The Athenian Challenge - Part 2

Apologetic Strategies

Having surveyed and extracted relevant data from this key passage, including both theoretical and practical truths, it is now possible to delineate a number of relevant apologetic strategies. Successful communication of the Christian gospel in a pagan or neo-pagan environment requires the appropriation and application of the Athenian paradigm. The following principles are intended to assist in the task of witnessing among the biblically uninformed.

1. Interactive Apologetics: Good apologists engage the world in which they live.

One key to evangelistic relevance is the ability of Christians to know something about their world. While successful witnessing has always depended on an awareness of one's social setting, today's situation represents a special challenge. The reason for this is quite simple; many contemporary believers operate in a cultural environment far removed from secular society.(25) This means that Christians must make a concerted effort to become acquainted with the habits of modern man.

The apostle Paul was a master of this. When in Athens, he observed the surroundings in order to familiarize himself with Athenian culture. Indeed, he apparently already possessed an understanding of pagan literature, as evidenced by his quoting their poets (17:28).

"Summing up Paul's rhetorical strategy in Athens, we may note that the apostle was knowledgeable, dialectical, well-read, relevant, and rhetorically skillful. What particularly strikes the reader is his ability to accommodate himself to the knowledge base of most Athenians."(26) In other words Paul lived in the real world and knew how people thought and lived.

In like manner believers who live in today's neo-pagan society must interact with it. The trends, popular ideas, current styles, and cultural assumptions of the day must be grasped. This type of cultural awareness is fostered by reading the newspaper, watching television, surfing the internet, and a host of other ways.(27) It is not so much that believers should stand on the periphery of society, performing cold cultural analysis. Rather, they are to live within the "walls" of modern society, daily (and prayerfully) befriending non-Christian people. "If you want to build bridges to any culture, you need to be an observer of it. That means being inside it."(28)

Now, this entire project raises important questions about the subject of worldliness.(29) While believers are not to emulate the anti-God and idolatrous attitudes of society and though they are to be careful not to allow "the cares of this world" (Mark 4:7, 18-19) to take priority in their lives, the Bible demands a type of "worldly" apologetic. Like Paul, and Jesus before Him (Luke 19:1-10), the apologetically-minded individual must spend quality time with the lost people of this generation. "If we do not take seriously the responsibility to build redemptive relationships with the lost, who will? Seeking such relationships should surely figure prominently into our personal and church philosophy of ministry."(30)

Of course the ultimate motive in one's efforts to be culturally literate is love. "If you truly desire to be more effective taking Jesus into your world, one of the best places to start is to simply be the kind of friend Jesus is. And Jesus is a friend for sinners."(31)

2. Worldview Apologetics: Good apologists provide the context, the biblical worldview, apart from which the gospel is unintelligible.

Those who are culture watchers are keenly aware of the fact that the direction of society is typically contrary to the biblical norm. Indeed, the assumptions and priorities of the modern world are often the antithesis of those found in Scripture.

This being the case, it is incumbent upon believers to communicate the Bible's presuppositions. It is not enough to proclaim that Jesus saves. As true as this statement is, it requires some context. Before the Christian gospel can be perceived, a biblical framework must be established. "In short, the good news of Jesus Christ is virtually incoherent unless it is securely set into a biblical worldview."(32)

As Paul seeks to communicate with the Athenians, a number of truths come to the fore. Basically, he is concerned to share something about God, man, and Jesus. God, Paul says, is the transcendent, immanent Creator (24-29). He is both the sovereign Judge to whom all men must give an account (26, 31), and the compassionate Lord who graciously invites people into His presence (27, 30). Man, as the apostle describes him, is both ignorant and culpable (23ff), but he also retains a vestigial awareness of God (Romans 1:18-22). Paul shares these facts with the Athenians in order that they might understand both their guilt and their need of repentance. Only after laying out these broad strokes does he turn to the subject of Jesus.(33) When the apostle finally mentions His name, he shares something about Jesus' status. God has declared Him to be the eschatological Judge. Evidence for this is found in the fact that God has raised Jesus from the dead (31). Now, while many of the pagans of that day would have (and in fact did, 32) heartily disagreed with Paul, it was nonetheless essential to point out that God had furnished proof for all who cared to see.(34)

In the final analysis, the Areopagus speech is a brilliant attempt to disclose biblical ideas to those who had little understanding of (or liking for) Christianity. It entails both the correction of commonly held yet erroneous views and the communication of God's true ways. If contemporary apologists are to follow this pattern, they too must determine to speak not only about Jesus but about the entire biblical story-line. In other words it will be essential to have a firm grasp of the biblical worldview, for only then will the message of the cross and resurrection make sense to modern pagans.

3. Contextualized Apologetics: Good apologists communicate in culturally sensitive ways.

So far, it has been suggested that Christians should know something about the world in which they live, and that they must then seek to provide a biblical framework for those who are ignorant of the truth. Next, it is important to recognize the manner in which the Christian worldview is to be communicated. In short, the subject of contextualization must be addressed.

"Contextualization occurs when the presentation and outworking of the gospel is done in a manner appropriate to the context in which it is found."(35) Thus, it involves the melding of the two previous principles. If a person understands his culture (principle # 1) and desires to provide a framework for understanding the gospel within that culture (principle # 2), it makes sense to do so in an appropriate manner.

A part of Paul's strategy involves finding areas of agreement with his hearers. Not only is he concerned to know his audience, but he looks for common ground. In Athens, for instance, he was able to glean truths from the Athenian's own writers and use these to point people to Jesus. As Paul speaks before the Areopagus, "the vocabulary is linguistically appropriate to his hearers, but at the level of the sentence and the paragraph, Paul in his report is saying just what he wants to say; he is establishing a biblical worldview."(36) Charles adds: "The striking significance of Acts 17:16-34 is the ability of Paul to clothe biblical revelation in a cultured and relevant argument to his pagan contemporaries."(37)

Believers must follow the apostle's example. Not only should they be acquainted with cultural tendencies, but they must also shape their message to fit the contemporary scene. The truth is to be uncompromisingly enculturated.

4. Teleological(38) Apologetics: Good apologists seek to direct people—wisely, gradually, and creatively—to the God who has revealed Himself through Jesus Christ.

One danger of apologetic engagement is the tendency to deal merely in the abstract and theoretical. When this happens, top priority is given to winning the argument, or at least silencing critics. The problem with this model, however, is that it neglects the goal of Christian apologetics, to unite fallen human beings with their Creator. While the Bible certainly endorses serious doctrinal and theological study, the purpose of these things is to lead people into a knowledge of God.

On this score the apostle's wisdom is once again evident. The effort of Paul to communicate a biblical worldview in culturally relevant ways had as its aim the actual conversion of individuals. It was not enough to simply find common ground with ancient pagans or to share broad ideas with them. Rather, he actually called people to repentance. If lost people hope to know God, they must respond personally to the message of the gospel.

[The] movement of a faithful apologetic is always in the direction of moral accountability. By underscoring the reality of future judgment, the apostle dismantles religious inclusivity: all people everywhere must repent and confront the knowledge of the Creator that has been imparted to them.(39)

But conversion is not merely an idea. It is related to a person, Jesus. This explains the direction of Paul's message. Men must turn from their ways and look this one whom God appointed. Thus, all of the groundwork Paul provides, all of the worldview apologetics, has a telos, an aim. That aim is that lost individuals would turn from their ways and embrace the Son of God. Hence, the need for teleological apologetics.

Conclusion

Paul's Athenian address represents a great challenge to modern apologists. The challenge is to understand and then apply the truths of this passage to the modern world. Fundamentally, this starts with a proper biblical perspective, i.e., a correct understanding of the Word of God and a corresponding commitment to the God therein revealed.

With a right biblical and theological foundation, it is then possible to implement sound apologetic principles. These include connecting with the non-Christian world, communicating a biblical worldview, exuding cultural sensitivity, and aiming at conversion. Charles nicely summarizes:

The Christian community must understand the culture in which it has been placed by the sovereign Lord. By demonstrating an understanding of culture, it is then able to engage culture with a measure of credibility. Finally, having humbly sought to be a student of and active participant in culture, the church is able to confront the false values that are lodged within culture. Perception, engagement, confrontation necessarily follow—in this order.(40)

Larkin adds this: "We must reintroduce post-Christians to Jesus with freshness, without resorting to the traditional formulations they will call the ‘old, old story.' But we must do so with faithfulness, telling it the way it was and is."(41) The success of this endeavor will hinge greatly on the church's ability to unlock the treasures contained in Acts 17:16-34. Here is an important passage whose principles the church must understand, grasp, and employ, a text for communicating in a pluralistic world, a paradigm for reaching modern pagans. It is time for believers to take seriously the Athenian challenge. 

Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 2:2 that he "determined to know nothing . . . except Jesus Christ and Him crucified." Because his work among the Corinthians (Acts 18) follows immediately on the heels of his ministry in Athens (Acts 17), some have speculated that these words are the apostle's way of rejecting the type of approach he utilized among the Athenians. Paul, it is said, realized the error of his ways and the foolishness of trying to reason with these pagans as he did. In essence he came to see that the Athenian address was little more than a compromising and "gospeless" effort to reach the inhabitants of that city.

In response to this idea, a number of points can be mentioned. First, it is important to realize that what we possess is "a condensed record of a much longer speech."(42) Luke merely provides the broad strokes of Paul's message. Second, it is worth noting that the apostle may have been cut-off before he had concluded his speech.(43) Thus, it is reasonable to assume that he would have said more, specifically more about Jesus, given the opportunity. Third, it is plain to see that Paul did in fact mention Jesus' name. This is precisely the point of contention in Paul's discussion with the Athenians (18-20). Fourth, those who maintain that Paul failed to mention the cross are interpreting too rigidly. While Luke does not explicitly mention Golgotha, it is clearly implied. After all, Paul's teaching on the resurrection (18, 31-32) makes no sense apart from the reality of Jesus' death. "Though the cross is missing in this summary report of his talk, the death of Christ must have been mentioned for him to mention the resurrection, and there is nothing to say that this was not clearly presented during his reasoning with the people of Athens prior to this event."(44)

All of the attempts to treat this passage as something less than paradigmatic, or as bordering on an apostolic blunder, really miss the point of the address. Of course Jesus was preached, as Luke unambiguously records(18). Indeed, the tactics employed here closely parallel what Paul writes elsewhere. The pattern "is very much in line with Paul's own theology, not least his theology in the opening chapters of Romans."(45)

As to the notion that this mission failed, it must be asked, what constitutes failure? The real issue is not how many converts there were but whether Paul faithfully communicated the truth to his audience. Of this there is little doubt. Furthermore, Carson adds these words:

Strictly speaking, Paul does not say that only a "few" men believed, He says tines de andres, "certain people," along with heteroi, "others." These are in line with other descriptions. The numbers could scarcely been large, because the numbers in the Areopagus could not have been very large in the first place.(46)

Those who question the strategy of the apostle miss the wisdom this text provides, wisdom that should be extracted and applied. Paul communicates biblical truths in culturally acceptable ways. Surely, this is not a sign of compromise but of brilliant contextualization. Far from making unnecessary concessions when among the Athenians, Paul provides, for all generations, the basic model that is to be followed when witnessing to those who are ignorant of the Bible's contents.

25. This is not meant to imply that all believers are completely lacking in contact with the secular world. However, for a variety of reasons, it is quite common for this contact to be quite shallow, and for God's people to take lightly the views of their non-Christian acquaintances. For a better alternative, see Dick Staub, Too Christian, Too Pagan (Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000), 61-67.

26. J. Daryl Charles, "Engaging the (Neo) Pagan Mind: Paul's Encounter with Athenian Culture as a Model for Cultura1Apologetics" in The Gospel and Contemporary Perspectives: Viewpoints from the Trinity Journal, ed. Douglas Moo (Grand Rapids, MI.: Kregel Publications, 1997), 136.

27. For some excellent suggestions on becoming culturally literate, see Staub, Too Christian, Too Pagan, 129-165.

28. Michael Green and Alister McGrath, How Shall We Reach Them? Defending and Communicating the Christian Faith to Nonbelievers (Nashville, TN.: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995), 56.

29. For a popular treatment of these issues, see Staub, Too Christian, Too Pagan , 33-67.

30. Tom Hovestol, Extreme Righteousness: Seeing Ourselves in the Pharisees (Chicago, IL.: Moody Press, 1997), 150.

31. Staub, Too Christian, Too Pagan , 51.

32. Carson, The Gagging of God , 502.

33. It can certainly be argued that the name of Jesus had already been introduced in Paul's earlier witness (18). True enough. However, this does not detract from the apostle's basic plan, which is to ground his presentation of Jesus in the context of a biblical perspective. The point here is not that the name of Jesus is to be avoided, but that the gospel will only make sense to those who possess at least a rudimentary understanding of the Bible's story line.

34. At this point, some might ask why the apostle delved into the controversial subject of the resurrection. After all, the Athenians hardly took such talk seriously. Of course the resurrection must eventually be proclaimed because it is a fundamental tenet of the faith. But, it is especially important to recognize Paul's strategy here. He is not merely communicating facts about the resurrection, facts that made no sense in pagan thought. Rather, he hopes by first establishing a biblical worldview to get the Athenians to interpret the resurrection within the context of special revelation. Paul was not trying primarily to get them to consider a vital truth by means of their own unbiblical biases, but to see this doctrine through Christian lenses.

35. Ajith Fernando, Acts , The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan Publishing House, 1998), 480.

36. Carson, Telling The Truth , 392.

37. Charles, The Gospel and Contemporary Perspectives , 132.

38. Teleological comes from the Greek term telos, meaning purpose or end.

39. Charles, The Gospel and Contemporary Perspectives , 137.

40. Ibid., 136.

41. Larkin, Acts s, 253.

42. Carson, Telling the Truth , 391.

43. Carson, The Gagging of God, 503, n. 28.

44. Fernando, Acts, 477.

45. Carson, Telling the Truth, 396.

46. Ibid.

Barna, George. The Second Coming of the Church. Nashville, TN.: Word Publishing, 1998.

Bruce, F. F. The Book of Acts , New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1988.

Bruce, F. F. The Acts of the Apostles: The Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary . Grand Rapids, MI.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1990.

Carson, D. A. The Gagging of God: Christianity Confronts Pluralism. Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan Publishing House, 1996.

________. "Athens Revisited" in Telling the Truth: Evangelizing Postmoderns, ed. D. A. Carson. Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000.

Charles J. Daryl. "Engaging the (Neo) Pagan Mind: Paul's Encounter with Athenian Culture as a Model for Cultura1Apologetics (Acts 17:16-34)" in The Gospel and Contemporary Perspectives: Viewpoints from the Trinity Journal, ed. Douglas Moo. Grand Rapids, MI.: Kregel Publications, 1997.

Comfort, P. W. "Idolatry" in The Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity Press, 1993.

Fernando, Ajith. Acts, The NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan Publishing House, 1998.

Frame, John M. The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God. Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1987.

________. Contemporary Worship Music: A Biblical Defense. Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1997.

Green, Michael and Alister McGrath. How Shall We Reach Them? Defending and Communicating the Christian Faith to Nonbelievers. Nashville, TN.: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995.

Grenz, Stanley J., David Guretzki, and Cherith Fee Nordling, "Immanence" in Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms. Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity Press, 1999.

Hemer, Colin J. The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History. Winona Lake, IN.: Eisenbrauns, 1990.

Hovestol, Tom. Extreme Righteousness: Seeing Ourselves in the Pharisees. Chicago, IL.: Moody Press, 1997.

Larkin, William J. Jr. Acts. Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity Press, 1995.

Marshall, I. H. Acts. Grand Rapids, MI.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1980.

Mayers, Ronald B. Balanced Apologetics: Using Evidence and Presuppositions in Defense of the Faith. Grand Rapids, IL.: Kregel Publications, 1984.

Packer, J. I. Fundamentalism and the Word of God. Grand Rapids, MI.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1988.

Prior, Kenneth. The Gospel in Pagan Society. Fearn, Ross-shire, Scotland: Christian Focus Publications, 1995.

Staub, Dick. Too Christian, Too Pagan. Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000.

Stott, John R. W. The Message of Acts. Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity Press, 1990.

Williams, David J. Acts. Peabody, MA.: Hendrickson Publishers, 1990.