paul, the athenians, and the breath of life: acts 17:22-31
TRANSCRIPT
Seattle Pacific UniversityDigital Commons @ SPU
Theses and Dissertations
January 1st, 2011
Paul, the Athenians, and the Breath of Life: Acts17:22-31William Russell HorstSeattle Pacific Seminary
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.spu.edu/etd
Part of the Biblical Studies Commons
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ SPU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by anauthorized administrator of Digital Commons @ SPU.
Recommended CitationHorst, William Russell, "Paul, the Athenians, and the Breath of Life: Acts 17:22-31" (2011). Theses and Dissertations. 3.https://digitalcommons.spu.edu/etd/3
SEATTLE PACIFIC UNIVERSITY
PAUL, THE ATHENIANS, AND THE BREATH OF LIFE
ACTS 17:22-31
SUBMITTED TO DR. JOHN R. LEVISON
AND THE SEATTLE PACIFIC UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF A MASTER OF ARTS IN CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURE
BY
BILL HORST
JULY 25, 2011
ii
CONTENTS
ABBREVIATIONS . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PART I: BIBLICAL ALLUSIONS IN THE ATHENIAN ADDRESS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
THE GIVING OF LIFE IN GENESIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ISAIAH AND PAUL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
THE GIVING OF LIFE IN ISAIAH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ANTI-IDOL POLEMIC IN ISAIAH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ISAIAH AND THE MISSION OF PAUL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CONCLUSIONS ON ISAIAH AND PAUL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
THE DESCENT OF MANY FROM ONE IN GENESIS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CHILDREN OF GOD IN THE HEBREW BIBLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CONCLUSION TO PART I . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PART II: POINTS OF CONTACT BETWEEN HELLENISM AND THE ATHENIAN
ADDRESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
THE GIVING OF LIFE IN OVID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
THE DESCENT OF MANY FROM ONE IN THE MYTHOLOGY OF
PANDORA AND PROMETHEUS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
THE ANTI-TEMPLE AND ANTI-IDOL TEACHING OF THE STOICS . . . . . .
GOD’S LACK OF NEED IN SENECA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CHILDREN OF GOD IN ARATUS AND CLEANTHES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CONCLUSION TO PART II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PART III: POINTS OF CONTACT BETWEEN HELLENISTIC JUDAISM AND THE
v
1
4
4
6
6
10
11
14
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
24
iii
ATHENIAN ADDRESS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ANTI-IDOL POLEMIC IN THE LETTER OF ARISTEAS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ANTI-IDOL POLEMIC IN WISDOM OF SOLOMON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
GOD’S LACK OF NEED IN JOSEPHUS AND MACCABEES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
THE USE OF ARATUS BY PSEUDO-ARISTOBULUS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
RESURRECTION AS THE GIVING BACK OF LIFE AND BREATH IN
SECOND MACCABEES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
THE PROMINENCE OF THE BREATH OF LIFE IN OTHER HELLENISTIC
JEWISH TEXTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CONCLUSION TO PART III. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CONCLUSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
APPENDIX: PROMETHEUS, ATHENA AND PANDORA IN GRECO-ROMAN
AND OTHER LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I. PRIMARY SOURCES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
II. SOURCES ON LANGUAGE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
III. COMMENTARIES ON GENESIS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
IV. COMMENTARIES ON ISAIAH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
V. COMMENTARIES ON ACTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
VI. COMMENTARIES ON OTHER BIBLICAL TEXTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
VII. COMMENTARIES ON APOCRYPHA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
VIII. COMMENTARIES ON OTHER ANCIENT TEXTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
IX. SOURCES ON THE HEBREW BIBLE AND SEPTUAGINT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
25
26
29
33
35
36
39
42
44
47
51
51
54
55
55
56
57
58
59
60
iv
X. SOURCES ON EARLY JUDAISM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
XI. SOURCES ON THE NEW TESTAMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
XII. SOURCES ON GRECO-ROMAN AND JEWISH BACKGROUNDS . . . . . . . . .
XIII. SOURCES ON GRECO-ROMAN MYTHOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
XIV. SOURCES ON GRECO-ROMAN PHILOSOPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
XV. SOURCES ON ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN MYTHOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
XVI. SOURCES ON BIBLICAL ANTHROPOLOGY AND PNEUMATOLOGY. . . .
INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
INDEX OF ANCIENT SOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
61
63
66
67
68
68
69
70
71
v
ABBREVIATIONS
AB Anchor Bible
ACCS Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture
AJA American Journal of Archaeology
AnBib Analecta biblica
Arch Archaeology
ASNU Acta seminarii neotestamentici upsaliensis
BA Biblical Archaeologist
BAFCS Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting
BCOTWP Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms
BDB Brown, Francis, Samuel Rolles Driver and Charles Augustus Briggs. Hebrew
and English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1974.
BEC Biblical Encounters Series
BFCT Beiträge zur evangelischen Theologie
BST Bible Speaks Today
BTCB Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible
CA Christianisme Antique
CBC Cambridge Bible Commentary on the New English Bible
CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly
CEJL Commentaries on Early Jewish Literature
ColBC Collegeville Bible Commentary
CTSRR College Theology Society Resources in Religion
CUANTS Catholic University of America, New Testament Studies
DATD Das Alte Testament Deutsch
EC Epworth Commentaries
ESV English Standard Version
FCBS Fortress Classics in Biblical Studies
FGrHist Jacoby, F. Die Fragmente der Griechischen Historiker. Leiden: Brill, 1958.
GLAJJ Stern, Menahem, trans. From Tacitus to Simplicius. Vol. 2 of Greek and Latin
Authors on Jews and Judaism. Jerusalem: The Israel Academy of Sciences and
Humanities, 1980.
HNT Handbuch Zum Neuen Testament
HTR Harvard Theological Review
HTS Harvard Theological Studies
HRS How to Read Series
vi
HSCP Harvard Studies in Classical Philology
HuSt Humanistic Studies
ICC International Critical Commentary
Int Interpretation
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JETS Journal of Evangelical Theological Study
JPSTC Jewish Publication Society Torah Commentary
JQR Jewish Quarterly Review
JQRMS Jewish Quarterly Review Monograph Series
JSBLE Journal of the Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis
JSJSup Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman
Periods: Supplement Series
JSNT Journal for the Study of the New Testament
JSNTSup Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series
JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament
JTS Journal of Theological Studies
JWCI Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes
Lat Latomus
LCL Loeb Classical Library
LN Louw, Johannes P., and Eugene Albert Nida. Greek-English Lexicon of the
New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains. Electronic Edition of the 2nd ed.
New York: United Bible Societies, 1996.
LSTS Library of Second Temple Studies
MS Mission Studies
NAC New American Commentary
NCV New Century Version
NIB New Interpreter’s Bible
NICNT New International Commentary on the New Testament
NICOT New International Commentary on the Old Testament
NIV New International Version
NovT Novum Testamentum
NRSV New Revised Standard Version
NTT New Testament Theology
OTL Old Testament Library
OTM Old Testament Message
vii
PAI ΠΑΙΔΕΙΑ: Commentaries on the New Testament
PACS Philo of Alexandria Commentary Series
PNTC Pillar New Testament Commentary
Read Readings: A New Biblical Commentary
SBLEJL Society of Biblical Literature Early Judaism and Its Literature
SBLSP Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers
SCS Septuagint Commentary Series
SSC Social-Science Commentary
SVTP Studia in Veteris Testaemnti Pseudepigrapha
TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by Gerhard Kittel,
Geoffrey W. Bromiley and Gerhard Friedrich. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1964.
TDOT Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Edited by G. Johannes
Botternweck, Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry. Translated by
Douglas W. Stott. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999.
TNTC Tyndale New Testament Commentaries
TynBul Tyndale Bulletin
VC Vigiliae Christianae
WAS Wilson Authors Series
WBC Word Biblical Commentary
WUNT Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament
INTRODUCTION
In a recent review of John R. Levison’s Filled with the Spirit,1 Frank D. Macchia
argues that Levison has “unnecessarily widened the gap between the pneumatologies of
the two Testaments.”2 In Levison’s analysis, the Old Testament conceives of spirit as
inherent to human life, present from birth and closely tied with wisdom, knowledge and
learning. In the New Testament, spirit is associated with faith in Christ rather than
universal human vitality, leading Levison to argue for a substantial discontinuity
between the notion of spirit filling in the Old and New Testaments.3 Macchia, while
generally affirming of the book, argues that there are significant points of
pneumatological continuity between the testaments which Levison overlooks, including
Paul’s speech to the Athenians in Acts 17:22-31. He finds expressed in this discourse the
journeys of scattered peoples, inspired and influenced by the spirit of a God who is “not
far from each one of us” (Acts 17:27), and proposes that this text, which is mentioned in
Filled with the Spirit only in a passing footnote, deserves thorough exegetical
consideration in light of Levison’s work.4 Macchia touches on this same connection
1 John R. Levison, Filled with the Spirit (Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2009).
2 Frank D. Macchia, “The Spirit of Life and the Spirit of Immortality: An Appreciative Review of
Levison's Filled with the Spirit,” Pneuma 33.1 (2011): 69.
3 Macchia, “Spirit of Life,” 71.
4 Macchia, “Spirit of Life,” 75.
2
briefly in his recent book Justified in the Spirit, in which he puts more focus squarely on
Acts 17:28 – “in [God] we live and move and have our being.”5
While Paul cites Scripture frequently in his speeches, he typically does so in the
context of the synagogue, temple, or in front of someone familiar with Judaism.6 In
Athens only passing mention is made of the synagogue (17:17), and Paul’s speech is
delivered to the “men of Athens” (ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι; 17:22), including Epicurean and
Stoic philosophers in particular (17:18). While we would readily expect Paul to use
Scripture when teaching in the synagogue, we might wonder what the point would be
of doing so before a pure Greek audience, to whom Scripture is of no consequence. Paul
makes no direct reference to any Bible verse or any aspect of the history of Israel in his
Athenian speech,7 which would seem to support a reading of this text as a purely Greek
appeal to a purely Greek audience, where Paul need not bother to import anything
Jewish in order to communicate the gospel of Jesus. Further, Paul does make direct
reference to the Athenians’ “own poets” (17:28), which is unparalleled in Acts. In fact,
the very phrase which is so central to Macchia’s interpretation, “In him we live and
5 Frank D. Macchia, Justified in the Spirit: Creation, Redemption, and the Triune God (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2010), 33, 121, 197.
6 Acts 9:20-22; 13:14-47; 17:2-3, 10-11; 18:5; 28:23-28. Even Agrippa is said to be “familiar with all
the customs and controversies of the Jews” (26:3; see 26:1-29). The speech in Lystra (14:15-17) is
the only other place where Paul could be found to allude to Scripture in a pagan context, though
we might also consider that Paul and Silas “spoke the word of the Lord” to the jailer and his
household (16:32).
7 Beverly R. Gaventa, “Traditions in Conversation and Collision: Reflections on Multiculturalism
in the Acts of the Apostles,” Making Room at the Table: An Invitation to Multicultural Worship (ed.
Brian K. Blount and Leonora Tubbs Tisdale; Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001),
32.
3
move and have our being” (17:28), is often attributed to a Greek poet (on which see
below), and does not linguistically resemble anything in the Hebrew Bible. The
Athenian address is thoroughly oriented around the concerns of its pagan Greek
audience. Can we really expect to find that it also contains as a central idea the biblical
concept of a universal spirit of life?
The purpose of this essay is to demonstrate that Paul’s speech to the Athenians in
Acts 17:22-31 does include, contrary to expectation, biblical allusions, as well as concepts
and turns of phrase that bear a strong resemblance to those of other Hellenistic Jewish
texts, especially those related to the breath of life. Part I will argue that Paul’s address
contains biblical allusions, and that Isaiah 42:5 in particular is a key intertext for this
passage. Part II will demonstrate that, while there are points of contact between Paul’s
address and extant Greco-Roman texts, many such connections are qualified by
fundamental differences from Paul’s speech. Finally, part III will argue that Paul’s
address includes elements consistent with Hellenistic Jewish texts, and that these
connections are more congenial to Paul’s address than many of the Greco-Roman
connections. Even when Paul addresses a pagan Greek audience with no biblical or
Jewish knowledge, and even when he goes out of his way to appeal to Greco-Roman
poetry and religious observance, he is still found to do so in a way that is true both to
Scripture and to Jewish idiom.
4
PART I: BIBLICAL ALLUSIONS IN THE ATHENIAN ADDRESS
Macchia’s basic contention regarding Acts 17:22-31 is that the text reflects an Old
Testament pneumatology of spirit as inherent to human life.8 He cites Genesis 2:7 as
archetypical of the spirit of life,9 and Levison begins his exploration of Spirit-filling in
Israelite literature with the same verse,10 so we will begin by considering Genesis 2:7 as
an intertext for Acts 17:24ff.
THE GIVING OF LIFE IN GENESIS
Commentators often find in Acts 17:25 an allusion to Genesis 2:7,11 where God
forms the first human from the ground and “[breathes] into his nostrils the breath of life
(LXX ἐνεφύσησεν εἰς τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ πνοὴν ζωῆς),” making him a “living being
(ψυχὴν ζῶσαν).”12 Πνοή, which occurs in the New Testament only here and in Acts
8 Macchia, “Spirit of Life,” 75.
9 Macchia, “Spirit of Life,” 71.
10 Levison, Filled, 14ff.
11 Bertil Ga rtner, The Areopagus Speech and Natural Revelation (trans. Carolyn Hannay King; ASNU
21; Uppsala: Almquist & Wiskells, 1955), 198; Hans Conzelmann, Acts of the Apostles (trans. James
Limburg, A. Thomas Kraabel, and Donald H. Juel; ed. Eldon Jay Epp and Christopher R.
Matthews; Herm; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987; trans. from Die Apostelgeschiche; verbesserte
Auflage, 1972; reprint of Die Apostelgeschiche, Tübingen, J.C.B. Mohr, 1963), 142; I. Howard
Marshall, The Acts of the Apostles (TNTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 287; C. K. Barrett, A
Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles (vol. 2; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998),
841; Anthony B. Robinson and Robert W. Wall, Called to be Church: The Book of Acts for a New Day
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006), 217.
12 For our purposes, the MT does not differ substantially from LXX.
5
2:2,13 appears frequently in the Septuagint, usually as a translation of 14,נשמה and often in
parallel with πνεῦμα/15.רוח Genesis 2:7 is the first instance of πνοή in the Septuagint,
and is prototypical of a series of texts which reflect a notion of breath as animating
principle – the difference between a living creature and dust.16
The combination of creation (Acts 17:24), God’s giving of ζωή and πνοή (Acts
17:25) and the descent of all human nations from one individual (17:26) naturally evokes
the Adamic narrative of Genesis 2:4ff for Christian readers,17 but the echo must be seen
as primarily conceptual, since the only linguistic commonalities are the use of ζωή and
πνοή, the former of which is quite common in the Septuagint, New Testament, and
Hellenistic literature.18 The lack of linguistic connection between Acts 17 and Genesis 2:7
raises the question of whether a closer parallel can be found with another biblical text.
13 In Acts 2:2, the disciples of Jesus hear the sound of a rushing wind (πνοή), which ultimately
fills the house in which they are seated.
14 Gen 2:7; 7:22; 2 Sam 22:16; 1 Kgs 15:29; Ps 150:6; Prov 20:27; Job 26:4; 27:3; 32:8; 33:4; 37:10; Isa
42:5; 57:16. It translates רוח in Prov 1:23; 11:13; Isa 38:16; Ezek 13:13, נפש in Prov 24:12, and פרץ in 2
Esd 16:1.
15 Job 4:9; 27:3; 32:8; 33:4; 34:14; Isa 42:5; 57:16.
16 Gen 2:7; 7:22; Job 27:3; 32:8; 33:4; 37:10; Isa 42:5. Other texts use πνεῦμα in the same way: Gen
6:3; Ps 51:10-12; 104:29-30; Job 12:10; Eccl 3:19-21; 12:7.
17 Paul Schubert, “The Place of the Areopagus Speech in the Composition of Acts," Transitions in
Biblical Scholarship (ed. Go sta W. Ahlstro m and John C. Rylaarsdam; Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1968), 254.
18 An extensive sampling of the usage of ζωή can be found in Georg Bertram, Rudolph Bultmann
and Gerhard von Rad, “ζάω, ζωή (βιόω, βίος), ἀναζάω, ζῷον, ζωογονέω, ζωοποιέω,” TDNT
2:832-72. It is also worth noting that πνοιή (an earlier form of πνοή; Friedrich Baumgärtel,
Werner Bieder, Hermann Kleinknecht, Eduard Schweizer and Erik Sjöberg, "πνεῦμα,
πνευματικός, πνέω, ἐμπνέω, πνοή, ἐκπνέω, θεόπνευστος," TDNT 6:334.) is used of Zeus in a
known Orphic hymn: “Ζεὺς πνοιὴ πάντων, Ζεὺς ἀκαμάτου πυρὸς ὁρμή” (Otto Kern, Orphicum
6
ISAIAH AND PAUL
THE GIVING OF LIFE IN ISAIAH
A comparison of language shows that a far stronger linguistic similarity exists
between Acts 17 and Isaiah 42:5 than between Acts 17 and Genesis 2:7. Within the first
Isaianic servant song (42:1-9), the LORD is spoken of as creator of the world and
sustainer of all life that walks upon the earth. This verse bears a strong resemblance to
Paul’s description of God in his speech to the Athenians, as can best be seen through a
side-by-side comparison of Acts 17:24-25 and LXX Isaiah 42:5:19
A
B
C
D
LXX Isa 42:5
οὕτως λέγει κύριος
Thus says the Lord,
ὁ θεὸς ὁ ποιήσας
the God who made
τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ πήξας αὐτόν,
heaven and pitched it;
ὁ στερεώσας τὴν γῆν
who established the earth
καὶ τὰ ἐν αὐτῇ
and the things in it
B
C’
D
C
A
Acts 17:24-25
ὁ θεὸς ὁ ποιήσας
The God who made
τὸν κόσμον
the world
καὶ πάντα τὰ ἐν αὐτῷ,
and all the things in it,
οὗτος οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς
this one, of heaven and earth
ὑπάρχων κύριος …
being Lord …
Framenta (Berlin: Berolini Arud Weidmannos, 1963), §21a). The similarity between πνοιὴ
πάντων and ζωὴν καὶ πνοὴν καὶ τὰ πάντα (Acts 17:25) further calls into question the echo of
Genesis 2:7 in the same verse, since a comparable linguistic parallel can be found in a Hellenistic
text.
19 My translation is at times awkward in order to preserve the parallelism of specific phrases.
7
E
καὶ διδοὺς πνοὴν τῷ λαῷ τῷ ἐπʼ
αὐτῆς
and gives breath to the people who
(are) upon it
καὶ πνεῦμα τοῖς πατοῦσιν αὐτήν,
and spirit to those who walk on it
E
αὐτὸς διδοὺς πᾶσι ζωὴν καὶ πνοὴν
καὶ τὰ πάντα·
he himself gives to all life and breath
and all things
Though there are a number of clear similarities between these two texts, some
differences are worth noting. The inclusion of πᾶς words (part D and E above) gives the
passage a more universal tone, and is consistent with the overall frequency of πᾶς
words in Paul’s speech.20 Paul’s use of κύριος in part A suits the purposes of Paul’s
polemic against idols (on which see below), as God is not only the maker but also the
Lord of heaven and earth.21 Τὸν κόσμον is seldom used to refer to the whole of creation
in the Septuagint translations of Hebrew Bible texts,22 but is used frequently in this way
within the Hellenistic Septuagint texts,23 so its presence in Paul’s speech (C’) is perfectly
consistent with the Hellenistic Jewish textual tradition.24
20 Forms of πᾶς are used eight times in the ten-verse speech (17:22, 24, 25 (2), 26, 30 (2), 31), and
also in the preceding verse (17:21).
21 Cf. Ernst Haenchen, The Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary (Philadelphia: Westminster Press,
1971), 522.
22 The exception would be LXX Gen 2:1 and perhaps Prov 17:6. Κόσμος in LXX typically refers to
adornment (e.g. Ex 33:5f; Esth 4:17; Isa 3:18ff) or heavenly bodies (e.g. Deut 4:19; Isa 13:10).
23 See e.g. 2 Macc 7:9; Wis 7:17; cf. Odes 12:2.
24 Marshall, Acts, 287.
8
The servant song includes synonymous parallelism between “gives breath to the
people who (are) upon it (διδοὺς πνοὴν τῷ λαῷ τῷ ἐπʼ αὐτῆς)” and “spirit to those
who walk on it (πνεῦμα τοῖς πατοῦσιν αὐτήν)” (E) where Paul’s speech has the single
assertion that God “gives to all life and breath and all things (αὐτὸς διδοὺς πᾶσι ζωὴν
καὶ πνοὴν καὶ τὰ πάντα).” The verb (διδοὺς) is the same in both verses, and in both
πνοὴν is one of the objects, but the synonymous indirect objects in Isaiah are replaced
by “all (πᾶσι),” which may function to avoid the covenantal nuance of τῷ λαῷ, or may
simply serve as a shorter paraphrase.25 Πνεῦμα is not present in Paul’s speech, while
ζωή and τὰ πάντα are included. The reason for this is less clear, and we will need to
return to it below.
Isaiah 42:5 lists various creation events in a manner that matches the order of
Genesis 1.26 God “made heaven and pitched it” (Gen 1:6-8), “established the earth” (Gen
1:9-13), and “the things in it” (Gen 1:20-25) including “the people…who walk on it” (Gen
1:26-27). While this is by no means a comprehensive account of Genesis 1, it is fair to say
that Isaiah is congenial to Genesis 1:1-2:4. In light of this, the statement that God “gives
breath to the people upon [the earth] and spirit to those who walk in it” can be read as
25 Examples of the use of λαός to speak of Israel in Acts include 2:47; 6:8; 13:17; cf. Luke 24:19;
Gaventa, Acts, 218; Conzelmann, Acts, 117. If πᾶσι is taken as a way to avoid the covenantal
nuance of τῷ λαῷ, then the difference is appropriate in light of Paul’s audience and the universal
nature of his speech. If it is taken as a simple paraphrase or the omission of parallelism, then it is
of little consequence for our purposes.
26 Joseph Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40-55 (AB; New York: Doubleday, 2002), ad. loc.
9
reminiscent of the giving of breath in Genesis 2:7.27 While Genesis 2 speaks only of the
in-breathing of Adam, Genesis 6:3, 17 and 7:22 confirm that the breath of life is present
in all breathing creatures. The same concept of an animating breath of life is reflected in
various other texts where breath is associated with life, or where the taking of breath is
associated with death (see Job 12:10; 27:3-4; 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30; 146:4; Eccl 3:19-
21; 12:7; cf. Ps 51:10-12[12-14]),28 so we can speak of a breath of life tradition in the
Hebrew Bible that is archetypically expressed in Genesis 2:7 and reflected in other texts,
including Isaiah 42:5.29 In light of this, while Genesis 2 does not specifically say that God
gives breath to the people living on the earth, Isaiah 42:5 can be seen as reminiscent of
the Adamic breath of life.
In spite of the aforementioned differences between Isaiah 42:5 and Acts 17:24-25,
the echo indicates the presence of a tradition pertaining to the Adamic breath of life in
Paul’s speech. God gives breath to all, creating and sustaining life on the face of the
earth. This is congenial to the later statement that in God “we live and move and are”
27 So Christopher R. Seitz, “The Book of Isaiah 40-66,” NIB 6:364. Note that while נשמת/πνοή is
used of the breath of life in LXX Gen 2:7, רוח/πνεῦμα is used of the same breath of life in Gen 6:17;
cf. Gen 6:3. MT Gen 7:22 combines the two with נשמת־רוח, though this is rendered simply as
πνεῦμα in LXX. Both terms can be used to speak of the animating breath of life in Genesis, so the
synonymous use of both terms in Isa 42:5 does not lessen the echo in any substantial way.
28 Levison discusses these texts in a similar light in Filled with the Spirit, 14-33.
29 Westermann points out that the creation and in-breathing of one man is not present in Isa 42:5,
but maintains that a bestowal of the breath of life on the human race is expressed; Claus
Westermann, Isaiah 40-66: A Commentary (trans. David M. G. Stalker; OTL; Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1969; trans. from Das Buch Jesaiah, 40-66; 1st ed.; DATD 19; Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966), 99.
10
(Acts 17:28),30 and serves Paul’s purposes in dispelling the perception that he is
proclaiming “foreign deities (ξένων δαιμονίων)” (Acts 17:18). The God who Paul
proclaims is unknown to the Athenians (17:23), but is not foreign, for God sustains their
lives and the lives of all who walk on the earth, and is “not far from each one of us”
(17:27).
ANTI-IDOL POLEMIC IN ISAIAH
An echo of the first Isaianic servant song is appropriate in Paul’s speech, in part
because of Paul’s polemic against idolatry. Paul arrives in Athens unexpectedly, and
while he waits for Silas and Timothy (Acts 17:15), his spirit is provoked within him
because Athens is full of idols (17:16). This leads him to argue in the synagogues and
the agora (17:17), and ultimately brings him to the Areopagus (17:22). In his address at
the Areopagus, Paul states that “God…does not live in shrines made by human hands”
(17:24), that God does not need service from humans (17:25), and that “we ought not to
think that the deity is like gold, or silver, or stone, an image formed by the art and
imagination of mortals” (17:29). There is a strong anti-idol theme throughout the
passage, and we can see how Paul’s portrait of God as creator of the world (17:24), giver
of breath (17:25), and progenitor of all human nations (17:26-29) essentially serves the
purposes of his anti-idol polemic. God does not live in shrines made by human hands
(χειροποιήτοις; 17:24b), but rather humans live in a world made by God (ὁ ποιήσας;
17:24a). God does not need any service from human hands (17:25a), but humans need
30 Cf. Macchia, “Spirit of Life,” 74-75.
11
God, who gives them life, breath, and everything (17:25b; cf. 17:28a). It is because we are
God’s offspring (17:28b-29a) that we should not suppose God is like an image formed by
the art and imagination of mortals (17:29b). While Paul says much about God’s creation
of the world and sustenance of human life, the primary telos of this material is his
argument that idol worship is ignorant (17:30a), and that the Athenians should repent
(17:30b).
Isaiah 40-48 represents a key anti-idol polemic of the Old Testament, within
which the first servant song (42:1-9) appears. Isaiah 42:1-4 speaks of Israel as the
LORD’s servant, upon whom God has put רוח (LXX πνεῦμα), in order to bring justice to
the nations and win their hope.31 Verse 42:5 introduces a commissioning statement from
the LORD to Israel, which includes bringing Gentiles from darkness to light (42:6-7),
rejecting idol worship (42:8), and making new things known (42:9). Paul’s use of Isaiah
42:5 should not be understood merely as the choice of an appropriately concise
summary of God’s creation and sustenance of life on earth, but as part of an appeal to
idolatrous people on behalf of the creator.
ISAIAH AND THE MISSION OF PAUL
The four so-called servant songs of Isaiah32 are of substantial importance to Luke-
Acts. Lukan texts regarding the ministry of Jesus often echo the servant songs,
31 MT is much more ambiguous about the identity of the servant, but Jacob and Israel are
specifically mentioned in LXX Is 42:1.
32 First song: Isa 42:1-9; second song: Isa 49:1-13; third song: Isa 50:4-9; fourth song: Isa 52:13-
53:12.
12
suggesting that Jesus is identified with the suffering servant,33 and especially the
servant’s call to be a light to the nations.34
The book of Acts also associates the servant songs with Paul’s mission. In Acts
13, Paul and Barnabas address Jews and Gentiles in Psidian Antioch, and identify their
mission to Gentiles with Isaiah 49:6:
[W]e are now turning to the Gentiles. For so the Lord has commanded us,
saying, ‘I have set you to be a light for the Gentiles (εἰς φῶς ἐθνῶν), so
that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.’ (Acts 13:46-47)
While Isaiah 49:6 is part of the second servant song and Isaiah 42:5 is part of the first,
both passages share a common call on the servant to be a light to the nations.35 While he
does not specifically quote from Isaiah, Paul later speaks of his mission to bring light to
the Gentiles again when giving an account of his conversion to King Agrippa in Acts 26.
Jesus tells Paul:
I will rescue you from your people and from the Gentiles (ἐθνῶν) —to
whom I am sending you to open their eyes so that they may turn from
darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may
receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by
faith in me. (Acts 26:17-18)
33 Lk 3:22; 9:35 and 23:35 echo Isa 42:1; Lk 11:22 and 22:37 echoes Isa 53:12.
34 Lk 2:30-32 echoes Isa 42:6; 49:6; Lk 1:79 may echo Isa 42:7. The account of Jesus’ life in Acts
further echoes the fourth servant song: Acts 3:13 echoes Isa 52:13 and Acts 9:32 echoes Isa 53:7-8.
35 Isa 42:6; 49:6. Note that ἔθνος can potentially be translated “nation” or “Gentile.” NRSV, for
instance, translates the word “Gentile” in Acts 13:46-48; 18:6; 26:23; 28:28, but translates it
“nation” in Acts 24:10, 17; 28:19. In LXX it typically translates the Hebrew גוי, (e.g. Gen 10:20; Ex
33:13; Esth 3:14) which has the corporate but not the individual meaning (i.e. “nation” but not
“Gentile”); BDB 156.
13
A few verses later, Paul claims that his message is simply a declaration of what Moses
and the prophets said would take place:
…that the Messiah must suffer, and that, by being the first to rise from
the dead, he would proclaim light both to our people and to the Gentiles
(ἔθνεσιν). (Acts 26:23)
Jesus is described as the suffering, anointed one (χριστός; cf. Isa 42:1-4) of the Lord, with
a mission to bring light to the nations. In this case, the light is also brought to Paul’s
people (i.e. Israel), and comes through Jesus’ distinction as the first to rise from the dead
(cf. Acts 17:31-32). Paul’s mission is to declare this message of Jesus’ resurrection to Jews
and Gentiles in order to bring about repentance (Acts 26:20), so again we see the
importance of the Isaianic servant songs to Paul’s identity and goals.36
In Romans 15:14-21, Paul speaks of his mission to the Gentiles by the grace of
God, and quotes specifically from Isaiah 52:15 (the fourth servant song):
I make it my ambition to proclaim the good news, not where Christ has
already been named, so that I do not build on someone else’s foundation,
but as it is written, “Those who have never been told of him shall see, and
those who have never heard of him shall understand.” (Romans 15:20-21)
While this text does not explicitly mention ἐθνῶν, this is the clear sense of “those
who have not been told,” both in Romans (15:16, 18) and Isaiah (52:15a). This
first Pauline epistle thus corroborates the importance of the servant songs to the
identity of the Pauline mission, and in particular the servant’s call to be light to
the nations.
36 The importance of Paul’s declaration of God to the nations is also reflected in Acts 9:15-16; 18:6;
21:19; 22:21; 28:28.
14
CONCLUSIONS ON ISAIAH AND PAUL
Acts 17:24-25 bears strong linguistic similarity to Isaiah 42:5, which is consistent
both with Paul’s anti-idol polemic and the overall portrait of Paul in Acts as a servant of
the LORD, sent as a light to the nations in the footsteps of Jesus. For these reasons it
should be seen as a strong intertext in the Pauline address to the Athenians.
In Paul’s address to Athens, the echo of Isaiah 42:5 is especially appropriate
because Paul is appealing to the nations at their intellectual center.37 Though the
Athenians would not be able to recognize the biblical allusion, the biblically-informed
reader of Acts finds that Paul’s appeal to Athens, and for that matter, the nature of his
purpose there, is rooted in biblical prophecy.
THE DESCENT OF MANY FROM ONE IN GENESIS
After describing God’s creation of the world in Acts 17:24-25, Paul says:
From one (ἑνός) [God] made all human nations to dwell upon the whole
face of the earth (ἐπὶ παντὸς προσώπου τῆς γῆς). (Acts 17:26a)
The descent of all humanity from one common ancestor naturally evokes the narrative
of Adam and Eve in Genesis 2-5. Eve was made from Adam (Gen 2:21-23), and is the
“mother of all living” (Gen 3:20), so Adam readily fits the description of the “one” from
whom all humanity was made. Likewise, the dwelling of human nations on the earth is
reminiscent of the divine commission for humans to “fill the earth” (Gen 1:28; 9:7), the
37 It is worth noting that Paul’s audience includes not only Athenian Greeks, but also “the
foreigners living there (οἱ ἐπιδημοῦντες ξένοι).” While the context of the speech is Athens, Paul
truly does address “the nations” through various intellectual representatives (Acts 17:21).
15
settling of humans in various lands (Gen 10) and their scattering “upon all the face of the
earth” (ἐπὶ προσώπου πάσης τῆς γῆς; Gen 11:4, 9).38 While Isaiah 42:5 makes a more
direct intertext for Acts 17:24-25 than does Genesis 2:7, the intertextuality between Acts
17:26 and Genesis complements the reference well in light of the resemblance between
Isaiah 42:5 and Genesis 1-2.
CHILDREN OF GOD IN THE HEBREW BIBLE
The Hebrew Bible occasionally uses familial language to express the relationship
between God and Israel. In Exodus, the LORD tells Pharaoh to let Israel go out into the
desert because “Israel is my firstborn son” (4:22). Hosea likewise says:
When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.
(Hos 11:1)
Both texts speak of Israel collectively as one child of God, in contexts that emphasize
mutual faithfulness between both parties.
Amos speaks of Israel as “the whole family that [the LORD] brought up out of
the land of Egypt” (Amos 3:1). The LORD tells them, “You only have I known of all the
families of the earth” (3:2). For Amos, Israel is not one collective child of God, but rather
a family uniquely elected by God.
While Exodus, Hosea and Amos use familial language, the notion of a familial
relationship between God and Israel serves to set Israel apart from all other peoples.39
38 The phrase “face of the earth (πρόσωπος τῆς γῆς)” appears many times in Genesis, often
pertaining to the inhabited earth as a whole: 2:6; 4:14; 6:7; 7:4, 23; 8:8, 9, 13; 11:4, 8, 9; 19:28; 41:56.
39 Peterson identifies these texts, along with Rom 9:4 and Gal 4:1-5, as examples of familial
language used to express Israel’s distinctive relationship with God; David Peterson, The Acts of
16
Paul’s claim that “we also are [God’s] children” (Acts 17:28b) actually serves the
opposite purpose, unifying all nations in their common descent from God (17:26). There
is a fair amount of tension, then, between the familial language of the Hebrew Scriptures
and Paul’s claims about God’s nearness to all humans (17:27).
CONCLUSION TO PART I
While Genesis 2:7 bears similarity to Acts 17:24-25, Isaiah 42:5 serves as a better
intertext because of linguistic connections, consistency in the context of anti-idol
polemic, and the importance of the Isaianic servant songs to the mission of Paul in Acts
and his letters. The text expresses God’s creation of the world and the giving of breath
to all who live on the earth, and thus serves as a pneumatological point of continuity
between the Old and New Testaments, along the lines suggested by Macchia, though
with respect to a text he does not explicitly mention: Isaiah 40-48. While Levison
accurately identifies Isaiah 42:1ff as an example of a special spiritual anointing,40 he
neglects to address the presence of the universal, creational pneumatology in Isaiah 42:5,
which may in turn have led him to give more attention to Acts 17:24-25 as a point of
pneumatological continuity between the testaments.
Paul’s description of the descent of all human nations from one ancestor (Acts
17:26) readily recalls the expansion of human settlement in Genesis 1-11, which
the Apostles (PNTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 500. Rom 9:4 says that God’s adoption
belongs to Israel. In Gal 4:1-5 Paul says that “we” received adoption as God’s children when the
fullness of time had come.
40 Levison, Filled, 44, 242, 246.
17
complements the creational pneumatology of Isaiah. While this connection is consistent
with Macchia’s argument for continuity between the testaments, we must also note the
lack of similarity between the Hebrew Bible and Paul’s claim that all humans are God’s
children (17:28). While Paul’s speech contains biblical elements, this particular element
cannot be fully attributed to Old Testament thought.
PART II: POINTS OF CONTACT BETWEEN HELLENISM AND THE ATHENIAN
ADDRESS
Writing in 1939, Martin Dibelius called Paul’s Athenian address “as alien to the
New Testament…as it is familiar to Hellenistic, particularly Stoic, philosophy.”41 While
Dibelius’ claim has since been seriously challenged by other scholars,42 it serves to
underscore the reality that Paul speech in Athens is particularly oriented around the
interests of its pagan Greek audience in a way that other speeches in Acts are typically
not.43 As we might expect, there are significant points of contact between known
Hellenistic texts and Paul’s speech.
41 Martin Dibelius, Studies in the Acts of the Apostles (ed. Heinrich Greeven; trans. Mary Ling;
London: SCM Press, 1956; trans. from Aufsätze Zur Apostelgeschichte; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and
Ruprecht, 1956), 63.
42 For a description of the most relevant sources, see Haenchen, Acts, 527-529.
43 Paul’s speech at Lystra in Acts 14:15-17 is routinely identified as a passage similar to Acts 17:22-
31 in its orientation around a pagan rather than Jewish audience. E.g. Dibelius, Studies, 63.
18
THE GIVING OF LIFE IN OVID
Ovid’s Metamorphoses bears some resemblance to the giving of life and breath by
God in Acts 17:25b. Deucalion, son of the Titan Prometheus, survives a flood that wipes
out all human life. He cries out:
Oh, would that by my father’s arts I might restore the nations, and pour
(infundere) – as he did – life (animas) into the moulded clay. (Metam. 1.363-
64)
Prometheus, who first formed humanity from earth and water (1.76-86), is said to have
poured life into the first humans, presumably making them alive. The function of
infusing anima approximates the breath of life – it is an animating principle that makes
the difference between clay and a living human being. However, there are a few
noteworthy differences between the giving of life in Ovid and the giving of life in Acts
17:25. While it is the creator God who gives life in Paul’s speech, it is Prometheus – a
Titan rather than a proper god – who does the animating in Ovid. Prometheus’ giving
of life is also a one-time occurrence. The event of which Deucalion speaks is in the past,
and he wishes it could be repeated in his present situation. On the other hand, the
present participle διδοὺς in Acts 17:25b suggests a perpetual giving. God does not cease
to give life and breath any more than God ceases from being Lord (ὑπάρχων κύριος;
Acts 17:25a). While there are other known examples of the giving of life in Greco-
Roman mythology,44 they occur in texts dated to the second century or later,45 so we will
44 Pseudo-Hyginus, Fab. 142; Lucian, Lit. Prom. 3; cf. Etym. Mag. (s.v. Ἰκόνιον); Pseudo-Lactantius,
Metam.
19
not give them consideration here as a background for Acts. This leaves us with one very
imperfect match between Acts 17:25 and Greco-Roman mythology.
THE DESCENT OF MANY FROM ONE IN THE MYTHOLOGY OF PANDORA AND
PROMETHEUS
Paul’s description of God’s making of all nations from one ancestor (Acts 17:26),
while it has a clear biblical referent in Adam, does not have as clear an equivalent in
Greco-Roman mythology. The closest figure would be Pandora, the first woman from
whom all other women are descended (Hesiod, Theog., 590). However, Hesiod is clear
that there was already a race of men living on the earth when Pandora was made (Theog.
592), so Pandora does not represent a progenitrix for all humanity, but rather the
introduction of women into human existence. Likewise, in Pseudo-Apollodorus and
Pseudo-Hyginus, it is humans, not a human, who are created from water and earth (Lib.
1.7.1; Fab. 142). Later texts about human creation confirm that Greco-Roman mythology
typically conceives of the creation of a race of people rather than one common ancestor.46
The initial formation of humanity in Ovid’s Metamorphoses (1.76-86) refers to the
establishment of “human” in the singular (homo – Metam. 1.78; homini – Metam. 1.85), but
it is ambiguous whether the text refers to the creation of a single initial human or the
45 More detail on the development of mythology related to Prometheus, Athena and Pandora can
be found in the appendix.
46 Cf. Lucian, Lit. Prom. 3; Prom. on Cauc. 13; Et. Mag. (s.v. Ἰκόνιον). Cf. also the re-creation the
human race after Deucalion’s flood in Ovid, Metam. 1.395-415.
20
initiation of humanity.47 The text certainly does not speak explicitly of the descent of all
other people from one common ancestor, and thus is only marginally related to Acts
17:26, where it is the descent of the various nations from one person that receives focus.
THE ANTI-TEMPLE AND ANTI-IDOL TEACHING OF THE STOICS
Paul states that God “does not live in temples made by human hands” (Acts
17:25), an idea which has precedent in Stoic and other Hellenistic philosophy.48 While
none of Zeno’s writings survive, Diogenes Laertius says that Zeno’s Republic “prohibits
the building of temples, law courts and gymnasia” (DL 7.33). Diogenes does not explain
Zeno’s reasoning, but some insight is available through Plutarch, who criticizes Stoics
for affirming Zeno’s teaching yet participating in aspects of the temple cult anyway.
[I]t is a doctrine of Zeno’s not to build temples of the gods, because a
temple not worth much is not sacred and no work of builders or
mechanics is worth much. (Mor. 1034B=SVF 1.264)
A fragment of Seneca expresses a similar thought regarding idols:
They supplicate them with bended knee…and while they look up to these
so much they contemn the laborers who made them. (Frg. 120=Lactantius,
Div. Inst. 2.2.14)
47 Miller translates these as “man” in the sense of humanity; Frank J. Miller, trans. Metamorphoses
(LCL; London: W. Heinemann, 1916), 9.
48 We will not be able to cover all relevant Hellenistic texts here, but have chosen several Stoic
texts to serve as an example. A more comprehensive handling of relevant texts can be found in
Dibelius, Studies, 41-45 and Ga rtner, Natural Revelation, 203-228.
21
While Zeno denies the value of temples, Seneca denies the value of idols.49 Both base
their position on a low estimation of the value of the human producers of the idols,
which bears some resemblance to Paul’s claim that the creator God does not dwell in
temples made by human hands. It should not surprise us that Paul would say things
consistent with Stoic thought, since his audience includes Stoic philosophers (Acts 17:18)
and he quotes from Aratus in Acts 17:28. However, we may note that Paul’s anti-idol
polemic has a significant difference in that it does not cite human inferiority, but rather
divine superiority as justification. For Paul, God’s not dwelling in structures made by
humans is predicated on humans’ dwelling in a world made by God.
GOD’S LACK OF NEED IN SENECA
Paul says in Acts 17:25a that God is “[not] served by human hands, as though he
needed anything (προσδεόμενός τινος).” Dibelius calls God’s lack of need “a departure
from Old Testament ways of thought,”50 since the Hebrew Bible does not contain any
explicit mention of the idea.51 The statement does, however, bear a strong resemblance
to a passage from one of Seneca’s epistles:52
49 Of course, both texts come through non-Stoic authors, and we cannot be certain that they
portray the Stoics’ positions accurately. This is especially true of Plutarch, who summarizes
rather than quotes.
50 Dibelius, Studies, 42.
51 Cf. Richard I. Pervo, Acts: A Commentary (ed. Harold W. Attridge; Herm.; Minneapolis: Fortress
Press, 2009), 435.
52 Again, we will not be able to cover the notion of divine self-sufficiency in Hellenistic writings
comprehensively, but will use Seneca as an example. For a more thorough handling of relevant
texts, see Dibelius, Studies, 41-45 and Ga rtner, Natural Revelation, 203-228.
22
God seeks no servants. Of course not; he himself does service to
humankind, everywhere and to all he is at hand to help. (Ep. mor. 95.48)
The statements made by Paul and Seneca sound similar, but there are some key
differences to how they function within their larger context. While Paul’s statement
appears in the context of creation material (17:24, 26), Seneca does not mention any sort
of creation, describing instead God’s sovereign involvement in the lives of mortals (Ep.
mor. 95.48-49). While Paul presents a clearly monotheistic notion of God, Seneca
switches between speaking of “God (deus)” and “gods (deos),” evidently regarding
multiple deities. While Paul’s aim is to refute idolatry, Seneca seeks to discourage
unnecessary cultic practices – such as bringing mirrors to Juno (Ep. mor. 95.48) – since
the gods are sufficiently worshipped through reverence and imitation (Ep. mor. 95.50).
Seneca uses the sovereignty of the gods to refute the notion that the gods need to be
served by mortals, while Paul uses the claim that God is creator and ruler of heaven and
earth to show that humans should not craft shrines and idols at all. As with our
examples of Stoic anti-idol teaching, Paul claim about God’s lack of need proceeds from
God’s creation of the world and sustenance of life within it.
CHILDREN OF GOD IN ARATUS AND CLEANTHES
After stating in Acts 17:27 that God is “not far (μάκραν) from each one of us,”53
Paul justifies his claim with the citation of Hellenistic poets: “as even some of your own
53 The notion of the nearness of God (and even that God is “not far”) has biblical, Hellenistic
Jewish and Stoic precedent. Cf. Isa 55:6; Ps 145:18; Philo, Spec. Leg. 1.30-31 (quoting Deut 4:4);
Josephus, Ant. 8.4.2; Seneca, Ep. mor. 41:1; 95.47-50. Pervo, Acts, 434, 438.
23
poets have said, ‘For we too are his offspring.’”54 This is a direct quotation from the
Aratus of Soli, a disciple of the Stoic Zeno.55 Paul’s quotation is part of a longer proem
to Aratus’ Phaenomena, which is generally congenial to the Athenian address:
Let us begin with Zeus, whom we men never leave unspoken. Filled with
Zeus are all highways and all meeting-places of people, filled are the sea
and harbours; in all circumstances we are all dependent on Zeus. For we
are also his children (τοῦ γὰρ καὶ γένος εἰμέν), and he benignly gives
helpful signs to men, and rouses people to work, reminding them of their
livelihood (βιότοιο), tells when the soil is best for oxen and mattocks, and
tells when the seasons (ὧραι) are right both for planting trees and for
sowing every kind of seed. (Phaenomena 1-9)
Aratus speaks of Zeus as present in all things, and people as dependent on him. The
notion that humans are children of Zeus, expressed in verse five (and quoted by Paul),
54 This is actually preceded in Acts 17:28a by the phrase, “In him we live and move and have our
being (ἐν αὐτῷ γὰρ ζῶμεν καὶ κινούμεθα καὶ ἐσμέν),” and while this text is important to
Macchia’s reading (Justified, 33, 121, 197), its background is not completely clear. It has often been
taken as a quotation of a lost text from Epimenides of Crete (J. Rendel Harris, “A Further Note on
the Cretans,” The Expositor 7.16 (April, 1907): 332-37; Kirsopp Lake and Henry J. Cadbury, English
Translation and Commentary (vol. 4; of The Beginnings of Christianity: Part I: The Acts of the Apostles;
ed. Foakes Jackson and Kirsopp Lake; London: Macmillan and Co., LTD, 1933), 217; Marshall,
Acts, 289), but much Acts scholarship does not accept this claim based on a lack of hard evidence
(John B. Polhill, Acts (NAC 26; Nashville: Broadman Press, 1992), 375-76; Darrell L. Bock, Acts
(Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 568. Dibelius accepted this claim in his 1939 essay but
later renounced it; Studies, 18, 50). The text does not have a recognized biblical precedent, but the
ἐν is generally thought to be instrumental (Robert W. Wall, "Acts," NIB 10 (Nashville, TN:
Abingdon, 2001), 247; Pervo, Acts, 438), in which case the statement is consistent in character with
the quotation from Aratus (see below), having to do with God’s provision for and sustenance of
human life.
55 Douglas Kidd, Aratus: Phaenomena (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 3.
24
has everything to do with the reliance of mortals on Zeus’s assistance in the process of
obtaining livelihood (βιός).56
The phrase Paul uses also closely resembles a statement in Cleanthes’ Hymn to
Zeus, which says: “from you we have our being” (ἐκ σοῦ γὰρ γένος ἐσμέν; Hymn to
Zeus 4=Clement, Strob. Ecl. 1.1.12). In Cleanthes’ poem, humans are again referred to as
the offspring of Zeus, but this time the sense is much stronger that Zeus is the origin of
human life as active principle in the world (φύσεως ἀρχηγέ; 2), of whom humans are an
image (μίμημα; 4). Both Aratus’ and Cleanthes’ texts have relevance for Paul’s
statements about the nearness of God (17:26-27), though they are not in their original
contexts consistent with Paul’s appeal to God’s identity as creator of the world (17:24-
26a).
CONCLUSION TO PART II
The mythology of Prometheus includes the formation and enlivening of the
earliest humans as a one-time occurrence rather than as an ongoing provision (Ovid,
Metam. 1.363-64). All women are said to be descended from Pandora (Hesiod, Theog.,
590), but she is not the progenitor of all humanity, since men already populated the
earth (Theog. 592). Though these mythological texts bears some resemblance to the
giving of life in Acts 17:25 and the descent of all humans from one ancestor in Acts 17:26,
56 Kidd (Aratus, 161) states that Zeus is called father because Zeus is the origin of life, but this
does not seem to be supported by the text. Perhaps more accurately, Zeus’ fatherhood is an
expression of the idea that Zeus is the origin of life, but life in the sense of βιός rather than ζωή.
LN 260, 505, 558.
25
we must conclude that Isaiah 42:5 and Genesis 1-11 make for much closer precedents,
both linguistically and conceptually.
While the Stoic teachings of Zeno and Seneca bear resemblance to Paul’s claims
that God is not served by human hands, does not live in structures, and is not like an
idol (Acts 17:24b-25a, 29), their claims are not anchored in God’s identity as creator of
the world, and do not serve the same purposes. While we must recognize with both
Dibelius and Ga rtner that Paul’s claims along these lines have Hellenistic philosophical
background,57 we should also be mindful that God’s identity as creator is central to
Paul’s discourse in a way that is not reflected in the Stoic texts we have considered.
The most direct connection between Paul’s address and known Hellenistic
literature is Aratus’ Phaenomena, from which Paul quotes explicitly (Acts 17:28b=Phaen.
5). Paul’s use of familial language to express God’s nearness to all people does seem to
be rooted in Hellenistic rather than Old Testament thought, though Paul links this to
God’s identity as creator where Aratus does not.
PART III: POINTS OF CONTACT BETWEEN HELLENISTIC JUDAISM AND THE
ATHENIAN ADDRESS
While there are significant points of contact between Acts 17 and various Greco-
Roman texts, there are a number of Hellenistic Jewish texts which match elements of the
passage even more closely than non-Jewish texts, and at times even more closely than
the relevant Old Testament texts.
57 Dibelius, Studies, 42; Ga rtner, Natural Revelation, 218.
26
ANTI-IDOL POLEMIC IN THE LETTER OF ARISTEAS
While Isaiah 42:5 is strongly echoed in Acts 17:24-25, and while the intertext is
appropriate in light of the anti-idol polemic of both texts, it should be noted that there is
a key difference between these passages. While Paul speaks against idolatry to Gentiles,
the anti-idol polemic of Isaiah 40-48 is addressed almost exclusively to the people of
Israel.58 The portrait of God as creator of the universe and sustainer of life in Isa 42:5 is
addressed to a people who already have a covenant relationship with God, while the
Athenian address is an appeal to the nations on behalf of the creator and sustainer of
life.59
The Letter of Aristeas, written in the second or third century B.C.E.,60 includes an
appeal to Gentiles on behalf of the creator God,61 coupled with anti-idol polemic. The
letter narrates a visit from Aristeas and some Greek companions to the high priest
Eleazar. In response to one of their questions, Eleazar explains:
that God is one; that his power is revealed universally, every place being
filled with his sovereignty; that no secret, human, earthly activity escapes
58 The one potential exception is the address to the coastlands in Isa 41:1-7, which includes a
reference to an artisan and a goldsmith in 41:7. While these trades are associated with idol
production elsewhere in Isa 40-48 (see 40:19-20; 44:11; 46:6), no mention of idolatry is specifically
made in Isa 41, leaving the reference a bit ambiguous. It is at least generally true that the anti-
idol material of Isa 40-48 is directed towards Jews.
59 It should be noted that all discussion of a text’s audience here pertains to the implied audience.
60 I. Abrahams, "Recent Criticism of the Letter of Aristeas," JQR 14.2 (1902): 323; Moses Hadas,
Aristeas to Philocrates (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1951), 54.
61 Bartlett makes a similar connection; John R. Bartlett, Jews in the Hellenistic World: Josephus,
Aristeas, The Sibylline Oracles, Eupolemus (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), 14.
27
his notice but all human deeds and all future events are revealed to him.
(Aris. 132)
This bears a strong conceptual resemblance to Paul’s statements that the creation is
organized so as to reveal the creator and that God is “not far from each one of us” (Acts
17:26-27).62 Eleazar’s initial statement in 132 is followed by a polemic against idolatry
(Aris. 134-151),63 in which he states that pagans make idols, products of human
invention, of stone and wood (Aris. 135-136; cf. Acts 17:29). The idolaters’ major error
consists in their attempt to deify created things, which are their equals (Aris. 136). The
implication is that only the creator – who sovereignly fills every place and supervises all
human actions (Aris. 132) – is worthy of worship.
The most overt appeal for common ground between Jews and Greeks comes at
the letter’s opening, when Aristeas claims before the king that they and the Jews
worship the same God by different names:
They worship the same God - the Lord and creator of the universe, as all
other men, as we ourselves, O King, though we call him by different
names, such as Zeus and Dis. This name was very appropriately
bestowed upon him by our first ancestors, in order to signify that He
through whom all things are endowed with life and come into being
(ζωοποιοῦνται τὰ πάντα καὶ γίνεται), is necessarily the ruler and Lord
(κυριεύειν) of the universe. (Aris. 16)
62 Aristeas 190 likewise speaks of God as the sustainer of the human race, “providing them with
health and food and everything else (τὰ λοιπὰ) in due season.”
63 Bultmann draws a connection between Aristeas 132ff and the Pauline speeches to Gentiles in
Acts 14 and 17; Rudolph Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament (trans. Kendrick Grobel; New
York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1951), 1:68.
28
Again, God is identified as creator and maker of life. Ζῳοποιέω does not appear in the
Septuagint, but does appear in a number of New Testament texts,64 often in the context
of explicit contrast between life and death.65 The sense of the word would seem to imply
something similar to the animating breath of life of Genesis 2:7,66 though Aristeas does
not use the language of in-breathing. Even though the only point of common language
between the texts is the use of ζω- words, it would seem that Aristeas reflects a notion of
human creation similar to the breath of life of Genesis 2:7, which makes the difference
between inanimate matter and a living creature.
This passage is not so much anti-idolatry as an appeal for Greek
acknowledgement of the God of the Jews, who is the same God the Greeks call Zeus.
Likewise Paul, speaking of the unknown god altar, implies that the God he proclaims is
also worshipped by the Athenians – “What therefore you worship as unknown, this I
proclaim to you” (Acts 17:23).67 Like Paul, Aristeas couples God’s identity as creator of
64 Jn 5:21, 6:63; Rom 4:17; 8:11; 1 Cor 15:22, 36, 45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 3:21; 1 Pet 3:18.
65 Jn 5:21, Rom 4:17; 8:11; 1 Cor 15:22, 36; 2 Cor 3:6; 1 Pet 3:18.
66 Cf. Bertram, et. al., “ζάω, ζωή (βιόω, βίος), ἀναζάω, ζῷον, ζωογονέω, ζωοποιέω,” TDNT
2:874-875.
67 It should be noted that in both Aristeas and Acts 17, the appeal is for Gentile recognition that
the God of the Jews (or Paul) is already known to and worshipped by the Gentiles. The goal is
for Gentiles to recognize the validity of Jewish/Pauline religion, not for Jews to recognize the
validity of Gentile worship. Barclay demonstrates this in detail regarding Aristeas; John M. G.
Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora: From Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE – 117 CE) (Berkeley,
Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1996), 143-150. Likewise, while Paul lends
some validity to Athenian culture (Acts 17:23, 28), his goal is ultimately for the Athenians to turn
from idols to the God who raised Jesus from the dead (17:30-31). The Athenians worship God “in
ignorance (ἀγνοοῦντες)” (17:23b, 30a), while Paul proclaims the truth (17:23b) in order that they
would repent (17:30b).
29
the universe with God’s lordship of the universe (κυριεύειν - Aris. 16; ὑπάρχων κύριος -
Acts 17:24). We may also note the similarity between ζωοποιοῦνται τὰ πάντα (Aris. 16)
and διδοὺς πᾶσι ζωὴν (Acts 17:25), and perhaps even between καὶ γίνεται (Aris. 16) and
καὶ ἐσμέν (Acts 17:28). Though the linguistic similarities are too faint to allow a claim
that Paul alludes to Aristeas in Acts 17:22-31, it can be seen as a conceptual precedent
within Hellenistic Judaism, where divine creation and rule of the universe, divine
sustenance of life on earth, and anti-idol polemic are combined with an appeal to
Gentiles on behalf of the God of the Jews.
ANTI-IDOL POLEMIC IN WISDOM OF SOLOMON
Wisdom of Solomon includes another polemic against idolatry, spanning chapters
13-15, which employs creational themes, particularly the Adamic in-breathing, and
shares significant common language with Acts 17:22-31.
The Sage criticizes as fools those who pay heed to created things but fail to
acknowledge their creator (Wis 13:1-5). Such people go astray while seeking and
desiring to find God (ζητοῦντες καὶ θέλοντες εὑρεῖν; 13:6). Likewise, Paul says that
God appoints the times and boundaries of the existence of nations (Acts 17:26) “so that
they would search for (ζητεῖν)…and find (εὕροιεν) [God]” (17:27). In both texts, ζητέω
and εὑρίσκω describe the search for God by people living within God’s creation.
In Wis 13:10-19, the Sage turns his polemic more squarely and specifically
against the use of idols:
But miserable, with their hopes set on dead things, are those
who give the name "gods" to the works of human hands,
30
gold and silver fashioned with skill,
and likenesses of animals,
or a useless stone, the work of an ancient hand. (Wis 13:10)
Idols are dead and unworthy of devotion because they are the work of human hands
(ἔργα χειρῶν ἀνθρώπων), fashioned by human skill (τέχνης) from gold (χρυσὸν),
silver (ἄργυρον) and stone (λίθον). Likewise, Paul tells the Athenians, “we ought not to
think that the deity is like gold (χρυσῷ), or silver (ἀργύρῳ), or stone (λίθῳ), an image
formed by the art (τέχνης) and imagination of mortals (ἀνθρώπου)” (17:29). Both
verses use the same three materials – gold, silver, and stone – in the same order,68 and
also speak of human skill as inadequate for the creation of a god. Both passages also
have as a broader theme the inadequacy of that which is made by human hands
(χειροποίητος – Wis 14:8; Acts 17:24; ἄνθρῶπων χειρῶν – Wis 13:10b; Acts 17:25; cf.
Wis 13:10e; 15:17). In addition to common language, Paul and the Sage have
complementary statements at the conceptual level. While the Sage points out that the
idol is inadequate because it needs help from humans (Wis 13:15-16), Paul makes it clear
that God does not need anything (Acts 17:25a). The idol is dead (Wis 13:1, 10, 18; 15:5,
17), while God gives life to all (Acts 17:25b).
The Sage goes on to describe a potter who fashions vessels out of clay, for both
clean and unclean use. The destination of a vessel is not dependant on any trait of the
clay, but rather on the decision of the potter (Wis 15:7) – as it were, the potter is
sovereign over the clay forms. Such a potter then fashions a god from some of the clay –
68 This connection is made by Ga rtner, Natural Revelation, 220.
31
a preposterous act, since potters are themselves mortals made of earth (15:8). The potter
fails to recognize God’s sovereignty over their own life and death; their work is vain
because:
they failed to know the one who formed them
and inspired them with active souls
and breathed a living spirit into them. (Wis 15:11)
Recapitulating Genesis 2:7, the Sage describes God as the creator of life, who gives
breath and takes it away. For a potter to worship a god of their own creation is to not
know (ἀγνοέω, cf. Acts 17:23, 30) the God who formed them, who inspired them with
an active soul (ἐμπνεύσαντα αὐτῷ ψυχὴν ἐνεργοῦσαν), and who breathed a living
spirit (ἐμφυσήσαντα πνεῦμα ζωτικόν) into them. An idol is dead because it is made by
the hands of a human being (Wis 15:16-17; cf. Acts 17:24, 29), whose spirit (πνεῦμα) is
borrowed.
The Sage does make some significant modifications to Genesis 2:7. Whereas the
first human of Genesis became (ἐγένετο) a living soul (ψυχὴν ζῶσαν), an active soul
(ψυχὴν ἐνεργοῦσαν) is one of the things in-breathed (ἐμπνέω) in Wisdom of Solomon. In
a Hellenistic context, it is easier to speak of a person having a soul than becoming one.69
The Sage describes a borrowed soul (cf. Wis 15:8) that God puts into a mortal body
through in-breathing.70
69 Ernest Best, "The Use and Non-Use of Pneuma by Josephus," NovT 3.3 (1959): 221.
70 David Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon (AB 43; Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1979), 286-
287; John R. Levison, Portraits of Adam in Early Judaism: From Sirach to 2 Baruch (Sheffield: JSOT,
1988), 53. Gilbert lists many similar texts and argues that the notion of borrowed soul is
32
The active soul is accompanied by the in-breathing (ἐμφυσάω, as in Gen 2:7) of a
living spirit (πνεῦμα ζωτικόν), whereas in Genesis it is the breath of life (πνοὴν ζωῆς).
Where Genesis has πνοή, Wisdom has πνεῦμα, and where ζωή appears as a genitive of
purpose in Genesis71 it appears in Wisdom as an adjective describing the πνεῦμα. The
same phrase occurs in Alexandrian medical terminology,72 and would be consistent with
a notion of soul or spirit as an element independent of the body but dwelling within the
body.73 However, the verse remains consistent with Genesis 2:7 in the essential truth
that the in-breathing of God makes a God-formed object into a living being.
The Sage’s language is reflective of a Hellenistic milieu that is not shared by
Genesis 2:7. Nonetheless, his use of in-breathing in the anti-idol polemic of Wisdom 13-
Hellenistic rather than biblical; Maurice Gilbert, La critique des dieux dans le Livre de la Sagesse: Sg
13-15 (AnBib 53; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1973), 207-210.
71 Ζωὴς in Gen 2:7 is most naturally read as a genitive of purpose because it’s effect is to make the
clay human into a ψυχὴν ζῶσαν. An analogous statement could be made about the Hebrew
grammar of the MT, where נשמת חיים appears as a construct chain and results in the human
becoming a נפש חיה.
72 The phrase is first recorded in the fragments of Eristratus; James M. Reese, Hellenistic Influence
on the Book of Wisdom and Its Consequences (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1970), 16, 159; Winston,
Wisdom, 287-288.
73 Levison, Portraits, 53. The parallel grammar of Wis 15:11b-c would call for the two in-breathing
phrases to be read as mutually-glossing explanations of the same animating principle. Cf. Ernest
G. Clarke, The Wisdom of Solomon (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973), 101; Gilbert,
213. Reese, however, takes πνεῦμα and ψυχή as two separate components of a tri-partite human
makeup, as can be found expressed in 1 Thess 5:23; Influence, 84. Josephus, Ant. 1.1.2 is a much
clearer example of a restatement of Gen 2:7 where πνεῦμα and ψυχή are reinterpreted as two
aspects of the human makeup that are inserted (ἐνῆκεν) into the body. Josephus uses only one
verb and does not incorporate any obvious parallelism. Cf. Louis H. Feldman, Flavius Josephus:
Translation and Commentary (vol. 3 of Flavius Josephus: Translation and Commentary; ed. Steve
Mason; Leiden: Brill, 2000), 13.
33
15 is consistent with Paul’s Athenian speech in that the production of idols is portrayed
as ignorant, and this claim is based on God’s identity as the giver of life.
Wisdom of Solomon 13-15, especially 13:10 and 15:11, makes for a key intertext
with Paul’s anti-idol polemic in Acts 17:24-29, where the maker of the world (17:24), in
whom we live and move and have our being (17:28; cf. 17:25), is elevated over figures
made by human hands (17:24-25).
GOD’S LACK OF NEED IN JOSEPHUS AND SECOND AND THIRD MACCABEES
While Seneca expresses the notion that God does not seek servants, God’s lack of
need is also present in a number of Hellenistic Jewish texts. In the eighth book of
Antiquities, Josephus describes the dedication of Solomon’s temple. Solomon extends his
hands to the temple and blesses it, beginning with the following words:
It is not possible for humans by their works to do God a favor, for the
sake of the good things they have experienced. For the Deity requires
nothing at all (ἀπροσδεὴς) and is superior to any sort of recompense.
But…it is necessary for us to praise your majesty and thank you for your
benefits to our house and the people of the Hebrews. (Ant. 8.4.3)74
In the context of the temple cult, Josephus affirms that God is not in need of anything,
but rather gives to humanity without the possibility of being repaid. Thanks and praise
74 Book eight of Antiquities is essentially a paraphrase of 1 Kgs 2:13-22:40//2 Chr 1-18. While Ant.
8.4.2-3 corresponds fairly well to 1 Kgs 8:10-43//2 Chr 5:11-6:33, the passage quoted here is quite
different from the MT and LXX which are essentially consistent:
O LORD, God of Israel, there is no God like you in heaven above or on earth
beneath, keeping covenant and steadfast love for your servants who walk before
you with all their heart (1 Kgs 8:23//2 Chr 6:14)
Cf. Christopher T. Begg and Paul Spilsbury, Judean Antiquities 8-10 (vol. 5 of Flavius
Josephus: Translation and Commentary; ed. Steve Mason; Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2005), 31.
34
do not benefit God, but are appropriate because of God’s blessings on Israel. Solomon is
not under the impression that the temple serves God (cf. Acts 17:25a), nor that the God
can adequately inhabit it (this is stated later in Ant. 8.4.3; cf. Acts 17:24b), but rather
recognizes it as a benefit to the Hebrew people.
In Second Maccabees, Nicanor threatens to level the temple and build one to
Dionysus in its place (2 Macc 14:33). Once Nicanor departs, the priests extend their
hands toward heaven (2 Macc 14:34) and call upon God:
O Lord of all, though you have need (ἀπροσδεὴς) of nothing, you were
pleased that there should be a temple for your habitation among us (2
Macc 14:35)
Again, the temple is not thought to serve any need of God’s, but rather serves to benefit
the covenant people as a means of God’s habitation among them.
Third Maccabees contains a similar statement, with a stronger creational motif.
Amidst trial and tribulation of political conflict, the high priest Simon extends his hands
toward the sanctuary of the temple and blesses the Lord of all creation (3 Macc 2:2),
saying:
You, O King, when you had created the boundless and immeasurable
earth, chose this city and sanctified this place for your name, though you
have no need (ἀπροσδεεῖ) of anything (3 Macc 2:9)
Again, the creator of the world requires nothing from the created. Rather, the temple is
a sign of God’s faithfulness to Israel and a place where their prayers are heard (3 Macc
2:10-11).
35
While Seneca’s claim that God seeks no servants sounds similar to Paul’s claim
that God is not served by human hands, the assertions of Second and Third Maccabees and
Josephus have the added similarity that they pertain, implicitly or explicitly, to the
creator God of Judaism.75 These texts, especially Third Maccabees, which along with Paul
is explicitly creational (3 Macc 2:9; Acts 17:24-25), bear an even closer similarity to Paul’s
claims in Acts 17:24b-25a than does Seneca.76
THE USE OF ARATUS BY PSEUDO-ARISTOBULUS
While Acts 17:28b is a clear appeal by Paul to Hellenistic philosophy, even this
has a precedent in Hellenistic Judaism. The pseudepigraphal Aristobulus77 also quotes
Phaenomena 1-9 as part of an argument that Greek writers actually speak of the God of
the Jews, though they use the name Zeus:
And Aratus also speaks about the same things thus: “Let us begin with
God…we are all his children…” I believe that it has been clearly shown
how the power of God is throughout all things. And we have given the
true sense, as one must, by removing the (name) Zeus throughout the
verses. For their intention refers to God, therefore it was so expressed by
us. (Fragment 4:6-7 = Eusebius, Praep. Evang. 13.13.6-7)
75 Additional parallels can be found in Philo, Det. 54-56; Deus Imm. 56.
76 It should be noted, however, that none of the texts in this section reflect the giving of life and
breath that Paul expresses is Acts 17:25b.
77 Five fragments of Aristobulus are quoted in the works of Eusebius. Aristobulus dedicates his
work to Ptolemy (Fragment 3:1 = Praep. Evang. 13.12.1), and the second book of Maccabees refers
to Aristobulus as Ptolemy's teacher and a member of the priestly family (2 Macc 1:10). The
fragments are typically dated to the middle of the (second century B.C.E.) and represent an
attempt to reconcile Jewish tradition and Hellenistic philosophy by showing that the
philosophers made use of the books of Moses. A. Yarbo Collins, “Aristobulus,” The Old Testament
Pseudepigrapha (ed. James H. Charlesworth, vol. 2; New York: Doubleday, 1985), 831-836.
36
Pseudo-Aristobulus appeals to Aratus’ poem, indicating that what is said of Zeus is
actually true of God (i.e. the God of Moses; 4:3), particularly that God’s power is
throughout all things. This particular concept is not overly important to Aristobulus’
theology, but rather serves as one of several examples78 proving that the philosophers
agree: “it is necessary to hold holy opinions concerning God” (Frag. 4:8). Aristobulus’
use of Aratus, like Paul’s, serves as part of an appeal to an implied Hellenistic audience
by establishing common ground between Hellenistic philosophy and Jewish
monotheism.79
RESURRECTION AS THE GIVING BACK OF LIFE AND BREATH IN SECOND
MACCABEES
In the second book of Maccabees, a mother and her seven sons are arrested and
tortured for their refusal to forsake God’s law (7:1-41). Despite the gruesome
punishments exacted on their bodies, the family remains faithful, each in turn
expressing their confidence that they will receive their bodies anew through a
posthumous resurrection.80
78 Pseudo-Aristobulus uses other key Greek philosophers alongside Aratus, including Plato and
Pythagoras (Frag. 3, 4), Orpheus (Frag. 4), Homer and Hesiod (Frag. 5), arguing that they crafted
their own philosophical writings from the Mosaic Scriptures (Frag. 4:4). Collins, “Aristobulus,”
831. In the case of Aratus, Pseudo-Aristobulus attempts to show that Isaiah 66:1 and Phaenomena
1-9 share the same concepts about God’s pervasive presence in creation. Frag. 4:5.
79 While Pseudo-Aristobulus uses philosophical texts corroborate the Hebrew Scriptures, Paul is
not explicit in his quotation of Scripture, and rather uses elements of Hellenism to corroborate his
proclamation about God.
80 Other than Dan 12:2-3, this text is thought to be the earliest known expression of a Jewish hope
for life after death; Peter F. Ellis, Jeremiah, Baruch (CBC 14; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press,
37
The key point of connection between 2 Maccabees 7 and Acts 17 occurs when the
mother gives a word of encouragement to her suffering sons:
I do not know how you came into being in my womb. It was not I who
gave you life and breath (τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὴν ζωὴν), nor I who set in
order the elements within each of you. Therefore the creator of the world
(τοῦ κόσμου), who formed the family of humanity and of all things
(πλάσας ἀνθρώπου γένεσιν καὶ πάντων), will in his mercy give breath
and life back (τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὴν ζωὴν… ἀποδίδωσιν) to you again,
since you now forget yourselves for the sake of his laws. (7:22-23)
Here the giving of τὸ πνεῦμα and τὴν ζωὴν expresses both the initial impartation of life
at birth (7:22) and the return of life through resurrection (7:23). The old and new
creations are united, and God is recognized as sovereign over both. Though Acts 17:25
speaks of God “διδοὺς…ζωὴν καὶ πνοὴν” rather than “τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὴν
ζωὴν…ἀποδίδωσιν,” the similarity remains striking,81 especially given the importance
of resurrection in Acts 17:16-34. Both texts also use forms of ὁ κόσμος to refer to God’s
1986), 122. While Wright understands this as a future earthly resurrection (N. T. Wright, The
Resurrection of the Son of God (vol. 3 of Christian Origins and the Question of God; Minneapolis:
Fortress Press, 2003), 150; cf. 4 Macc 18:17), it should be noted that the text is not so precise, and it
could be understood in a more abstract sense (see Jan Willem van Henten, The Maccabean Martyrs
as Saviours of the Jewish People: A Study of 2 and 4 Maccabees (Leiden, New York, and Köln: Brill,
1997), 175-184; cf. 4 Macc 7:19; 17:17-18).
81 The connection between Acts 17:25 and 2 Macc 7:22-23 is noted by Lake (Acts, 215),
Conzelmann (Acts, 142), and Barrett (Acts, 841), but none of these go further than to state the
presence of an intertext. Πνοή and πνεῦμα are relatively interchangeable in LXX, appearing in
parallel in Job 4:9; 27:3; 32:8; 33:4; 34:14; Isa 42:5; 57:16. Both words can refer to breath as
animating principle (πνοή - Gen 2:7; 7:22; Job 27:3; 32:8; 33:4; 37:10; Isa 42:5; πνεῦμα - Gen 6:3; Ps
51:10-12; 104:29-30; Job 12:10; Eccl 3:19-21; 12:7; Tob 3:6; Bar 2:17; TAbr 1 17:3; TGad 5:9), Josephus
replaces πνοή with πνεῦμα when paraphrasing Gen 2:7 (Ant 1.1.2), and the Sage uses πνεῦμα in
recapitulation of Gen 2:7 (Wis 15:11). Dibelius and Bruce claim that πνοὴν is used in Acts 17:25
for the sake of assonance with ζωὴν. Dibelius, Studies, 46; F. F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles:
Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary (3rd ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 382.
38
creation (2 Macc 7:22; Acts 17:24),82 both refer to the descent of humanity by divine
facilitation (2 Macc 7:23; Acts 17:26, 28), and both use the masculine plural of πᾶς to
refer to creatures in the world (2 Macc 7:22; Acts 17:25).
The same concept is expressed with roughly the same language again in Second
Maccabees, when more than five hundred soldiers are sent to arrest a Jewish elder named
Razis (14:37-46). Razis commits suicide to avoid capture by the soldiers, calling upon
“the Lord of life (τῆς ζωῆς) and breath (τοῦ πνεύματος)” to give them back
(ἀποδίδωμι) to him again (14:46). Once more, the giving back of life and breath is used
to describe a posthumous resurrection.
The echoes of 2 Maccabees in Acts 17:22-28 imply a connection between the God-
given breath of 17:25 and the theme of resurrection in 17:18, 31-32. The giving of life and
breath in Paul’s speech serves not only to challenge idolatry, but also to undergird
Paul’s presentation of Jesus’ resurrection. The same God who gives life and breath to all
can give them back to one.
The echoes also underscore the influence of Hellenistic Judaism in Paul’s
Athenian speech. While the resurrection of Jesus is a uniquely Christian element in the
passage,83 the general concept of bodily resurrection, while quite foreign to the
Athenians (Acts 17:32; cf. 17:18), does have precedent in Hellenistic Jewish literature.
82 While Pervo calls Paul’s use of κόσμος “one concession to Greek philosophical language” in
Acts 17:24 (Acts, 434), the intertext between 2 Macc 7:22-23 and Acts 17:24-25 qualifies such a
claim. Paul’s use of κόσμος may just as easily be due to the influence of 2 Macc 7 as to the
influence of Greek philosophy.
83 Cf. Martin Dibelius, The Book of Acts: Form, Style and Theology (ed. K. C. Hanson; FCBS;
Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2004), 113.
39
THE PROMINENCE OF THE BREATH OF LIFE IN OTHER HELLENISTIC JEWISH
TEXTS
Some additional texts deserve mention in order to demonstrate that the notion of
the breath of life is generally prominent in Hellenistic Jewish texts. Ben Sira, in an
exhortation to steward one’s property throughout life, urges his readers:
While you are still alive and have breath (πνοή) in you, do not let anyone
take your place. (Sir 33:21)
Πνοή here represents an animating principle – the difference between life and death.
Not unlike Job (LXX Job 27:3), Ben Sira calls for consistent behavior as long as one has
breath.
Tobit, amidst compounded frustration, cries out to God for the mercy of death:
So now deal with me as you will;
command my breath to be taken from me,
so that I may be released from the face of the earth and become dust.
For it is better for me to die than to live,
because I have had to listen to undeserved insults,
and great is the sorrow within me.
Command, O Lord, that I be released from this distress;
release me to go to the eternal home,
and do not, O Lord, turn your face away from me. (Tob 3:6)
While Tobit expects his existence to continue in his “eternal home,” πνεῦμα here is the
difference between a living body and dust. Tobit recognizes that his possession of
πνεῦμα is predicated on the command of God, and asks God to take his breath away.
Baruch, though a bit more ambiguous, seems to express a similar interplay between
immortality and death:
40
[T]he dead who are in Hades, whose breath has been taken from their
bodies (ὧν ἐλήμφθη τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτῶν ἀπὸ τῶν σπλάγχνων αὐτῶν),
will not ascribe glory or justice to the Lord (Bar 2:17)
Though Baruch expresses belief in some sort of continued existence in Hades, the focus is
not the nature of that existence, but rather that the dead can no longer give glory to the
Lord. As with Tobit, the taking away of the πνεῦμα makes the difference between a
living body and dead σπλάγχνον.84
In Antiquities 12.2, Josephus closely paraphrases a substantial portion of The
Letter of Aristeas. He renders Aristeas 16 as follows:
[B]oth these people and we also worship the same God, the framer of all
things. We call him, and that truly, by the name of Zeus, because he
breathes life into all people. (Ant. 12.2.2)
Where Aristeas calls God “the one by whom all live (ζωοποιοῦνται) and are created
(γίνεται),” Josephus says that God “breathes life (ἐμφύειν τὸ ζῆν) into all people.”
Here the breath of life, given to all people, appears in the context of common ground
between Jews and Greeks. Though we cannot know for certain that Josephus’ source
matched ours, it is most probable that the difference reflects a choice of style and not a
source issue.85 This suggests that in Josephus’ first century context, and to his Greco-
Roman audience, God’s making all people alive could be naturally communicated with
the language of universal in-breathed life.86
84 Πνεῦμα also functions as animating principle in TAbr 1 17:3 and TGad 5:9.
85 Hadas, Aristeas, 18.
86 Ἐμφυσάω is used in the NT only in Jn 20:22, where Jesus breathes the holy Spirit into his
disciples. In LXX it appears in Gen 2:7; 1 Kgs 17:21; Job 4:21; Wis 15:11; Nah 2:2; Ezek 21:36; 37:9.
41
Philo Judaeus discusses the breath of life in Genesis 2:7 many times in his
writings,87 presenting a variety of interpretations which cannot be enumerated in detail
here.88 Suffice it to say that Philo generally understands the breath of life as an
impartation of the soul of the soul – the reasoning mind (νοῦς), which is not made of any
created thing, but rather consists of πνεῦμα (Her. 55-57).89 While Philo ascribes ψυχή to
all living creatures, humans are distinct because of the νοῦς, which alone is the image of
God (Opif. 66). It is the πνεῦμα that is in-breathed (Opif. 134-135), which is the
substance of the νοῦς. While Philo’s handling of Genesis 2:7 is quite unique among
known Hellenistic Jewish texts, its prominence in his work underscores the importance
of the text to Philo and presumably in Alexandrian Judaism.
In Job 4:21; Ezek 21:36 it refers to the breath of God’s wrath, but in Gen 2:7; 1 Kgs 17:21; Wis
15:11; Ezek 37:9 it pertains to in-breathed life.
87 Opif. 134ff; Leg. All. 1.31ff; 3.161; Det. 80ff; Plant. 19f; Her. 56f; Somn. 1.34; Spec. 4.123; Virt. 203ff;
QG 1.4f; 2.56ff; cf. QG 2.8. Note that Gen 2:7 is also referred to with respect to molding but not in-
breathing in Leg. All. 1.53-55, 88-96; 2.4-13, 19, 71-73; Congr. 90.
88 Tobin handles Philo’s various interpretations of human creation in great detail in his
dissertation, proposing that Philo incorporated many earlier interpretations together with his
own original material. Thomas H. Tobin, The Creation of Man: Philo and the History of Interpretation
(Washington, DC: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1983).
89 While Philo differentiates between the in-breathed reason and the body molded from blood
and clay (Her. 57), he describes the body as:
[held] together and quickened as into flame (ζωπυρεῖται) by the providence of
God, who is its protecting arm and shield, since our race cannot of itself stand
firmly established for a single day. (Her. 58)
Though this statement does not include in-breathing language, the use of ζωπυρέω implies a
bodily enlivening along the lines of Gen 2:7. Ζωπυρέω is also used in LXX 2 Kgs 8:1, 5 in
reference to the child that Elisha restores to life. Cf. H.G. Liddell, A Lexicon: Abridged from Liddell
and Scott's Greek-English Lexicon (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, 1996), 345.
42
CONCLUSION TO PART III
The Letter of Aristeas includes an appeal to Gentiles on behalf of the creator God
over against idols (Aris. 132), and also claims, not unlike Paul (Acts 17:23), that the God
of the Jews is the same God the Greeks call Zeus, who makes all mortals alive (Aris. 16;
cf. Acts 17:25). The Sage likewise criticizes the production of idols because they are
composed of created materials (Wis 13:10). Wisdom 13 shares a great deal of common
language with Acts 17, including the use ζητέω and εὑρίσκω to describe all peoples’
search for God (Wis 13:6; cf. Acts 17:26), χειρῶν ἀνθρώπων and τέχνης to describe the
human construction of religious objects (Wis 13:10; cf. Acts 17:24, 29), and χρυσὸς,
ἄργυρος and λίθος to describe the materials from which idols are constructed (Wis
13:10; cf. Acts 17:29). The Sage goes on to accuse idolaters of failing to know the one
who formed and inspired them (Wis 15:11; cf. Acts 17:25). Both Aristeas and Wisdom of
Solomon include creational and particularly Adamic themes in the context of anti-idol
polemic, and make for important precedents to Paul’s polemic against idolatry (Acts
17:24-29) within Hellenistic Judaism.
Josephus includes in Solomon’s temple dedication an assertion of God’s lack of
need (ἀπροσδεὴς) based on divine superiority (Ant. 8.4.3). Josephus, like Paul,
recognizes that the temple does not serve God (Acts 17:25), and that God does not
inhabit it (Acts 17:24), but rather affirms it as a benefit to the Hebrew people. The priests
of Second Maccabees, like Josephus’ Solomon, extend their hands and affirm that God
needs nothing (ἀπροσδεὴς), and that the temple is a blessing to Israel (2 Macc 14:35). In
Third Maccabees, the high priest Simon extends his hands to the temple and affirms God’s
43
creation of the world and the blessing of the temple as a place for God’s name to dwell
with Israel, though God does not need (ἀπροσδεεῖ) anything (3 Macc 2:9). All three
texts speak of God’s lack of need in the context of temple cult, and base their claims on
God’s adequacy rather than human inadequacy. While Seneca expresses something like
God’s lack of need in Acts (cf. Ep. mor. 95:48), these Hellenistic Jewish texts must be seen
as bearing stronger resemblance to the notion of divine sufficiency in Acts 17:24-25.
While Aratus’ influence on Acts 17 seems undeniable, the use of Phaenomena in
an appeal to Gentiles for common ground has precedent in Pseudo-Aristobulus, who
quotes Phaenomena 1-9 (Frag. 4:6-7) in his effort to demonstrate agreement between
Moses and Greek philosophers (Frag. 4:8). In a sense, Pseudo-Aristobulus could be seen
as an even closer parallel to Acts 17 than Aratus, since the ultimate purpose of the
reference is similar to Paul’s.
Second Maccabees refers to resurrection as God’s giving back of life and breath (τὸ
πνεῦμα καὶ τὴν ζωὴν…ἀποδίδωσιν; 2 Macc 7:22-23; cf. 2 Macc 14:46), with language
very similar to Paul’s claim that God “gives to all life and breath and all things”
(διδοὺς…ζωὴν καὶ πνοὴν; Acts 17:25). Both passages use ὁ κόσμος (2 Macc 7:22; Acts
17:24) and πᾶς (2 Macc 7:22; Acts 17:25), and both refer to God’s facilitation of the
descent of humanity (2 Macc 7:23; Acts 17:26, 28). The various linguistic and conceptual
connections make Second Maccabees a fairly strong intertext for Acts 17:24-25, and
underscore the relevance of God’s giving of life and breath (Acts 17:25) to the theme of
44
resurrection in Acts 17. The God who gives life and breath to all can also give life and
breath back.90
God’s giving of breath to mortals as an animating principle is generally
prominent in Hellenistic Jewish literature, which further corroborates the Hellenistic
Jewish nature of Acts 17. Ben Sira refers to life in terms of the continuation of πνοὴ (Sir
33:21), Tobit asks God to end his life by taking his breath away (Tob 3:6), and Baruch
speaks of the dead as those whose breath has been taken from their bodies (Bar 2:17).
Josephus paraphrases the claim of Aristeas that by God all are made alive (ζωοποιέω)
and come into being (γίνομαι; Aris. 16), saying instead that God “breathes life (ἐμφύειν
τὸ ζῆν) into all people” (Ant. 12.2.2). The in-breathing of Genesis 2:7 is also important to
Philo, who quotes and interprets it in many of his writings.91 While Isaiah 42:5 is a more
direct precedent for the claim that God “gives to all…breath” (Acts 17:25), the concept is
also thoroughly consistent in character with Hellenistic Jewish literature.
CONCLUSION
While Macchia rightly points out that Paul’s speech to the Athenians should be
seen as a point of continuity between the Old and New Testaments, and that Genesis 1-
11 is important to this dynamic, he does not make reference to Isaiah 42:5, which is
arguably the most direct intertextual connection between Acts 17 and the Old Testament
90 Levison does not handle the “life and breath” texts of Second Maccabees, though it seems they
would fit in well with the rest of his work in Filled with the Spirit.
91 Opif. 134ff; Leg. All. 1.31ff; 3.161; Det. 80ff; Plant. 19f; Her. 56f; Somn. 1.34; Spec. 4.123; Virt. 203ff;
QG 1.4f; 2.56ff
45
“spirit of life” pneumatology. Macchia also fails to acknowledge the importance of
Hellenistic Jewish elements within the text, especially the importance of Second
Maccabees to the theme of resurrection. His review of Filled with the Spirit as a whole
makes next to no reference to Hellenistic Judaism,92 though Levison devotes one of the
book’s three parts to the subject.93
Levison’s chapter on “Spirit in the Shadow of Death”94 does not mention Isaiah
42:5, though he otherwise deals with Old Testament breath-of-life texts thoroughly.
Consideration of the pneumatological nature of this text might have paved the way for
recognition of Acts 17:22-31 as a point of continuity between Old and New Testament
conceptions of spirit, which would ultimately have enriched Levison’s analysis of the
pneumatology of Acts.95 While Levison rightly identifies Acts 17 as a place where Paul
eschews a bifurcation between old and new creations,96 he fails to recognize the
importance of resurrection as a giving back of life and breath. The Athenian address has
much to do with “Jesus and the resurrection” (Acts 17:18), and its pneumatology should
be seen as one of both old and new creation, held together in harmony by a Hellenistic
Jewish notion of the breath of life.
92 Macchia, “Spirit of Life,” 69-78.
93 Levison, Filled, 109-221.
94 Levison, Filled, 14-33.
95 Levison, Filled, 317-365; cf. Macchia, “Spirit of Life,” 75.
96 Levison, Filled, 251.
46
Paul’s use of Scripture when addressing a non-Jewish audience is indicative of
the Bible’s centrality to his mission and identity. Paul does not simply use Scripture as a
means to appeal to people who trust Scripture; rather, Scripture is inherent in Paul’s
work as a servant of the Lord, which challenges any claim that Paul is portrayed as
supercessionist or otherwise less than fully Jewish in Acts. At the same time, both
biblical and Hellenistic categories ultimately fall short in an analysis of Acts 17:22-31.
The most comprehensive context for Paul’s speech is found in Hellenistic Jewish
literature, where Israelite and Hellenistic thought are both influential. Paul speaks to the
Athenians as a Hellenistic Jew, called to be “a light to the nations” (Acts 13:47) on behalf
of the God who “gives to all life and breath and all things” (Acts 17:25).
47
APPENDIX: PROMETHEUS, ATHENA AND PANDORA IN GRECO-ROMAN AND
OTHER LITERATURE
Text Date Quotation Description
Pre-Roman Texts
Hesiod, Theogany,
570ff
7th-8th cent.
B.C.E.97
[Hephaistos] took earth,
and molded it…into the
likeness of a modest
young girl, and the
goddess gray-eyed
Athene dressed her and
decked her in silverfish
clothing, and over her
head she held, with her
hands, an intricately
wrought veil in place, a
wonder to look at.
The first woman is
fashioned from the earth
and adorned by Athena
and Hephaistos. She is the
common ancestor of all
women, though a race of
men already dwells on the
earth (592).
Hesiod, Works and
Days, 60ff
7th-8th cent.
B.C.E.
[Hephaistos mixed] earth
with water, and [infused]
it with a human voice and
vigor, and [made] the face
like the immortal
goddesses, the bewitching
features of a young girl;
meanwhile Athene
[taught] her skills, and
how to do the intricate
weaving…
The first woman is
fashioned from earth and
water in the image of the
goddesses. She is given
many gifts from various
deities, and for this reason
is named Pandora (“all-
gifts”; πᾶν + δῶρα, 81).
Aeschylus,
Prometheus Bound,
107-109; 436-506
5th cent.
B.C.E.
I hunted out and stored in
fennel stalk the stolen
source of fire that hath
proved to mortals a
teacher in every art and a
means to mighty ends…I
taught them to discern the
risings of the stars and
Prometheus gives
humanity fire, which
represents not only a
practical means of
survival, but subtly also
the fire of wisdom from
which proceed all aspects
of human civilization.98
97 Michael Grand, Greek and Latin Authors: 800 B.C.-A.D. 1000 (New York: H. W. Wilson Company,
1980), 199.
98 Olga Raggio, “The Myth of Prometheus: Its Survival and Metamorphoses up to the Eighteenth
Century,” JWCI 21.1/2 (1958): 45.
48
their settings…inventions
I devised for mankind.
Plato, Protagoras,
320ff
4th cent.
B.C.E.
[Prometheus stole]
Hephaestus’s fiery art and
all Athena’s also he
gave…to man, and hence
it is that man gets facility
for his livelihood.
Prometheus steals artistic
wisdom and fire from the
workshop of Hephaistos
and Athena and gives
them to humanity, making
them closer to deity than
the animals.
Philochorus of
Athens, FGrHist
328 F 10.
3rd cent.
B.C.E.
[I]f anyone sacrifices an
ox to Athena, it is
necessary also to sacrifice
a sheep to Pandora
Pandora and Athena are
also closely associated in
the cultic practices of
Athens.
Early Roman Texts
Ovid,
Metamorphoses
1.76-86
~ 9 C.E.99 …that earth which
[Prometheus] mixed with
fresh, running water, and
moulded into the form of
the all-controlling gods…
Prometheus is said to have
formed the first humans
from earth and water to
resemble gods. This is
associated with the unique
human intellect (86).
Ovid,
Metamorphoses
1.363-64
~ 9 C.E. Oh, would that…I
might…breathe
(infundere), [as
Prometheus did,] the
breath of life (animas) into
the molded clay.
Deucalion wishes to pour
life into molded clay in
order to reconstitute
humanity, just as
Prometheus first formed
humanity (cf. 76-86).
Post-New Testament Texts
Juvenal, Satires,
14.35
1st-2nd
cent. C.E.
One or other young man
may reject this behavior,
if his heart is fashioned by
[Prometheus] with
generous skill from a
superior clay
Juvenal speaks
metaphorically of
Prometheus’ skillful
fashioning of people from
clay.
Pseudo- 2nd cent. Prometheus moulded Pseudo-Apollodorus
99 Harris Lenowitz and Charles Doria, Origins: Creation Texts from the Ancient Mediterranean (New
York: AMS Press, 1976), 335.
49
Apollodorus,
Library, 1.7.1
C.E. men out of water and
earth and gave them also
fire, which, unknown to
Zeus, he had hidden in a
stalk of fennel.
basically makes a concise
summary of prior content
regarding Prometheus, as
seen in Aeschylus and
Ovid.
Pseudo-Hyginus,
Fabulae, 142
2nd cent.
C.E.
Prometheus…first
fashioned men from clay.
Later Vulcan, at Jove’s
command, made a
woman’s form from clay.
Minerva100 gave it life
(animam dedit) and the rest
of the gods each gave
some other gift. Because
of this they named her
Pandora.
Prometheus fashioned the
first men from clay, while
Vulcan formed Pandora
and Minerva gave her life.
Lucian, Prometheus
on Caucasus, 13
2nd cent.
C.E.
I [Prometheus] molded
my material – with water
mingling clay – and
created man, calling in
Athene to aid me in the
task.
Prometheus and Athena
make the first humans
from clay and water.
Lucian, A Literary
Prometheus, 3
2nd cent.
C.E.
Prometheus conceived
and fashioned them…he
was practically their
creator, though Athene
assisted by putting breath
into the clay and bringing
the models to life.
Athena “ensouls”
Prometheus’ clay models,
making them alive
(ἔμψυχα ποιοῦσα εἶναι τὰ
πλάσματα).
Porphyry, Ad
Gaurum 11=GLAJJ
§466
3rd cent.
C.E.
[T]hose who play
Prometheus in the theatre
are compelled to make the
soul enter the body...
However, perhaps the
ancients [wanted to show]
that the animation takes
place after the conception
and formation of the
body. The theologian of
Porphyry seems to indicate
that Prometheus plays
were common in his day,
which included the
animation of a body.
Porphyry makes a
connection between
Prometheus mythology
and Genesis 2:7.
100 Vulcan, Jove and Minerva are the Roman equivalents of Hephaistos, Zeus and Athena,
respectively.
50
the Hebrews also seems
to signify this…
Tertullian,
Apology, 18.3
3rd cent.
C.E.
[God] made all things,
who formed man from
the dust of the ground
(for He is the true
Prometheus who gave
order to the world by
arranging the seasons and
their course)
God is compared to
Prometheus on the basis
for forming humans from
the dust.
Etymylogicum
Magnum (s.v.
Ἰκόνιον)
12th cent.
C.E.
Zeus commanded
Prometheus and Athena
to form (πλάσσω) idols
from the clay and called
the winds to breathe
(ἐμφυςῆσαι) and to
complete living beings.
After Deucalion’s flood,
Prometheus and Athena
make new people from
clay and wind.
Pseudo-
Lactantius,
Metamorphoseon
15th cent.
C.E.?
Prometheus…formed
man out of earth, into
which Minerva infused
breath (cui Minerva
spiritum infudit).
Minerva gives breath to
the people formed by
Prometheus.
51
BIBLIOGRAPHY
I. PRIMARY SOURCES
Aeschylus. Agamemnon, Libation-Bearers, Eumenides, Fragments. Vol. 2 of Aeschylus.
Translated by H. Weir Smyth and H. Lloyd-Jones. Edited by G. P. Goold. LCL
146. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1983.
--------. Suppliant Maidens, Persians, Prometheus, Seven against Thebes. Vol. 1 of Aeschylus.
Translated by H. Weir Smyth. LCL. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press,
1988.
Allenbach, J. Biblia Patrist In e es t t ns t s ns es ns tt r t re
Patristique, Vol. 1-7. Paris: Editions du Centre national de la recherche
scientifique, 1975.
Apollodorus. “Library.” p r s’ Library n Hyg n s’ Fabulae. Translated by R.
Scott Smith and Stephen M. Trzaskoma. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett
Publishing Company, Inc., 2007.
Arnim, Hans F. A. Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta. 4 vols. Stutgardiae: Teubner, 1964.
Borgen, Peder, Ka re Fuglseth, and Roald Skarsten. The Philo Index: A Complete Greek Word
Index to the Writings of Philo of Alexandria. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000.
Callimachus, Lycophron and Aratus. Callimachus, Hymns and Epigrams, Lycophron,
Aratus. Rev. ed. Translated by A. W. Mair and G. R. Mair. LCL 129. Cambridge,
Mass., and London: Harvard University Press, 1955.
Catullus. “The Poems of Gaius Valerius Catullus.” Pages vii-183 in Catullus, Tibullus,
Pervigilium, Veneris. Further rev. ed. Translated by F. W. Cornish. Edited by T. E.
Page. LCL. Cambridge, MA. and London, Eng.: Harvard University Press, 1962.
Charlesworth, James H. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Vol. 1. Garden City, N. Y.:
Doubleday, 1983.
--------. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, v 2. New York: Doubleday, 1985.
Chrysostom, Dio. Discourses 12-30. Translated by J. W. Cohoon. Edited by Jeffrey
Henderson. LCL 339. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001. Reprint
of 1939 ed.
Chrysostom, St. John, A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles; available from
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf111.toc.html; Internet; accessed 19 May 2011.
Cleanthes, Hymn to Zeus, trans. M. A. C. Ellery, 1976; available from
http://www.utexas.edu/courses/citylife/readings/cleanthes_hymn.html; Internet;
accessed 6 June 2011.
Delamarter, Steve, and James H. Charlesworth. A Scripture Index to Charlesworth's the Old
Testament Pseudepigrapha. London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002.
52
Demosthenes. I-XVII & XX: Olynthiacs, Philippics, In Leptinem, Minor Orations. Vol. 1 of
Demosthenes. Translated by J. H. Vince. LCL. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1962.
Epictetus. The Discourses: Books II-IV: The Encheiridion. Translated by W. A. Oldfather.
LCL 218. Cambridge, Mass. and London, Eng.: Harvard University Press, 2000.
Reprint of 1928 ed.
Euripides. Bacchae, Iphigenia at Aulis, Rhesus. Translated by David Kovacs. LCL 495.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002.
Gaisford, Thomas. Etymologicon Magnum. Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1967. Reprint
of Oxford, 1848.
Hesiod. Hesiod. Translated by Richmond Lattimore. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Press, 1959.
--------. Theogony, Works and Days, Testimonia. Translated by Glenn W. Most. LCL 57.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006.
Horace. Odes and Epodes. Edited and Translated by Niall Rudd. LCL 33. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press, 2004.
Hyginus. The Myths of Hyginus. Translated by Mary Grant. HuSt 34. Lawrence:
University of Kansas Press, 1960.
Jacoby, F. Die Fragmente der Griechischen Historiker. 3 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1958.
Josephus, Flavius. Jewish Antiquities, Books XII-XIV. Vol. 7 of Josephus in Nine Volumes.
Translated by Ralph Marcus. Edited by G. P. Goold. LCL 365. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press, 1976.
--------. The Works of Josephus : Complete and Unabridged. Translated by William Whiston.
Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996.
--------. Judean Antiquities 1-4. Vol. 3 of Flavius Josephus: Translation and Commentary.
Translated by Louis H. Feldman. Leiden, Boston, Ko ln: Brill, 2000.
--------. Judean Antiquities 8-10. Vol. 5 of Flavius Josephus: Translation and Commentary.
Translated by Christopher T. Begg and Paul Spilsbury. Edited by Steve Mason.
Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2005.
Juvenal and Persius. Juvenal and Persius. Translated by Jeffrey Henderson. LCL 91.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004.
Kern, Otto. Orphicum Framenta. Berlin: Berolini Arud Weidmannos, 1963.
Laertius, Diogenes. Lives of Eminent Philosophers. Translated by Robert D. Hicks. LCL.
London: W. Heinemann, 1925.
Lucian. Lucian. Translated by A. M. Harmon. Edited by K. Kilburn and M. D. MacLeod.
8 vols. LCL. London: W. Heinemann, 1913.
Martial. Epigrams. Vol. 2. Translated by Walter C. A. Ker. Edited by T. E. Page. LCL.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1961.
53
Nestle, Eberhard and Erwin Nestle. Novum Testamentum Graece. 27th ed. Edited by
Barbara Aland, Kurt Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlo M. Martini, Bruce
M. Metzger. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2001.
Origen, De Principiis; available from http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf04.vi.v.html;
Internet; accessed 19 May 2011.
Ovid. Metamorphoses. Translated by Frank J. Miller. LCL. London: W. Heinemann, 1916.
Pausanias. Description of Greece: Books VIII.22-X. Translated by W. H. S. Jones. Edited by
G. P. Goold. LCL 297. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1935.
---------. Description of Greece: Books I-II. Translated by W. H. S. Jones. Edited by G. P.
Goold. LCL 93. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998.
Pearson, A. C. The Fragments of Zeno and Cleanthes: With Introductory and Explanatory
Notes. London: C. J. Clay and Sons, 1891.
Philo of Alexandria. Philo: In Ten Volumes (and Two Supplementary Volumes). 10 vols. and
2 supp. vols. Translated by F. H. Colson and G H. Whitaker. LCL. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press, 1929.
---------. The Works of Philo: Complete and Unabridged. Translated by Charles Duke Yonge.
Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996.
Plato. The Republic. Vol. 1. Translated by Paul Shorey. Edited by T. E. Page. LCL. New
York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1930.
--------. Laches, Protagoras, Meno, Euthydemus. Translated by W. R. M. Lamb. LCL.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1962.
--------. Timaeus, Critias, Cleitophon, Menexenus [and] Epistles. Translated by Robert G.
Bury. LCL. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1966.
--------. Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Phaedrus. Translated by Harold North Fowler.
Edited by T. E. Page. LCL 36. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1966.
Plutarch. Moralia. 15 vols. Translated by Harold Cherniss. Edited by G. P. Goold. LCL.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1976.
Propertius. Elegies. Rev. ed. Edited and translated by G. P. Goold. LCL 18. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press, 1999.
Pseudo-Lactantius. “Metamorphoseon: Narrationes, Liber Primus.” Towards a Text of the
Metamorphosis of Ovid. Translated by D. A. Slater. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1927. No pages.
Rinaldi, Giancario. Biblia Gentium. Rome: Libraria Sacre Scritture, 1989.
Seneca. Epistulae Morales. 3 vols. Translated by Richard M. Gummere. Edited by T. E.
Page. LCL. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1961.
Smith, R. Scott and Stephen M. Trzaskoma, trans., p r s’ Library n Hyg n s’
Fabulae (Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 2007), 147.
54
Stern, Menahem, trans. From Tacitus to Simplicius. GLAJJ 2. Jerusalem: The Israel
Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1980.
Tertullian. Tertullian: Apology, De Spectaculis; Minucius Felix: Octavius. Translated by T. R.
Glover and Gerald H. Rendall. Edited by G. P. Goold. LCL 250. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press, 1931.
Thucydides. Thucydides. Vol. 2. Translated by C. Forster Smith. LCL. New York: G. P.
Putnam’s Sons, 1920.
Varlerius Flaccus. Argonautica. Rev. ed. Traslated by J. H. Mozley. Edited by E. H.
Warmington. LCL 286. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1972.
Xenophon. Memorabilia and Oeconomicus. Translated by E. C. Marchant. LCL. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press, 1959.
II. SOURCES ON LANGUAGE
Baumgärtel, Friedrich, Werner Bieder, Hermann Kleinknecht, Eduard Schweizer and
Erik Sjöberg. "πνεῦμα, πνευματικός, πνέω, ἐμπνέω, πνοή, ἐκπνέω,
θεόπνευστος." TDNT 6:332-455.
Bertram, Georg, Rudolph Bultmann and Gerhard von Rad. "ζάω, ζωή (βιόω, βίος),
ἀναζάω, ζῷον, ζωογονέω, ζωοποιέω." TDNT 2:832-75.
Brown, Francis, Samuel Rolles Driver and Charles Augustus Briggs. Hebrew and English
Lexicon of the Old Testament. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1974. Reprint of 1907 ed.
Büchsel, Freiedrich. "δίδωμι, δῶρον, δωρέομαι, δώρημα, δωρεά, δωρεάν, ἀπο-,
ἀνταποδίδωμι, ἀνταπόδοσις, ἀνταπόδομα, παραδίδωμι, παράδοσις." TDNT
2:166-173.
Lamberty-Zielinski, H. “ה מ nəšāmah.” Pages 65-70 in TDOT 10. Edited by G. Johannes נ
Botternweck, Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry. Translated by Douglas W.
Stott. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999.
Liddell, H.G. A Lexicon: Abridged from Liddell and Scott's Greek-English Lexicon. Oak
Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1996.
Louw, Johannes P., and Eugene Albert Nida. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament:
Based on Semantic Domains. Electronic edition of the 2nd ed. New York: United
Bible Societies, 1996.
Maass, F. “ם ’ādhām.” Pages 75-87 in TDOT 1. Rev. ed. Edited by G. Johannes
Botternweck and Helmer Ringgren. Translated by John T. Willis. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1974.
Seebass, H. “ נ פ nep eš.” Pages 497-519 in TDOT 9. Edited by G. Johannes Botternweck,
Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry. Translated by David E. Green. Grand
Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 1998.
55
Seow, C. L. A Grammar for Biblical Hebrew. Rev. ed. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995.
Tengström, S. and H.-J. Fabry. “ ר ח rūaḥ.” Pages 365-402 in TDOT 13. Edited by G.
Johannes Botternweck, Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry. Translated by
David E. Green. Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2004.
III. COMMENTARIES ON GENESIS
Alexandre, Monique. Le Commencement Du Livre Genese I-V: La version grecque de la
Septante et sa reception. CA 3. Paris: Beauchesne, 1988.
Brayford, Susan. Genesis. Edited by Stanley E. Porter, Richard S. Hess and John Jarick.
SCS. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2007.
Brueggemann, Walter. Genesis. Interpretation. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1982.
Dillmann, A. Genesis: Critically and Exegetically Expounded. Vol. 1. Edinburgh: T. & T.
Clark, 1897.
Hamilton, Victor P. The Book of Genesis: Chapters 1-17. NICOT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1990.
Louth, Andrew, and Marco Conti. Genesis 1-11. ACCS 1. Downers Grove, Ill:
InterVarsity Press, 2001.
Sarna, Nahum M. Genesis בראשית. JPSTC. Edited by Nahum M. Sarna and Chaim Potok.
Philadelphia, New York, Jerusalem: Jewish Publication Society, 1989.
Skinner, John. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis. 2nd ed. ICC. Edinburgh: T.
& T. Clark, 1930.
von Rad, Gerhard. Genesis: A Commentary. Rev. ed. OTL. Philadelphia: Westminster
Press, 1972.
Wenham, Gordon J. Genesis 1-15. Edited by David A. Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker and
John D. W. Watts. WBC 1. Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987.
Westermann, Claus. Genesis 1-11: A Commentary. Translated by John J. Scullion.
Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1984.
IV. COMMENTARIES ON ISAIAH
Blenkinsopp, Joseph. Isaiah 40-55. AB. New York: Doubleday, 2002.
Goldingay, John. The Message of Isaiah 40-55: A Literary-Theological Commentary. London
and New York: T. & T. Clark, 2005.
Hartley, John E. The Book of Job. NICOT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.
Seitz, Christopher R. “The Book of Isaiah 40-66.” Pages 307-552 in NIB 6. Nashville:
Abingdon Press, 2001.
56
Watts, John D. W. Isaiah 34-66. Rev. ed. Edited by Bruce M. Metzger, John D. W. Watts,
and James W. Watts. WBC 25. Nashville, Dallas, Mexico City, Rio de Janeiro,
Beijing: Thomas Nelson, 2005.
Westermann, Claus. Isaiah 40-66: A Commentary. Translated by David M. G. Stalker. OTL.
Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1969. Translated from Das Buch Jesaiah, 40-66.
1st ed. DATD 19. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966.
V. COMMENTARIES ON ACTS
Barrett, C. K. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. Vol. 2. ICC.
Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998.
Bock, Darrell L. Acts. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007.
Bruce, F. F. The Acts of the Apostles: Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary. 3rd ed.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990.
Conzelmann, Hans. Acts of the Apostles. Translated by James Limburg, A. Thomas
Kraabel, and Donald H. Juel. Edited by Eldon Jay Epp and Christopher R.
Matthews. Herm. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987. Translated from Die
Apostelgeschiche, verbesserte Auflage, 1972. Reprint of Die Apostelgeschiche,
Tübingen, J.C.B. Mohr, 1963.
Dunn, James D. G. The Acts of the Apostles. EC. Peterborough: Epworth Press, 1996.
Haenchen, Ernst. The Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary. Translated by Bernard Noble
and Gerald Shinn. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1971. Translation of Die
Apostolgeschichte. 14th ed. Go ttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1965.
Johnson, Luke Timothy. The Acts of the Apostles. Edited by Daniel J. Harrington, S. J.
Sacra Pagina 5. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1992.
Kee, Howard C. To Every Nation Under Heaven: The Acts of the Apostles. Harrisburg:
Trinity Press International, 1997.
Lake, Kirsopp and Henry J. Cadbury. English Translation and Commentary. Vol. 4 of The
Beginnings of Christianity: Part I: The Acts of the Apostles. Edited by Foakes Jackson
and Kirsopp Lake. London: Macmillan and Co., LTD, 1933.
Malina, Bruce J, and John J. Pilch. Social-Science Commentary on the Book of Acts. SSC.
Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2008.
Marshall, I. Howard. The Acts of the Apostles. TNTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980.
Martin, Francis, and Thomas C. Oden. Acts. ACCS 5. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books,
2006.
Munck, Johannes. The Acts of the Apostles. AB 31. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967.
Parsons, Mikeal C. Acts. ΠΑΙ. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008.
Pelikan, Jaroslav. Acts. BTCB. Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2005.
57
Pervo, Richard I. Acts: A Commentary. Herm. Edited by Harold W. Attridge. Herm.
Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2009.
Peterson, David. The Acts of the Apostles. PNTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009.
Polhill, John B. Acts. NAC 26. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1992.
Spencer, F. Scott. Acts. Read. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997.
Stott, John R. W. The Message of Acts: The Spirit, the Church & the World. BST. Downers
Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1990.
Talbert, Charles H. Reading Acts: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Acts of the
Apostles. New York: Crossroad Publishing Company, 1997.
Tannehill, Robert C. The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts: A Literary Interpretation. 2 vols.
Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990.
Wall, Robert W. "Acts." Pages 1-368 in NIB 10. Nashville, Tenn: Abingdon, 2001.
Williams, David J. Acts. NIBCNT. Edited by W. Ward Gasque. Peabody, MA:
Hendrickson Publishers, 1985.
VI. COMMENTARIES ON OTHER BIBLICAL TEXTS
Allen, Leslie C. Psalms 101-150. Edited by David A. Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker and John
D. W. Watts. WBC 21. Waco, TX: Word Books, 1983.
Bartholomew, Craig G. Ecclesiastes. Edited by Tremper Longman III. BCOTWP. Grand
Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009.
Christensen, Duane L. Deuteronomy 1:1-21:9. Rev. ed. Edited by Bruce M. Metzger, John
D. Watts and James W. Watts. WBC 6A. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers,
2001.
--------. Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12. Edited by Bruce M. Metzger, John D. Watts and James
W. Watts. WBC 6B. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2002.
Clements, Ronald E. “The Book of Deuteronomy.” Pages 269-552 in NIB 2. Nashville:
Abingdon Press, 1998.
Clines, David J. A. Job: 1-20. Edited by Bruce M. Metzger, John D. W. Watts, and James
W. Watts. WBC 17. Dallas, Tex: Word Books, 1989.
--------. Job 21-37. Edited by Bruce M. Metzger, John D. W. Watts, and James W. Watts.
WBC 18A. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2006.
Collins, John J. A Commentary on the Book of Daniel. Edited by Frank Moore Cross. Herm.
Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.
Craghan, John. Esther, Judith, Tobit, Jonah, Ruth. OTM 16. Edited by Carroll Stuhlmueller
and Martin McNamara. Wilmington, D.E.: Michael Glazier, 1982.
Driver, Samuel Rolles and George Buchanan Gray. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary
on the Book of Job. ICC. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1921.
58
Ellis, Peter F. Jeremiah, Baruch. ColBC 14. Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press, 1986.
Fitzmyer, Joseph A. First Corinthians: A New Translation with Introduction and
Commentary. AB 32. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2008.
Kodell, Jerome. Lamentations, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Obadiah, Joel, Second Zechariah,
Baruch. Edited by Carroll Stuhlmueller and Martin McNamara. OTM 14.
Wilmington, D.E.: Michael Glazier, 1982.
Kru ger, Thomas. Qoheleth. Edited by Klaus Baltzer. Trnaslated by O. C. Dean Jr. Herm.
Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2004.
Longman, Tremper III. The Book of Ecclesiastes. NICOT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998.
McCann, J. Clinton, Jr. “The Book of Psalms.” Pages 639-1280 in NIB 4. Nashville:
Abingdon Press, 1996.
Murphy, Roland E. Proverbs. Edited by Bruce M. Metzger, John D. W. Watts and James
W. Watts. WBC 22. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1998.
Newsom, Carol A. “The Book of Job.” Pages 317-637 in NIB 4. Nashville: Abingdon
Press, 1996.
Sampley, J. Paul. “The First Letter to the Corinthians.” Pages 771-1003 in NIB 10.
Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 2001.
Sweeney, Marvin A. I & II Kings. Edited by William P. Brown, Carol A. Newsom, and
David L. Peterson. OTL. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2007.
Towner, W. Sibley. The Book of Ecclesiastes. Pages 265-360 in NIB 5. Nashville: Abingdon
Press, 1997.
Toy, Craford H. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Proverbs. ICC. New
York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1902.
van Leeuwen, Raymond C. “The Book of Proverbs.” Pages 17-264 in NIB 5. Nashville:
Abingdon Press, 1997.
Waltke, Bruce K. The Book of Proverbs: Chapters 15-31. NICOT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
2005.
VII. COMMENTARIES ON APOCRYPHA
Clarke, Ernest G. The Wisdom of Solomon. CBC. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1973.
Coggins, R. J. and M. A. Knibb. The First and Second Books of Esdras. CBC. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1979.
Crenshaw, James L. “The Book of Sirach.” Pages 601-867 in NIB 5. Nashville: Abingdon
Press, 1997.
Dancy, J. C. The Shorter Books of the Apocrypha. ColBC. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1972.
59
Doran, Robert. “The Second Book of Maccabees.” Pages 179-299 of NIB 4. Nashville:
Abingdon Press, 1996.
Goldstein, Jonathan A. II Maccabees. Edited by William Foxwell Albright and David Noel
Freedman. AB 41A. Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1983.
Moore, Carey. Tobit. AB 40A. New York: Doubleday, 1996.
Nowell, Irene. “The Book of Tobit.” Pages 973-1071 in NIB 3. Nashville: Abingdon Press,
1999.
Reese, James M. The Book of Wisdom, Song of Songs. OTM 20. Wilmington, D.E.: Michael
Glazier, 1983.
Kolarcik, Michael S. J. “The Book of Wisdom.” Pages 435-600 in NIB 5. Nashville:
Abingdon Press, 1997.
Stone, Michael Edward. Fourth Ezra. Edited by Frank Moore Cross. Herm. Minneapolis:
Fortress Press, 1990.
Wills, Lawrence M. “The Book of Judith.” Pages 1073-1183 in NIB 3. Nashville:
Abingdon Press, 1999.
Winston, David. The Wisdom of Solomon. AB 43. Garden City, New York: Doubleday,
1979.
VIII. COMMENTARIES ON OTHER ANCIENT TEXTS
Feldman, Louis H. Judean Antiquities 1-4. Vol. 3 of Flavius Josephus: Translation and
Commentary. Edited by Steve Mason. Leiden, Boston, Ko ln: Brill, 2000.
Hadas, Moses. Aristeas to Philocrates. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1951.
Kidd, Douglas. Aratus: Phaenomena. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Runia, David T. On the Creation of the Cosmos according to Moses: Introduction, Translation
and Commentary. PACS 1. Leiden: Brill, 2001.
Thom, Johan C. e nthes’ Hymn t Ze s: Text, Translation, and Commentary. Tübingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 2005.
van der Horst, P. W. The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides: With Introduction and Commentary.
Edited by A. M. Denis and M. de Jonge. SVTP Leiden: Brill, 1978.
60
IX. SOURCES ON THE HEBREW BIBLE AND SEPTUAGINT
Dollar, Harold. “A Critical Investigation of the Creation of Man as Given in Genesis 2:7.”
M. Div. thesis, Grace Theological Seminary, May 1971.
Hildebrandt, Wilf. An Old Testament Theology of the Spirit of God. Peabody, Mass:
Hendrickson, 1995.
Kaiser, Otto and Eduard Lohse. Death & Life. Translated by John E. Steely. BES.
Nashville: Abingdon, 1981. Translation of Tod Und Leben. Verlag W.
Kohlhammer, 1977.
Richardson, Ernest C. "ויפח of Genesis 2:7." JSBLE 5.2 (1885): 49-55.
Tov, Emmanuel. “Recensional Differences between the Masoretic Text and the
Septuagint of Proverbs.” Pages 43-56 of Of Scribes and Scrolls: Studies on the
Hebrew Bible, Intertestamental Judaism, and Christian Origins. CTSRR 5. Lanham,
New York, London: University Press of America: 1990.
Watts, Rikk E. "The New Exodus/New Creational Restoration of the Image of God."
Pages 15-41 in What Does it Mean to be Saved? Edited by John G. Stackhouse, Jr.
Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002.
Wifall, W. “The Breath of His Nostrils: Gen 2:7b,” CBQ 36 (1974): 237-40.
Wilkinson, David. The Message of Creation: Encountering the Lord of the Universe. BST.
Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002.
Wolff, Hans Walter. Anthropology of the Old Testament. Translated by Margaret Kohl.
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1974.
X. SOURCES ON EARLY JUDAISM
Abrahams, I. "Recent Criticism of the Letter of Aristeas." JQR 14.2 (1902): 321-342.
Baker, Margaret. “The Archangel Raphael in the Book of Tobit.” Pages 118-128 in Studies
in the Book of Tobit: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Edited by Mark Bredin. LSTS 55.
New York: T. & T. Clark, 2006.
Barclay, John M. G. Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora: From Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE
– 117 CE). Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1996.
Bartlett, John R. Jews in the Hellenistic World: Josephus, Aristeas, The Sibylline Oracles,
Eupolemus. Vol. 1i of Cambridge Commentaries on Writings of the Jewish & Christian
World 200 BC to AD 200. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985.
Begg, Christopher T. and Paul Spilsbury. Judean Antiquities 8-10. Vol. 5 of Flavius
Josephus: Translation and Commentary. Edited by Steve Mason. Leiden and Boston:
Brill, 2005.
Best, Ernest. "The Use and Non-Use of Pneuma by Josephus." NovT 3.3 (1959): 218-225.
61
Bohak, Gideon. Joseph and Aseneth and the Jewish Temple in Heliopolis. Edited by William
Adler. SBLEJL 10. Altanta: Scholars Press, 1996.
Burkes, Shannon. God, Self, and Death: The Shape of Religious Transformation in the Second
Temple Period. JSJSup 79. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2003.
Carmichael, Calum M. The Story of Creation: Its Origin and Its Interpretation in Philo and the
Fourth Gospel. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.
Collins, A. Yarbo. “Aristobulus.” Pages 831-42 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Vol.
2. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. New York: Doubleday, 1985.
Collins, John J. Jewish Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age. OTL. Louisville, K.Y.: Westminster
John Knox Press, 1997.
---------. Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora. 2nd ed.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000.
---------. “The Mysteries of God: Creation and Eschatology in 4QInstruction and the
Wisdom of Solomon.” Pages 287-305 in Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea
Scrolls and in the Biblical Tradition. Edited by F. García Martínez. Leuven: Leuven
University Press, 2003.
deSilva, David A. Introducing the Apocrypha: Message, Context and Significance. Grand
Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002.
Eldridge, Michael D. Dying Adam with His Multiethnic Family: Understanding the Greek Life
of Adam and Eve. Leiden, Boston and Köln: Brill, 2001.
Feldman, Louis H. “Josephus’ Commentary on Genesis.” JQRMS 72.2 (1981):121-131.
Franxman, Thomas W. Genes s n the “Jew sh nt t es” f F v s J seph s. Rome:
Biblical Institute Press, 1979.
Gilbert, Maurice. La critique des dieux dans le Livre de la Sagesse: Sg 13-15. AnBib 53. Rome:
Biblical Institute Press, 1973.
Glatzer, Nahum N., ed. The Literature of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus. New York:
Schocken Books, 1972.
Hogan, Karina Martin. Theologies in Conflict in 4 Ezra: Wisdom Debate and Apocalyptic
Solution. JSJSup 130 Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2008.
Janowitz, Naomi. “Translating Cult: The Letter of Aristeas and Hellenistic Judaism.”
Pages 347-357 in SBLSP 1983. Edited by Kent Harold Richards. Chico, CA:
Scholars Press, 1983.
Kamesar, Adam. The Cambridge Companion to Philo. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2009.
Knibb, Michael A. Essays on the Book of Enoch and Other Early Jewish Texts and Traditions.
Edited by H. J. de Jonhe, M. A. Knibb, J.-C. Haelewyck, and J. Tromp. Studia in
Veteris Testaemnti Pseudepigrapha 22. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2009.
62
Kvam, Kristen E., Linda S. Schearing and Valarie H. Ziegler, eds. Eve & Adam: Jewish,
Christian, and Muslim Readings on Genesis and Gender. Bloomington and
Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1999.
Levison, John R. Portraits of Adam in Early Judaism: From Sirach to 2 Baruch. Sheffield:
JSOT, 1988.
--------. The Spirit in First-Century Judaism. Boston, Mass: Brill Academic Publishers, 2002.
--------. “Adam and Eve.” Pages 300-302 in The Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism.
Edited by John J. Collins and Daniel C. Harlow. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010.
--------. “Spirit, Holy.” Pages 1252-1255 in The Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism. Edited
by John J. Collins and Daniel C. Harlow. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010.
Longenecker, Bruce W. Eschatology and the Covenant: A Comparison of 4 Ezra and Romans
1-11. Edited by David E. Orton. JSNTS 57. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991.
--------. 2 Esdras. Sheffield, Eng.: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995.
MacDonald, Nathan. “’Bread on the Grave of the Righteous’ (Tob 4.17).” Pages 99-103 in
Studies in the Book of Tobit: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Edited by Mark Bredin.
LSTS 55. New York: T. & T. Clark, 2006.
Martínez, F. García. "Introduction." Pages xiii-xxxiv in Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the
Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Biblical Tradition. Edited by F. García Martínez. Leuven:
Leuven University Press, 2003.
Nickelsburg, George W. E. Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life in Intertestamental
Judaism and Early Christianity. Exp. ed. HTS 56. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press, 2006.
Niehoff, Maren R. “Philo, Allegorical Commentary.” Pages 1070-1072 in The Eerdmans
Dictionary of Early Judaism. Edited by John J. Collins and Daniel C. Harlow. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010.
--------. “Philo, Exposition of the Law.” Pages 1074-1076 in The Eerdmans Dictionary of
Early Judaism. Edited by John J. Collins and Daniel C. Harlow. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2010.
Neve, Lloyd R. The Spirit of God in the Old Testament. Tokyo: Seibunsha, 1972.
Orlov, Andrei A. Selected Studies in the Slavonic Pseudepigrapha. Edited by H. J. de Jonge,
J.-C. Haelewyck, and J. Tromp. SVTP 23. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2009.
Rajak, Tessa. “The Location of Cultures in Second Temple Palestine: The Evidence of
Josephus.” Pages 1-14 in The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting. BAFCS 4.
Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.
Reese, James M. Hellenistic Influence on the Book of Wisdom and Its Consequences. Rome:
Biblical Institute Press, 1970.
Runia, David T. “God and Man in Philo of Alexandria.” JTS 39.1 (1988): 48-75.
63
Russell, D. S. The Method & Message of Jewish Apocalyptic: 200 BC – AD 100. OTL.
Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1964.
Schlatter, D. A. Die Theologie des Judentums nach dem Gericht des Josefus. BFCT 2.26.
Gu tersloh, 1932.
Sterling, Gregory E. “Philo.” Pages 1063-1070 in The Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism.
Edited by John J. Collins and Daniel C. Harlow. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010.
Tcherikover, V. "The Ideology of the Letter of Aristeas." HTR 51.2 (1958): 59-85.
Thackeray, H. St. J. “Appendix: The Letter of Aristeas.” Pages 531-606 in An Introduction
to the Old Testament in Greek. Written by Henry Barclay Swete. Revised by
Richard Rusden Ottley. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1914.
Tobin, Thomas H. The Creation of Man: Philo and the History of Interpretation. Washington,
DC: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1983.
van Henten, Jan Willem. The Maccabean Martyrs as Saviours of the Jewish People: A Study of
2 and 4 Maccabees. Leiden, New York, and Köln: Brill, 1997.
Wilson, Walter T. The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides. Edited by Loren T. Stuckenbruck.
CEJL. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2005.
Winston, David. Logos and Mystical Theology in Philo of Alexandria. Cincinnati: Hebrew
Union College Press, 1985.
--------. “Theodicy and Creation.” Pages 128-34 in The Ancestral Philosophy: Hellenistic
Philosophy in Second Temple Judaism. Edited by Gregory E. Sterling. Providence:
Brown Judaic Studies, 2001.
Worth, Roland H., Jr. Bible Translations: A History Through Source Documents. Jefferson,
N.C. and London: McFarland & Co., 1992.
Wright, N. T. The Resurrection of the Son of God. Vol. 3 of Christian Origins and the Question
of God. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003.
XI. SOURCES ON THE NEW TESTAMENT
A dna, Jostein, and Hans Kvalbein. The Mission of the Early Church to Jews and Gentiles.
WUNT 127. Tu bingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000.
Balch, David L. “The Areopagus Speech: An Appeal to the Stoic Historian Posidonius
against Later Stoics and the Epicureans.” Pages 52-79 in Greeks, Romans, and
Christians: Essays in Honor of Abraham J. Malherbe. Edited by David L. Balch,
Everett Ferguson, and Wayne A. Meeks. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990.
Bauckham, Richard. The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting. BAFCS 4. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1995.
Beasley-Murray, Paul. The Message of the Resurrection: Christ Is Risen! Edited by Derek
Tidball. BST. Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 2000.
64
Bousset, D. Wilhelm. Die Religion Des Judentums. HNT 21. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul
Siebeck), 1966.
Bruce, F. F. “The Speeches in Acts – Thirty Years After.” Pages 53-68 in Reconciliation and
Hope: New Testament Essays on Atonement and Eschatology Presented to L. L. Morris
on His 60th Birthday. Edited by Robert Banks. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975.
Bultmann, Rudolph. Theology of the New Testament. Vol. 1. Translated by Kendrick
Grobel. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1951.
Childs, Brevard S. The Church's Guide for Reading Paul: The Canonical Shaping of the Pauline
Corpus. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008.
Conzelmann, Hans. “The Address of Paul on the Areopagus.” Pages 217-230 in Studies in
Luke-Acts: Essays Presented in Honor of Paul Schubert. Edited by Leander E. Keck
and J. Louis Martyn. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980.
Dibelius, Martin. Studies in the Acts of the Apostles. Edited by Heinrich Greeven.
Translated by Mary Ling. London: SCM Press, 1956. Translated from Aufsätze
Zur Apostelgeschichte. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1951.
--------. The Book of Acts: Form, Style and Theology. Edited by K. C. Hanson. FCBS.
Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2004.
Esler, Philip F. Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts: The Social and Political Motivations of
Lucan Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
Evans, Craig A. “Jesus and the Spirit: On the Origin and Ministry of the Second Son of
God.” Pages 26-45 in Luke and Scripture: The Function of Sacred Tradition in Luke-
Acts. Edited by Craig A. Evans and James A. Sanders. Minneapolis: Fortress
Press, 1993.
Fudge, Edward. "Paul's Apostolic Self-Consciousness at Athens." JETS 14.3 (1971): 193-
198.
Ga rtner, Bertil. The Areopagus Speech and Natural Revelation. Translated by Carolyn
Hannay King. ASNU 21. Uppsala: Almquist & Wiksells, 1955.
Gaventa, Beverly R. “Traditions in Conversation and Collision: Reflections on
Multiculturalism in the Acts of the Apostles.” Pages 30-41 in Making Room at the
Table: An Invitation to Multicultural Worship. Edited by Brian K. Blount and
Leonora Tubbs Tisdale. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001.
Gempf, Conrad. “Before Paul Arrived in Corinth: The Mission Strategies in 1
Corinthians 2:2 and Acts 17.” Pages 126-142 in The New Testament in Its First
Century Setting: Essays on Context and Background in Honour of B.W. Winter on His
65th Birthday. Edited by P. J. Williams, Andrew D. Clarke, Peter M. Head and
David Instone-Brewer. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004.
Gill, David W. "Dionysios and Damaris: A Note on Acts 17:34." CBQ 61 (1999): 483-490.
Gray, Patrick. "Athenian Curiosity (Acts 17:21)." NovT 47.2 (2005): 109-116.
65
Green, Joel B. How to Read the Gospels & Acts. HRS. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity
Press, 1987.
Hays, Richard B. Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul. New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1989.
Heacock, Clint. Text and Culture: Bringing the Biblical Worldview to Bear on the World: A
Biblical-Theological Study of Acts 17:16-34. Unpublished Thesis; Portland, Oregon:
Western Seminary, 2003.
Hull, Robert F., Jr. "'Lucanisms' in the Western Text of Acts? A Reappraisal." JBL 107.4
(1988): 695-707.
Hur, Ju. A Dynamic Reading of the Holy Spirit in Luke-Acts. JSNT 211. Sheffield, England:
Sheffield Academic Press, 2001.
Jervell, Jacob. “The Church of Jews and Godfearers.” Pages 11-20 in Luke-Acts and the
Jewish People: Eight Critical Perspectives. Edited by Joseph B. Tyson. Minneapolis:
Augsburg Publishing House, 1988.
--------. The Theology of the Acts of the Apostles. NTT. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1996.
--------. “The Future of the Past: Luke’s Vision of Salvation History and Its Bearing on His
Writing of History.” Pages 104-126 in History, Literature, and Society in the Book of
Acts. Edited by Ben Witherington, III. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1996.
Johnson, Luke Timothy. Septuagintal Midrash in the Speeches of Acts. Milwaukee, WI:
Marquette University Press, 2002.
Kennedy, George A. New Testament Interpretation through Rhetorical Criticism. Chapel
Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1984.
Krause, Deborah. "Keeping It Real: the Image of God in the New Testament." Int 59.4
(2005): 358-368.
Litwak, Kenneth D. "Israel's Prophets Meet Athens' Philosophers: Scriptural Echoes in
Acts 17,22-31." Biblica 85.2 (2004): 199-216.
--------. Echoes of Scripture in Luke-Acts: Telling the History of God's People Intertextually.
JSNT 282. London: T & T Clark International, 2005.
Manning, Gary T. Echoes of a Prophet: The Use of Ezekiel in the Gospel of John and in
Literature of the Second Temple Period. JSNTSup 270. New York: T & T Clark
International, 2004.
Marshall, I H. Luke: Historian & Theologian. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 1998.
Martinez, Brandon C. “Greco-Roman Backgrounds of the Unknown God in Acts 17:23.”
Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, April 2009.
Moxness, Halvor. “’He Saw that the City Was Full of Idols’ (Acts 17:16).” Pages 107-131
in Mighty Minorities?: Minorities in Early Christianity – Positions and Strategies:
66
Essays in Honour of Jacob Hervell on His 70th Birthday 21 May 1995. Edited by David
Hellholm, Halvor Moxnes and Turid Karlsen Seim. Oslo, Copenhagen,
Stockholm, Boston: Scandinavian University Press, 1995.
Nave, Guy D., Jr. The Role and Function of Repentance in Luke-Acts. Atlanta: Society of
Biblical Literature, 2002.
Pathrapankal, Joseph. "From Areopagus to Corinth (Acts 17:22-31; I Cor 2:1-5): A Study
on the Transition from the Power of Knowledge to the Power of the Spirit." MS
23.1 (2006): 61-80.
Phillips, Thomas E. Contemporary Studies in Acts. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press,
2009.
Robinson, Anthony B, and Robert W. Wall. Called to Be Church: The Book of Acts for a New
Day. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006.
Schubert, Paul. “The Place of the Areopagus Speech in the Composition of Acts.” Pages
235-261 in Transitions in Biblical Scholarship. Edited by Go sta W. Ahlstro m and
John C. Rylaarsdam. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968.
Scott, James M. “Luke’s Geographical Horizon.” Pages 483-544 in The Book of Acts in Its
Graeco-Roman Setting. BAFCS 2. Edited by David W. Gill and Conrad H. Gempf.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994.
Soards, Marion L. The Speeches in Acts: Their Content, Context, and Concerns. Louisville:
Westminster/John Knox Press, 1994.
Stegmann, Basil Augustine. hr st, the ‘M n fr m He ven’; St y f 1 r 15, 45-47 in the
light of the anthropology of Philo Judaeus. CUANTS 6. Washington, D.C.: The
Catholic University of America, 1927.
Taylor, Terrence T. “The Meaning of ‘a Day’ in Acts 17:31.” B.Div. thesis, Grace
Theological Seminary, June 1966.
Vanderpool, Eugene. “The Apostle Paul in Athens.” Arch 3.1 (1950): 34-37.
Winter, Bruce W. “On Introducing Gods to Athens: An Alternative Reading of Acts
17:18-20.” TynBul 47.1 (1996): 71-90.
Wyckoff, John W, Paul Alexander, Jordan D. May, and Robert G. Reid. Trajectories in the
Book of Acts: Essays in Honor of John Wesley Wyckoff. Eugene, Or: Wipf & Stock,
2010.
XII. SOURCES ON GRECO-ROMAN AND JEWISH BACKGROUNDS
Broneer, Oscar. “Athens. ‘City of Idol Worship’.” BA 21 (1958): 2-28.
Evans, Craig A. and Stanley E. Porter, eds. Dictionary of New Testament Background.
Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000.
67
Ferguson, Everett. Backgrounds of Early Christianity. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
2003.
Garland, Robert. Introducing New Gods: The Politics of Athenian Religion. Ithaca, NY:
Cornell University Press, 1992.
Gill, David W. “Achaia.” Pages 433-453 in The Book of Acts in Its Graeco-Roman Setting.
BAFCS 2. Edited by David W. Gill and Conrad H. Gempf. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1994.
Grand, Michael. Greek and Latin Authors: 800 B.C.-A.D. 1000. WAS. New York: H. W.
Wilson Company, 1980.
Harris, J. Rendel. “A Further Note on the Cretans.” The Expositor 7.16 (April, 1907): 332-
37.
Levinskaya, I A. The Book of Acts in Its Diaspora Setting. BAFCS 5. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1996.
Winter, Bruce W, and Andrew D. Clarke. The Book of Acts in Its Ancient Literary Setting.
BAFCS 1. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.
XIII. SOURCES ON GRECO-ROMAN MYTHOLOGY
Frazer, Sir James George. “Ancient Stories of a Great Flood.” Huxley Memorial Lectures.
London: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 1928.
---------. Myths of the Origin of Fire. New York: Hacker Art Books, 1984. Reprint of Myths
of the Origin of Fire. London, MacMillan and Co., 1930.
Gantz, Timothy. Early Greek Myth: A Guide to Literary and Artistic Sources. Baltimore &
London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1993.
Gerke, Friedrich. Die Christlichen Sarkophage der Vorkonstantinischen Zeit. Berlin: Verlag
von Walter de Gruyter, 1940.
Grimal, Pierre. The Dictionary of Classical Mythology. Translated by A. R. Maxwell-
Hyslop. New York: Basil Blackwell Publisher, 1986.
Hardie, Philip. The Cambridge Companion to Ovid. Edinburgh: Cambridge University
Press, 2002.
Hurwit, Jeffrey M. "Pandora and the Athena Parthenos." AJA 99.2 (1995): 171-186.
Larrington, Carolyne, ed. The Feminist Companion to Mythology. London: Pandora, 1992.
Lenowitz, Harris and Charles Doria. Origins: Creation Texts from the Ancient
Mediterranean. New York: AMS Press, 1976.
March, Jenny. Dictionary of Classical Mythology. London: Cassell, 1998.
Otis, Brooks. "The Argumenta of the So-Called Lactantius." HSCP 47 (1936): 131-163.
Price, Simon and Emily Kearns, eds. The Oxford Dictionary of Classical Myth & Religion.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
68
Raggio, Olga. “The Myth of Prometheus: Its Survival and Metamorphoses up to the
Eighteenth Century.” JWCI 21.1/2 (1958):44-62.
Turcan, Richard. “Note sur les sarcophages ‘au Promethee’.” Lat 27 (1968): 628-634.
Vernant, Jean-Pierre. The Universe, the Gods, and Men: Ancient Greek Myths. Translated by
Linda Asher. New York: Harper Collins, 2001.
XIV. SOURCES ON GRECO-ROMAN PHILOSOPHY
Croy, N. Clayton. "Hellenistic Philosophies and the Preaching of the Resurrection (Acts
17:18, 32)." NovT 39.1 (1997): 21-39.
Dillon, John. “Platonism, Early and Middle.” Pages 679-680 in Concise Routledge
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. London: Routledge, 2000.
Furley, David. “Cosmology.” Pages 412-451 in The Cambridge History of Hellenistic
Philosophy. Edited by Keimpe Algra. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press, 1999.
Long, A. A. “Stoic Psychology.” Pages 560-584 in The Cambridge History of Hellenistic
Philosophy. Edited by Algra, Keimpe. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press, 1999.
Pelikan, Jaroslav. What Has Athens to Do with Jerusalem?: Timaeus and Genesis in
Counterpoint. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1997.
Sedley, David. “Hellenistic Physics and Metaphysics.” Pages 355-411 in The Cambridge
History of Hellenistic Philosophy. Edited by Keimpe Algra. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press, 1999.
---------. “Epicureanism.” Pages 244-245 in Concise Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
London: Routledge, 2000.
---------. “Epicurus (341-271 BC).” Page 245 in Concise Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
London: Routledge, 2000.
---------. “Stoicism.” Pages 862-864 in Concise Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. London:
Routledge, 2000.
Vogel C. J. de. "Platonism and Christianity: A Mere Antagonism or a Profound Common
Ground?" VC 39.1 (1985): 1-62.
XV. SOURCES ON ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN MYTHOLOGY
Clines, D. G. A. "The Image of God in Man." TynBul 19 (1968): 53-103.
Lenormant, François. The Beginnings of History According to the Bible and the Traditions of
Oriental Peoples: From the Creation of Man to the Deluge. Translated from 2nd ed. by
Francis Brown. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1883.
69
Tiggay, Jeffrey H. The Evolution of the Gilgamesh Epic. Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press, 1982.
XVI. SOURCES ON BIBLICAL ANTHROPOLOGY AND PNEUMATOLOGY
Green, Joel B. Body, Soul, and Human Life: The Nature of Humanity in the Bible. Grand
Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008.
Johnson, Elizabeth A. She Who Is: The Mystery of God in Feminist Theological Discourse.
New York: Crossroad, 1992.
Levison, John R. Filled with the Spirit. Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2009.
Macchia, Frank D. Justified in the Spirit: Creation, Redemption, and the Triune God. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010.
--------. “The Spirit of Life and the Spirit of Immortality: An Appreciative Review of
Levison's Filled with the Spirit.” Pneuma 33.1 (2011): 69-78.
Philip, Finny. The Origins of Pauline Pneumatology: The Eschatological Bestowal of the Spirit
p n Gent es n J sm n n the r y eve pment f P ’s The gy. Tübingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 2005.
70
INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS
Abrahams, I., 26
Barclay, John M. G., 28
Barrett, C. K., 4, 37
Bartlett, John R., 26
Baumgärtel Friedrich, 5
Begg, Christopher T., 33
Bertram, Georg, 5, 28
Best, Ernest, 31
Bieder, Werner, 5
Blenkinsopp, Joseph, 8
Bock, Darrell L., 23
Bruce, F. F., 37
Bultmann, Rudolph, 5, 27
Cadbury, Henry J., 23
Clarke, Ernest G., 32
Collins, A. Yarbo, 35, 36
Conzelmann, Hans, 4, 8, 37
Dibelius, Martin, 17, 20, 21, 23, 25, 37, 38
Doria, Charles, 48
Ellis, Peter F., 36
Feldman, Louis H., 32
Ga rtner, Bertil, 4, 20, 21, 25, 30
Gaventa, Beverly R., 2
Gilbert, Maurice, 31, 32
Grand, Michael, 47
Hadas, Moses, 26, 40
Haenchen, Ernst, 7, 17
Harris, J. Rendel, 23
Kern, Otto, 5
Kidd, Douglas, 23, 24
Kleinknecht, Hermann, 5
Lake, Kirsopp, 23, 37
Lenowitz, Harris, 48
Levison, John R., 1, 4, 9, 16, 31, 32, 35, 44
Liddell, H.G., 41
Macchia, Frank D., 1, 2, 4, 10, 16, 17, 23,
44, 45
Marshall, I. Howard, 4, 7, 23
Miller, Frank J., 20
Pervo, Richard I., 21, 22, 23, 38
Peterson, David, 15
Polhill, John B., 23
Raggio, Olga, 47
Reese, James M., 32
Robinson, Anthony B., 4
Schubert, Paul, 5
Schweizer, Eduard, 5
Seitz, Christopher R., 9
Sjöberg, Erik, 5
Spilsbury, Paul, 33
Tobin, Thomas H., 41
van Henten, Jan Willem, 37
von Rad, Gerhard, 5
Wall, Robert W., 4, 23
Westermann, Claus, 9
Winston, David, 31, 32
Wright, N. T., 37
71
INDEX OF ANCIENT SOURCES
A. Old Testament
B. Apocrypha
C. Pseudepigrapha
D. Josephus
E. Philo
F. New Testament
G. Greek and Roman Authors
H. Other Pre-Modern Works
I. Early Christian Literature
A. OLD TESTAMENT
Genesis
1-11 16, 25, 44
1:1-2:4 8
1-2 15
1 8
1:6-8 8
1:9-13 8
1:20-25 8
1:26-27 8
1:28 14
2-5 14
2 9
2:1 7
2:6 15
2:7 4, 5, 6, 9, 15, 16,
28, 31, 32, 37, 40,
41, 44, 49
2:21-23 14
3:20 14
4:14 15
6:3 5, 9, 37
6:7 15
6:17 9
7:4 15
7:22 5. 9, 37
8:8 15
8:9 15
8:13 15
9:7 14
10 13
10:20 12
11:4 15
11:8 15
11:9 15
19:28 15
41:56 15
Exodus
4:22 15
33:5f 7
33:13 12
Deuteronomy
4:4 22
4:19 7
2 Samuel
22:16 5
1 Kings
2:13-22:40 33
8:10-43 33
8:23 33
15:29 5
2 Chronicles
1-18 33
5:11-6:33 33
6:14 33
Esther
3:14 12
4:17 7
Job
4:9 5, 37
12:10 5, 9, 37
26:4 5
27:3-4 9
27:3 5, 9, 37, 39
32:8 5, 37
33:4 5, 9, 37
34:14-15 9
34:14 5, 37
37:10 5, 37
Psalms
51:10-12 5, 9, 37
104:29-30 5, 9, 37
145:18 22
146:4 9
150:6 5
72
Proverbs
1:23 5
11:13 5
17:6 7
20:27 5
24:12 5
Ecclesiastes
3:19-21 5, 9, 37
12:7 5, 9, 37
Isaiah
3:18ff 7
13:10 7
38:16 5
40-48 11, 16, 26
40:19-20 26
41 26
41:1-7 26
41:7 26
42:1-9 6, 11
42:1-4 11, 13
42:1ff 16
42:1 11, 12
42:5 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11,
12, 14, 15, 16, 25,
26, 37, 44, 45
42:6-7 11
42:6 12
42:7 12
42:8 11
42:9 11
44:11 26
46:6 26
49:1-13 11
49:6 12
50:4-9 11
52:13-53:12 11
52:13 12
52:15 13
52:15a 13
53:7-8 12
53:12 12
55:6 22
57:16 5, 37
66:1 36
Ezekiel
13:13 5
Daniel
12:2-3 36
Hosea
11:1 15
Amos
3:1 15
3:2 15
Nahum
2:2 40
B. APOCRYPHA
Baruch
2:17 37, 40, 44
2 Esdras
16:1 5
2 Maccabees
1:10 35
7 38
7:1-41 36
7:9 7
7:22-23 36, 37, 38, 43
7:22 37, 38, 43
7:23 37, 38, 43
14:33 34
14:34 34
14:35 34, 42
14:37-46 38
3 Maccabees
2:2 34
2:9 34, 35, 43
2:10-11 34
4 Maccabees
7:19 37
17:17-18 37
18:17 37
Odes
12:2 7
Sirach
33:21 39, 44
Tobit
3:6 37, 39, 44
Wisdom of Solomon
7:17 7
13-15 29, 32-33
13:1-5 29
73
13:1 30
13:6 29, 42
13:10-19 29
13:10 29-30, 33, 42
13:10b 30
13:10e 30
13:15-16 30
13:18 30
14:8 30
15:5 30
15:7 30
15:8 31
15:11 31, 33, 37, 40, 41
15:11b-c 32
15:16-17 31
15:17 30
C. PSEUDEPIGRAPHA
Letter of Aristeas
16 27, 29, 40, 42, 44
132ff 27
132 26-27, 42
134-151 27
135-136 27
136 27
190 27
Pseudo-Aristobulus
Fragments
3 36
3:1 35
4 36
4:3 36
4:4 36
4:5 36
4:6-7 35
4:8 36
5 36
Testament of Abraham
1 17:3 37, 40
Testament of Gad
5:9 37, 40
D. JOSEPHUS
Antiquities
1.1.2 32, 37
8.4.2-3 33
8.4.2 22
8.4.3 33, 34, 42
12.2 40
12.2.2 40, 42
E. PHILO
On the Creation
66 41
134ff 41, 44
134-135 41
Allegorical Interpretation
1.31ff 41, 44
3.161 41, 44
That the Worse is Wont to
Attack the Better
54-56 35
80ff 41, 44
On the Unchangeableness
of God
56 35
Concerning Noah's Work
as a Planter
19f 41, 44
Who is the Heir of Divine
Things
56f 41, 44
55-57 41
On Dreams
1.34 41, 44
The Special Laws
1.30-31 22
4.123 41,44
On the Virtues
203ff 41, 44
Questions and Answers on
Genesis
1.4f 41, 44
2.8 41
2.56ff 41, 44
F. NEW TESTAMENT
Luke
1:79 12
2:30-32 12
74
3:22 12
9:35 12
11:22 12
22:37 12
23:35 12
24:19 8
John
5:21 28
6:63 28
Acts
2:2 5
2:47 8
3:13 13
6:8 8
9:15-16 14
9:20-22 2
9:32 13
13 13
13:14-47 2
13:17 8
13:46-48 13
13:46-47 13
14 30
14:15-17 2, 19
16:32 2
17 5, 6, 25, 28, 37, 42,
43, 44, 45
17:2-3 2
17:15 10
17:16-34 37
17:16 10
17:17 2, 10
17:18 2, 10, 21, 38, 45
17:21 7, 15
17:22-31
1, 3, 4, 17, 29,
45, 46
17:22 2, 7, 10
17:23 10, 21, 28, 31, 42
17:23b 28
17:24ff 4
17:24-29 33. 42
17:24-26a 24
17:24-25 6, 9, 14, 15,
16, 26, 33, 35,
38, 43
17:24 5, 10, 22, 29, 30,
31, 37, 38, 42, 43
17:24a 10
17:24b 10, 34
17:24b-25a 25, 35
17:25
4, 5, 6, 10, 18, 19,
20, 24, 29, 30, 33,
37, 38, 42, 43, 44,
46
17:25a 10, 18, 21, 30,
34
17:25b 11, 18, 30, 35
17:26-29 10
17:26-27 24. 27
17:26 5, 15, 16, 19, 20,
24, 29, 38, 42, 43
17:26a 14
17:27 1, 10, 16, 22, 29
17:28 2, 3, 10, 17, 21,
29, 33
17:28a 11, 23
17:28b-29a 11
17:28b 16, 25, 35
17:29 10, 27, 30, 42
17:29b 11
17:30-31 28
17:30 7, 31
17:30a 11
17:30b 11, 28
17:31-32 13
18:5 2
18:6 12, 13
21:19 13
22:21 13
24:10 12
24:17 12
26 12
26:1-29 2
26:3 2
26:17-18 12
26:20 13
26:23 13
28:19 12
28:23-28 2
28:28 13
Romans
4:17 28
8:11 28
9:4 15, 16
15:14-21 13
15:16 13
15:18 13
15:20-21 13
1 Corinthians
15:22 28
15:36 28
15:45 28
2 Corinthians
3:6 28
75
Galatians
3:21 28
4:1-5 15, 16
1 Peter
3:18 28
G. GREEK AND
ROMAN AUTHORS
Aeschylus
Prometheus Bound
107-109 47
436-506 47
Aratus
Phaenomena
1-9 23, 35, 36, 43
5 25
Cleanthes
Hymn to Zeus
2 24
4 24
Diogenes Laertius
Lives of the Eminent
Philosophers
7.33 20
Hesiod
Theogany
570ff 47
590 19, 24
592 19, 24, 47
Works and Days
60ff 47
81 47
Juvenal
Satires
14.35 48
Lucian
Literary Prometheus
3 18, 19, 49
Prometheus on Caucasus
13 19, 49
Ovid
Metamorphoses
1.76-86 18, 19, 48
1.78 19
1.85 19
1.363-64 18, 24, 48
1.395-415 19
Philochorus of Athens
FGrHist
328 F 10 48
Plato
Protagoras
320ff 48
Plutarch
Moralia
1034B 20
Porphyry
Ad Gaurum
11 49
Pseudo-Apollodorus
Library
1.7.1 19, 49
Pseudo-Hyginus
Fabulae
142 19, 49
Seneca
Moral Epistles
41:1 22
95.47-50 22
95.48-49 22
95.48 22
95.50 22
Fragments
120 20
Stoicorum Veterum
Fragmenta
1.264 20
H. OTHER PRE-
MODERN WORKS
Etymologicum Magnum
Ἰκόνιον 18,19, 50
Pseudo-Lactantius
Metamorphoseon 18, 50
76
I. EARLY CHRISTIAN
LITERATURE
Clement
Strobaeus
1.1.12 24
Eusebius
Praeparatio evangelica
13.12.1 35
13.13.6-7 35
Lactantius
Divine Institutes
2.2.14 20
Tertullian
Apology
18.3 50