(Supreme Court of Cassation)
It is obvious that, especially for the modern Greek believers of the resurrected Christ, what was said in Arios Pagos and the conditions under which they were said, have substantial content. Not only because of the aspects of faith that are highlighted, and we may have not noticed otherwise, but also because there, in Arios Pagos, there are clarified critical issues of relations between the two worlds, the Greek and the Judaic.
At this meeting, for the first time, the word of the Resurrection is heard and for the first time the “audience” hears in their own cultural environment the occurrence of the Resurrection, not with the mantle of Jewish historical tradition but with the power of endless life. This brings the “audience” – even today – into confusion and responsibility. Confusion because the fact of the resurrection, though prophesied, does not spring naturally through tradition, is not imposed on the coreligionistic and does not encompass forcefully all the people who participate in this tradition.
Responsibility, because faith in Resurrection is transferred from collective to individual, from the nation to a natural person, like you and me, and we accept and follow or reject and depart with the corresponding consequences in our personal life.