使徒言行録 17:32

聖書日本語

32 死人のよみがえりのことを聞くと、ある者たちはあざ笑い、またある者たちは、「この事については、いずれまた聞くことにする」と言った。

Bible Verse Review
  from Treasury of Scripure Knowledge

some: Acts 17:18, Acts 2:13, Acts 13:41, Acts 25:19, Acts 26:8, Acts 26:24, Acts 26:25, Genesis 19:14, 2 Chronicles 30:9-11, 2 Chronicles 36:16, Luke 22:63, Luke 23:11, Luke 23:36, 1 Corinthians 1:23, 1 Corinthians 4:10, Hebrews 11:36, Hebrews 13:13

We will: Acts 24:25, Luke 14:18, 2 Corinthians 6:2, Hebrews 3:7, Hebrews 3:8

Reciprocal: 2 Chronicles 30:10 - they laughed Job 12:4 - the just Psalms 123:4 - with the scorning Proverbs 23:9 - he Isaiah 28:22 - be ye Jeremiah 20:7 - I am Matthew 13:19 - and understandeth Mark 4:15 - these Mark 5:40 - they John 6:52 - How John 11:24 - I know John 18:38 - What Acts 4:2 - preached Acts 18:1 - departed Acts 18:17 - And Gallio Romans 1:28 - as they did 1 Corinthians 1:18 - foolishness 1 Corinthians 2:14 - they Colossians 2:8 - philosophy 1 Thessalonians 2:13 - because Hebrews 6:2 - resurrection

Gill's Notes on the Bible

When they heard of the resurrection of the dead,.... Of a certain man that the apostle said God had raised from the dead, though they knew not who he was:

some mocked; at him, and at the doctrine he preached: these very likely were of the Epicurean sect, who disbelieved a future state; though, as Tertullian observes b, the doctrine of the resurrection was denied by every sect of the philosophers: it is a doctrine of pure revelation, and what the light of nature never taught men, and by which men being only guided, have declared against, and have treated it with the utmost ridicule and contempt. Pliny c reckons it, among childish fancies, and calls it vanity, and downright madness to believe it; as does also Caecilius in Minutius Felix d, and who even calls it a lie, and places it among old wives' fables; and Celsus in Origen e represents it as exceeding detestable, abominable, and impossible.

And others said, we will hear thee again of this matter; some think these were of the Stoic sect, who held a future state, and that the soul would live after the body, and had some notions which looked inclining to this doctrine: however, these thought there might be something in what the apostle said; they could not receive it readily, and yet could not deny it; they were willing to take time to consider of it; and were desirous of hearing him again upon that subject; in which they might be very open and upright; and this might not be a mere excuse to shift off any further hearing at that time, like that of Felix, in Acts 24:1.

b De praescript. Heret. c. 7. p. 232. c Nat. Hist. l. 7. c. 55. d Octav. p. 10. e Contra Cals. l. 5. p. 240.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

Some mocked - Some of the philosophers derided him. The doctrine of the resurrection of the dead was believed by none of the Greeks; it seemed incredible; and they regarded it as so absurd as not to admit of an argument, It has nor been uncommon for even professed philosophers to mock at the doctrines of religion, and to meet the arguments of Christianity with a sneer. The Epicureans particularly would be likely to deride this, as they denied altogether any future state. It is not improbable that this derision by the Epicureans produced such a disturbance as to break off Paul’s discourse, as that of Stephen had been by the clamor of the Jews, Acts 7:54.

And others said - Probably some of the Stoics. The doctrine of a future state was not denied by them; and the fact, affirmed by Paul, that one had been raised up from the dead, would appear more plausible to them, and it might be a matter worth inquiry to ascertain whether the alleged fact did not furnish a new argument for their views. They therefore proposed to examine this further at some future time. That the inquiry was prosecuted any further does not appear probable, for:

(1) No church was organized at Athens.

(2) There is no account of any future interview with Paul.

(3) He departed almost immediately from them, Acts 18:1. People who defer inquiry on the subject of religion seldom find the favorable period arrive. Those who propose to examine its doctrines at a future time often do it to avoid the inconvenience of becoming Christians now, and as a plausible and easy way of rejecting the gospel altogether, without appearing to be rude, or to give offence.

Clarke's Notes on the Bible

Verse 32. When they heard of the resurrection, c.] Paul undoubtedly had not finished his discourse: it is likely that he was about to have proclaimed salvation through Christ crucified but, on hearing of the resurrection of the body, the assembly instantly broke up; the Epicureans mocking, εχλευαζον, began to laugh; and the Stoics saying they would take another opportunity to hear him on that subject. And thus the assembly became dissolved before the apostle had time to finish his discourse, or to draw all the conclusions he had designed from the premises he had laid down. St. Stephen's discourse was interrupted in a similar manner. See Acts 7:54, and the note there.