the teachings and practices either of the religions of the East – Artemis, Serapic, Isis, astrology or the Great Mother – or else they followed the Greek and Roman gods – Dionysus, Orpheus, Zeus or Jupiter. These religions rarely affected a person’s behaviour and were regarded by both Greeks and Romans as superstition, closely associated with patriotism, humanism and pantheism. A number of these religious are alluded to in the book of Revelation of John. While these were not in the classical sense philosophies, they did provide for many a philosophy of living, contrary to Christian beliefs. Paul encountered all of these philosophies simultaneously.
Paul in Athens
The capital of modern Greece has been settled continually for 5,000 years. Its great building programmes were begun in the sixth century BC and the greatest of all, the Parthenon, finely designed and executed in the best marble, was completed in 438 BC. The Agora, beneath the Parthenon, was the commercial centre consisting of public buildings and a great plaza where citizens could meet for discussion and philosophical debate. When Paul came into the Agora in Athens to talk about the new Christian faith he knew exactly what he was doing. This was the site for philosophical discussion.
Paul had studied at the university city of Tarsus. He then trained in the key religious centre of Jerusalem. He would die later in the political capital, Rome. But on this day Paul walked into the intellectual capital of the Roman world – Athens.
As he stood in the Agora surrounded by public buildings, marble columns and beautiful temples, and standing on the same spot as Socrates, Plato and the other great philosophers before him, he began to present the Christian philosophy of life before the crowds of Athenians and many philosophers
There was nothing the Athenians liked more than to hear the latest news. And Paul brought them the good news from God. The Areopagus or ‘the Court of Areas’ was the judicial advisory council that heard criminal cases. It also had the responsibility of listening to significant presentations of non-legal matters, particularly religious affairs. After Paul had begun preaching about his religious news, he was summoned to appear before this council. He may have appeared at the Royal Porch, where even today the seating cut into the rock can be seen. Whether he was on this site or in the restored stoa nearby cannot be ascertained. But a more noble setting could hardly be imagined for the launching of Christian truth among the intellectuals.
Here is a summary outline of Paul’s argument to the Athenians: 11
(a) God is in the heart of this city
Athens was a very religious place. God, the unknown, is there. Commencing with a reference to a local shrine dedicated to ‘an unknown God’, Paul then proceeds to build his argument.
This unknown god was the creator of all. God is not confined to idols or temples – as the famous Athenian philosopher, Xenophanes, argued. This God, Paul was declaring, is self-sufficient, not requiring anything from us.
Paul, in placing stress on the fact that God is spiritual being who is the source of all life, would have gained the support of the Stoics. In his teaching that this God is self-sufficient, he would have gained the support of the Epicureans. Notice that Paul does not use any Old Testament or Hebrew texts. This is because these people did not understand the Jewish law or history. Paul started where the Athenians were, indicating the relevance of the true God to their situation. The people of Athens did not believe in God, had no sense of guilt or sin, and had no awareness of their need of a Saviour. So Paul starts, not with God’s answer to mankind’s need, but with his audience’s fundamental understanding of the nature of God and of his existence. 12
(b) We are to seek God
Paul now indicates that this unknown God requires us to seek him and find him. Paul argues that we are all one brotherhood and any of us seeking him will find that ‘God is actually not far from any one of us’. Paul quotes two Greek poets, Epimenides and Aratus, who in their poetry substantiated these very points. These poets, one from Crete, the other from Cilicia, support his case. 13
(c) Jesus is our way to God
God wants us to come to him, so he has provided a way. He expects us to turn from our self-centredness, to turn away from our wicked ways and to repent of our sin. Paul quickly comes to the centre of the gospel. Because of our guilt God will judge the whole world through one man whom he has appointed to be our judge and ‘has given proof of this to everyone by raising that man from death.’ 14
To this clear-cut outline of Paul’s philosophy the listener has only one logical response: to repent of sin and to trust in this risen Jesus, the coming judge.
But at this point of his presentation Paul was interrupted and unable to finish his address. The council broke into debate over the question of the resurrection. Some scoffed at him, thinking he was introducing two gods: one called ‘Jesus’ and the other called ‘Resurrection’! Others wanted to hear him speak further and asked him to return. Still others believed, including Dionysius (a member of the council), a woman named Damaris and some other people. 15
That was in fact quite an incredible response to his philosophical presentation of the gospel. Even to this day, where that speech of Paul’s stands inscribed in bronze in the midst of the Areopagus, the only names known from this period of Greek history happen to be the names of the two who believed.
The Atheniahs wanted their ears tickled with the latest intellectual fad. Paul started at the point of their ignorance. He then brought them new truth about God who was creator, provider and judge, introducing them to Jesus, whom God had raised from death. Through him we have access to God; before him we shall be judged.
Though interrupted, Paul’s address is the classic defence of the Christian faith, a practical model for Christian apologetics.
Endnotes:
1. Galatians 2:11-14
2. Acts 13:10-11
3. Acts 13:45
4. Acts 24:5-9
5. Acts 15:1-2
6. Philippians 3:18-19
7. Acts 17:18
8. Acts 6:1-2
9. 1 Corinthians 15:32
10. John 1:1-3; 14
11. Acts 17:16-34
12. Acts 17:22-23
13. Acts 17:26-28
14. Acts 17:30-31
15. Acts 17:32-34
For personal reading
Theme: Christ, the basis of our faith
Monday : Our God needs no sacrifice (Acts 17:16-32)
Tuesday : The goodness of God (Acts 14:8-18)
Wednesday : We walk in the light (Ephesians 5:1-14)
Thursday : Reconciled to Christ (Colossians 1:21-29)
Friday : Paul’s philosophy opposed (Acts 13:44-52)
Saturday : Worldliness condemned (Philippians 3:17-21 and 1 Corinthians 15:28-34)
Sunday : The body of Christ (Ephesians 4:1-16)
For group study
Topic: Thinking through the meaning of life
1. Today we hear many claims and many voices. Each one demands our attention. How can we tell right from wrong? What should be the basis of our faith?
2. Read again John 1:1-3, and 14. What is that promise regarding the centrality of Jesus as the word? How does it strengthen your faith?
3. Examine again Paul’s three main theses from Acts 17:16-34
(a) God is a spiritual being who is the source of all life. Do we believe in the living, vital presence of God in daily life?
(b) God has made it possible for us to find him. Do we really seek God?
(c) Jesus is our only way to God. In practical terms what does it mean to give ourselves to him? Why is it only possible to discover God as he really is through Jesus? Compare Colossians 1:15, 19-20; and Romans 3:23-26