TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Commentary on Acts 17 verses 16–21
A scholar that has acquaintance, and is in love, with the learning of the ancients, would think he should be very happy if he were where Paul now was, at Athens, in the midst of the various sects of philosophers, and would have a great many curious questions to ask them, for the explication of the remains we have of the Athenian learning; but Paul, though bred a scholar, and an ingenious active man, does not make this any of his business at Athens. He has other work to mind: it is not the improving of himself in their philosophy that he aims at, he has learned to call it a vain thing, and is above it (Col 2:8); his business is, in God's name, to correct their disorders in religion, and to turn them from the service of idols, and of Satan in them, to the service of the true and living God in Christ.
I. Here is the impression which the abominable ignorance and superstition of the Athenians made upon Paul's spirit, Act 17:16. Observe, 1. The account here given of that city: it was wholly given to idolatry. This agrees with the account which the heathen writers give of it, that there were more idols in Athens than there were in all Greece besides put together, and that they had twice as many sacred feasts as others had. Whatever strange gods were recommended to them, they admitted them, and allowed them a temple and an altar, so that they had almost as many gods as men - facilius possis deum quam hominem invenire. And this city, after the empire became Christian, continued incurably addicted to idolatry, and all the pious edicts of the Christian emperors could not root it out, till, by the irruption of the Goths, that city was in so particular a manner laid waste that there are now scarcely any remains of it. It is observable that there, where human learning most flourished, idolatry most abounded, and the most absurd and ridiculous idolatry, which confirms that of the apostle, that when they professed themselves to be wise they became fools (Rom 1:22), and, in the business of religion, were of all other the most vain in their imaginations. The world by wisdom knew not God, Co1 1:21. They might have reasoned against polytheism and idolatry; but, it seems, the greatest pretenders to reason were the greatest slaves to idols: so necessary was it to the re-establishing even of natural religion that there should be a divine revelation, and that centering in Christ. 2. The disturbance which the sight of this gave to Paul. Paul was not willing to appear publicly till Silas and Timothy came to him, that out of the mouth of two or three witnesses the word might be established; but in the mean time his spirit was stirred within him. He was filled with concern for the glory of God, which he saw given to idols, and with compassion to the souls of men, which he saw thus enslaved to Satan, and led captive by him at his will. He beheld these transgressors, and was grieved; and horror took hold of him. He had a holy indignation at the heathen priests, that led the people such an endless trace of idolatry, and at their philosophers, that knew better, and yet never said a word against it, but themselves went down the stream.
II. The testimony that he bore against their idolatry, and his endeavours to bring them to the knowledge of the truth. He did not, as Witsius observes, in the heat of his zeal break into the temples, pull down their images, demolish their altars, or fly in the face of their priests; nor did he run about the streets crying, "You are all the bond-slaves of the devil," though it was too true; but he observed decorum, and kept himself within due bounds, doing that only which became a prudent man. 1. He went to the synagogue of the Jews, who, though enemies to Christianity, were free from idolatry, and joined with them in that among them which was good, and took the opportunity given him there of disputing for Christ, Act 17:17. He discoursed with the Jews, reasoned fairly with them, and put it to them what reason they could give why, since they expected the Messiah, they would not receive Jesus. There he met with the devout persons that had forsaken the idol temples, but rested in the Jews' synagogue, and he talked with these to lead them on to the Christian church, to which the Jews' synagogue was but as a porch. 2. He entered into conversation with all that came in his way about matters of religion: In the market - en tē agora, in the exchange, or place of commerce, he disputed daily, as he had occasion, with those that met with him, or that he happened to fall into company with, that were heathen, and never came to the Jews' synagogue. The zealous advocates for the cause of Christ will be ready to plead it in all companies, as occasion offers. The ministers of Christ must not think it enough to speak a good word for Christ once a week, but should be daily speaking honourably of him to such as meet with them.
III. The enquiries which some of the philosophers made concerning Paul's doctrine. Observe,
1.Who they were that encountered him, that entered into discourse with him, and opposed him: He disputed with all that met him, in the places of concourse, or rather of discourse. Most took no notice of him, slighted him, and never minded a word he said; but there were some of the philosophers that thought him worth making remarks upon, an they were those whose principles were most directly contrary to Christianity. (1.) The Epicureans, who thought God altogether such a one as themselves, an idle inactive being, that minded nothing, nor put any difference between good and evil. They would not own, either that God made the world or that he governs it; nor that man needs to make any conscience of what he says or does, having no punishment to fear nor rewards to hope for, all which loose atheistical notions Christianity is levelled against. The Epicureans indulged themselves in all the pleasures of sense, and placed their happiness in them, in what Christ has taught us in the first place to deny ourselves. (2.) The Stoics, who thought themselves altogether as good as God, and indulged themselves as much in the pride of life as the Epicureans did in the lusts of the flesh and of the eye; they made their virtuous man to be no way inferior to God himself, nay to be superior. Esse aliquid quo sapiens antecedat Deum - There is that in which a wise man excels God, so Seneca: to which Christianity is directly opposite, as it teaches us to deny ourselves and abase ourselves, and to come off from all confidence in ourselves, that Christ may be all in all.
2.What their different sentiments were of him; such there were as there were of Christ, Act 17:18. (1.) Some called him a babbler, and thought he spoke, without any design, whatever came uppermost, as men of crazed imaginations do: What will this babbler say? ho spermologos houtos - this scatterer of words, that goes about, throwing here one idle word or story and there another, without any intendment or signification; or, this picker up of seeds. Some of the critics tell us that the term is used for a little sort of bird, that is worth nothing at all, either for the spit or for the cage, that picks up the seeds that lie uncovered, either in the field or by the way-side, and hops here and there for that purpose - Avicula parva quae semina in triviis dispersa colligere solet; such a pitiful contemptible animal they took Paul to be, or supposed he went from place to place venting his notions to get money, a penny here and another there, as that bird picks up here and there a grain. They looked upon him as an idle fellow, and regarded him, as we say, no more than a ballad-singer. (2.) Others called him a setter forth of strange gods, and thought he spoke with design to make himself considerable by that means. And, if he had strange gods to set forth, he could not bring them to a better market than to Athens. He did not, as many did, directly set forth new gods, nor avowedly; but they thought he seemed to do so, because he preached unto then Jesus, and the resurrection. From his first coming among them he ever and anon harped upon these two strings, which are indeed the principal doctrines of Christianity - Christ and a future state - Christ our way, and heaven our end; and, though he did not call these gods, yet they thought he meant to make them so. Ton Iēsoun kai tēn anastasin̂ "Jesus they took for a new god, and anastasis, the resurrection, for a new goddess." Thus they lost the benefit of the Christian doctrine by dressing it up in a pagan dialect, as if believing in Jesus, and looking for the resurrection, were the worshipping of new demons.
3.The proposal they made to give him a free, full, fair, and public hearing, Act 17:19, Act 17:20. They had heard some broken pieces of his doctrine, and are willing to have a more perfect knowledge of it. (1.) They look upon it as strange and surprising, and very different from the philosophy that had for many ages been taught and professed at Athens. "It is a new doctrine, which we do not understand the drift and design of. Thou bringest certain strange things to our ears, which we never heard of before, and know not what to make of now." By this it should seem that, among all the learned books they had, they either had not, or heeded not, the books of Moses and the prophets, else the doctrine of Christ would not have been so perfectly new and strange to them. There was but one book in the world that was of divine inspiration, and that was the only book they were strangers to, which, if they would have given a due regard to it, would, in its very first page, have determined that great controversy among them about the origin of the universe. (2.) They desired to know more of it, only because it was new and strange: "May we know what this new doctrine is? Or, is it (like the mysteries of the gods) to be kept as a profound secret? If it may be, we would gladly know, and desire thee to tell us, what these things mean, that we may be able to pass a judgment upon them." This was a fair proposal; it was fit they should know what this doctrine was before they embraced it; and they were so fair as not to condemn it till they had had some account of it. (3.) The place they brought him to, in order to this public declaration of his doctrine; it was to Areopagus, the same word that is translated (Act 17:22) Mars' Hill; it was the town-house, or guildhall of their city, where the magistrates met upon public business, and the courts of justice were kept; and it was as the theatre in the university, or the schools, where learned men met to communicate their notions. The court of justice which sat here was famous for its equity, which drew appeals to it from all parts; if any denied a God, he was liable to the censure of this court. Diagoras was by them put to death, as a contemner of the gods; nor might any new God be admitted without their approbation. Hither they brought Paul to be tried, not as a criminal but as a candidate.
4.The general character of the people of that city given upon this occasion (Act 17:21): All the Athenians, that is natives of the place, and strangers who sojourned there for their improvement, spent their time in nothing else but either to tell or to hear some new thing, which comes in as the reason why they were inquisitive concerning Paul's doctrine, not because it was good, but because it was new. It is a very sorry character which is here given of these people, yet many transcribe it. (1.) They were all for conversation. St. Paul exhorts his pupil to give attendance to reading and meditation (Ti1 4:13, Ti1 4:15), but these people despised those old-fashioned ways of getting knowledge, and preferred that of telling and hearing. It is true that good company is of great use to a man, and will polish one that has laid a good foundation in study; but that knowledge will be very flashy and superficial which is got by conversation only. (2.) They affected novelty; they were for telling and hearing some new thing. They were for new schemes and new notions in philosophy, new forms and plans of government in politics, and, in religion, for new gods that came newly up (Deu 32:17), new demons, new-fashioned images and altars (Kg2 16:10); they were given to change. Demosthenes, an orator of their own, had charged this upon them long before, in one of his Philippics, that their common question in the markets, or wherever they met, was ei ti le etai neōteron - whether there was any news. (3.) They meddled in other people's business, and were inquisitive concerning that, and never minded their own. Tattlers are always busy bodies, Ti1 5:13. (4.) They spent their time in nothing else, and a very uncomfortable account those must needs have to make of their time who thus spend it. Time is precious, and we are concerned to be good husbands of it, because eternity depends upon it, and it is hastening apace into eternity, but abundance of it is wasted in unprofitable converse. To tell or hear the new occurrences of providence concerning the public in our own or other nations, and concerning our neighbours and friends, is of good use now and then; but to set up for newsmongers, and to spend our time in nothing else, is to lose that which is very precious for the gain of that which is worth little.
"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.
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.
"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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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."
Continue studying Acts 17:18 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
SUMMARY
Acts 17:18 captures a pivotal moment in Paul's Athenian ministry, detailing his initial confrontation with the city's leading intellectuals, the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers. As Paul proclaimed the Gospel in the bustling Agora, his message of Jesus and the resurrection provoked a range of reactions, from dismissive curiosity, labeling him a "babbler," to serious accusation, branding him a "setter forth of strange gods." This encounter highlights the profound clash between the prevailing Greek philosophical worldviews and the radical, transformative truths of the Christian faith.
CONTEXT
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
The passage effectively employs Irony, as the supposedly wise and enlightened philosophers of Athens dismiss Paul, the bearer of divine wisdom, as a mere "babbler." There is also a strong sense of Antithesis or Contrast, highlighting the stark opposition between the intellectual pride and philosophical systems of Athens and the "foolishness" of the Gospel message. Furthermore, the philosophers' misunderstanding of "resurrection" as a "strange god" is a clear example of Misinterpretation, underscoring the deep chasm between their pagan worldview and the revealed truth of Christianity.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
Acts 17:18 powerfully illustrates the radical nature of the Gospel when confronted with entrenched philosophical and cultural systems. The core message of "Jesus, and the resurrection" was not merely a new idea to be debated among others; it was a truth claim that fundamentally challenged the Epicurean denial of divine intervention and the Stoic concept of an impersonal, pantheistic deity. The bodily resurrection of Christ, in particular, was an intellectual stumbling block, as Greek thought generally viewed the physical body as inferior and a hindrance to the soul. This passage underscores that the Gospel, in its unadulterated form, will always be perceived as foolishness or an offense by those whose worldviews are antithetical to God's revelation, yet it remains the singular power for salvation.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
Paul's encounter in Athens provides timeless lessons for believers engaging with a skeptical or hostile world. It calls us to courageous and uncompromised proclamation of the Gospel, even when faced with intellectual disdain or outright opposition. Like Paul, we are to be students of our culture, understanding the prevailing worldviews and intellectual currents, yet never diluting the essential truths of Christ and His resurrection to make them more palatable. The Gospel's power lies not in its ability to conform to human reason or philosophical systems, but in its divine origin and transformative truth. We should anticipate that the message of the cross and resurrection may be misunderstood, mocked, or even seen as offensive by those who do not believe, but this should not deter us from faithfully proclaiming the only message that offers true life and hope.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Who were the Epicureans and Stoics, and why did they react this way to Paul's message?
Answer: The Epicureans were followers of Epicurus, who taught that the highest good was pleasure, understood as tranquility (ataraxia) and freedom from pain, achieved by living simply and withdrawing from public life. They believed the gods existed but were detached from human affairs and did not intervene. The Stoics, founded by Zeno of Citium, emphasized virtue, reason (logos), and living in harmony with nature and divine providence. They held a pantheistic view, seeing God as an impersonal force permeating the universe. Both philosophies were fundamentally opposed to Paul's message of a personal, sovereign God who actively intervenes in human history, the concept of a bodily resurrection, and a future judgment. For Epicureans, the resurrection was illogical and irrelevant to their materialist view of death. For Stoics, the idea of a specific historical person (Jesus) being resurrected and demanding allegiance, along with the concept of a future bodily resurrection, challenged their impersonal, cyclical view of the cosmos and the soul. Their reactions—dismissing Paul as a "babbler" or accusing him of introducing "strange gods"—stemmed directly from this clash of worldviews, as the Gospel presented truths that were either nonsensical or threatening to their established philosophical frameworks, particularly the idea of a bodily resurrection (Acts 17:32).
Why was "babbler" a significant insult in ancient Athens?
Answer: The Greek term for "babbler," spermológos (G4691), literally means "seed-picker" or "one who picks up scraps." It was originally used to describe a scavenging bird that picked up discarded seeds. When applied to a person, it was a derogatory intellectual insult, implying that Paul was an uneducated, unoriginal, and incoherent speaker who merely gathered bits of information from various sources and spouted them without true understanding or systematic thought. In a city renowned for its sophisticated rhetoric and philosophical discourse, being called a "babbler" was a profound dismissal of one's intellectual credibility and the perceived worthlessness of one's message.
What was the danger of being accused of setting forth "strange gods"?
Answer: The accusation of setting forth "strange gods" (xéna daimónia) was extremely serious in Athens. The city had strict laws against introducing new deities or religious practices that had not been officially approved by the state. Such an act was considered an offense against the state and could lead to legal prosecution, exile, or even the death penalty. Famously, Socrates had been condemned and executed centuries earlier, in part, on similar charges of impiety and introducing new gods. The philosophers likely misunderstood Paul's preaching of "Jesus, and the resurrection" as introducing two distinct new deities—Jesus and a goddess named "Resurrection" (anastasis)—which made the accusation a grave threat to Paul's safety.
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
The core of Paul's message to the Athenian philosophers was "Jesus, and the resurrection." This was not merely a historical report but the very heart of the Gospel, pointing to the climactic event of God's redemptive plan. The resurrection of Jesus Christ is the divine validation of His identity as the Son of God and the Messiah (Romans 1:4), and it serves as the ultimate proof of His victory over sin and death. Paul's emphasis on the resurrection directly foreshadows his argument on Mars Hill, where he declares that God "has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead" (Acts 17:30-31). The resurrection of Christ is not just a past event; it is the guarantee of our own future resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:20-23) and the foundation for the hope of eternal life. Thus, the message that seemed foolish or strange to the Athenian philosophers is, in Christ, the power and wisdom of God for salvation to everyone who believes (1 Corinthians 1:24).