Click here to listen to Religion and Politics: A Fresh Look at Imperial Overtones in the New Testament presented by Dustin Smith, Apr 29th 2008, Atlanta Georgia. Commentary by John Obelenus
The thesis of Dustin’s paper is that Paul is using specific phrases and words traditionally used in the context of the Caesar cult (the worship of the Roman emperor as a divine figure in the pantheon) that are re-appropriated for use in the preaching of Jesus as the Messiah, God’s representative.
A startling fact is shared: “If one were asked, what is the biggest and fastest growing religion in the Mediterranean world during Paul’s lifetime, one may be quick to think of the Christians as is described in the early chapters of the Acts of the Apostles. What may come to most a a surprise is that archeology, inscriptions, Greek writers, and historians all confirm that the Roman Caesar cult was the fastest growing phenomenon of the time.”
All along the big comments on this “Politics of the Message” series has been, “What does this mean for us today?”. And I want to outline some of the major points, and ask some questions in order that we can arrive at just what this means for us:
- In the atonement series I outlined what Jesus’ offense to both Rome and the Jewish leaders was: namely, that Jesus’ messianic authority challenged both parties use and abuse of power. Therefore, if Jesus uses power correctly they use power incorrectly and stand in the judgment of God for it.
I was reading through the book of Mark the other day, and I could not help but notice a pattern. Several times when Jesus talks about his crucifixion the surrounding context is about power.
In order to start talking about the cross we must go back in time before rappers starting wearing cross necklaces, before contemporary songs about the cross became popular on Christian radio, before the great hymns about the blood were composed, before the crusaders used it as a standard in their “holy wars,” before the churches began to see it as a symbol God’s love towards humanity, back to the time of Jesus when the cross already had a meaning attached to it. “As everyone in the Roman world knew well, the cross already had a clear symbolic meaning; it meant that Caesar ruled the world, with cruel death as his ultimate, and regular, weapon” (Paul and Caesar: A New Reading of Romans, by NT Wright).
I just started reading through John D Crossan’s God and Empire: Jesus Against Rome, Then and Now. The first chapter explains what the Roman Imperial thought world was like just before and during the time of Christ. He goes to great lengths to demonstrate that Caesar Augustus was deified [made into a god] during his life time. I thought the following quotation was fascinating.
When we first started talking about these issues that “Jesus is Lord and not Caesar”, one of Sean’s first questions was about us today, who is Caesar? (I use the phrase “Jesus is Lord and not Caesar” as a catch-all for all that we’ve posted about in these last five posts). Obviously at the time of the writing of the NT this wasn’t a question that needed asking. At the time I said I wasn’t sure, and I wasn’t worried about that. If we can find the truth behind the expression “Jesus is Lord and not Caesar” in the NT we can apply it to our own situations today. This topic sprung back into my mind since I was listening to NT Wright, who was asked this very same question.
Is it cheating to hijack someone else’s series title? I hope not. JohnO has produced four posts on this subject, The Politics of the Message, and for whatever reason a lot of what he has been saying has just hit me. I have looked around a bit and google is filled with articles talking about the phrases used (especially by Paul) to talk about Jesus in light of the political/religious terminology of the time (i.e. the Caesar cult).
I wanted to summarize what has been said and add a couple of more phrases to this discussion. Then, I’d like to bring out the implications of using this political terminology.
- lord kyrios: Caesar was known as “the lord kyrios of the world” the one who was to be submitted to by all in the empire.
I found another goldmine of information on this topic, so I get to resurrect it again. In Sylvia Keesmaat’s chapter, “In the Face of the Empire: Paul’s Use of Scripture in the Shorter Epistles” found in Hearing the Old Testament in the New Testament, she gives a large treatment on this very topic. In her opening
In an empire celebrated for the bringing of a gospel (euangelion) of salvation through the Pax Romana, Paul proclaims another gospel, the gospel of God(1 Thess 2.2, 8, 9) and his Messiah (Phil 1.27, 1 Thess 3.2), a gospel that is growing and bearing fruit in the whole world (Col 1.6) and proclaimed to every creature under heaven (Col 1.23). This is a gospel with geographical scope equal to Caesar’s. It is a gospel that proclaims a different Saviour, the Messiah (Eph 5.23), to whom all things will be subjected (Phil 3.21), and through whom peace is brought to those both far and near, indeed to all of creation (Eph 2.14-17, 6.15, Col 1.20, 2Thess 3.16).
Time for the third word – apantesis, in Greek απαντησιs. In the NT, this word is only used two other times besides this passage in 1 Thess 4:16 (Matt 25:1 and once in Acts). This word is used very specifically. It means to meet and then return with. In the parable of the bridgegroom we can see this is exactly the meaning, the virgins go out to meet the bridgegroom and return with him. I hope you’re not suprised, but the Caesars used this word of themselves also. The Caesars had welcoming parties, Chrysostom wrote:
Last time we saw the use of κυριοs applied to Jesus and not Caesar. By definition that is a political statement. Next I want to look at the word ‘parousia’, in Greek παρουσια. I hope you’re not surprised, this word was also used by the Caesars of the time. They used it in reference to their own coming in glory. Now it is used in reference to Jesus’ coming in glory.
Again we have Paul co-opting the royal words of the time and applying them directly to Jesus. He does this often, especially when talking to Roman citizens. He uses παρουσια four times in this epistle (2:19, 3:13, 4:15, 5:23), and three times in his second epistle (2:1, 8, 9) to these same people. The people in Corinth (also an important Roman city) get the same treatment from Paul, he uses παρουσια five times (1 Cor 15:23, 16:17, 2 Cor 7:6,7 10:10) in reference to Jesus.