God Man v Man gods

8/8/2019 God Man v Man gods

1/39

Abstract

Inscriptions predating Christianity both describe the Emperor using

titles later employed to describe Jesus, and couch the Emperors

role in similar terminology to that employed by the early church.

What are we to make of such commonality between the terminology

used to describe the Roman Emperor and the terms the Bible uses

to describe the supreme Lordship of Christ? Worship of the Roman

Emperor through the Roman Imperial Cult was an empire-wide

reality confronting the first Christians, living under Roman rule, as

they approached life in a new empire under a new king.


2/39

Introduction

God manifest. A god, and son of God. The Lord and saviour of the

world. The resurrected God. The subject of the . For

Christians this is language that describes the work, purpose andperson of Jesus Christ. For first century Roman citizens these titles

were shared with the emperors of the Julio-Claudian (49BC68AD)

and subsequent eras.

A study of Roman history charts the development of the Imperial

Cult as Romes predominant religious and political reality. The study

of epigraphic sources, and first and second century political

commentators sheds new light on the intentions of the writers of the

Bible, especially Paul, with regards to this political milieu. We will

examine the competing claims of the empire or Rome, and the

empire of Jesus through an examination of these sources.

We will consider the hypothesis that the gospel writers, especially

Matthew and Luke, framed their accounts as a challenge to Roman

authority, and that Paul, in his epistles and accounts of his ministry

in Acts, did not advocate conformity and obedience to the imperial

Roman hegemony, but rather a realignment of loyalties to Christ

and an accompanying repudiation of all other lords, including the

Emperor.

We will analyse the significance of language shared by the gospel

writers and heralds of the Roman emperor, arguing that while the

apostles proclamation of the of Jesus employed

politically loaded language, and titles familiar to first century

readers, this did not necessarily constitute a direct challenge to

Romes authority because such use of such terminology was

unavoidable. We will, however, conclude that it was likely perceived

as a challenge by Roman citizens participating the Imperial Cult.


3/39

We will then consider the problems that converting to this new way

of life brought for first century followers of the way. Concluding that

such a radical realignment of fidelity was a guaranteed path to

persecution, suffering and rejection by the empire.

Tracing the Development of the Imperial Cult

and use of Divine Titles through primary

sources from the Julio-Claudian Era

The concept of resurrection was foreign to Roman belief during the

Republican Era, but as the empires boundaries expanded, thebeliefs of conquered nations were assimilated into the melting pot

of Roman religiosity. Two such beliefs were the notion of

resurrection, and the divinity of rulers. Traditional Roman theology

saw death and apotheosis (resurrection) as the path to divinity, this

contrasted with Greek theology, which treated rulers as gods within

their lifetimes.1

This theological disparity placed emperors in a difficult position

when dealing with emissaries from the east and west of the empire.2

This tension was soon resolved, as the cult became an important

mechanism of control for the emperor,3 and the worship of the living

emperor (and his deified ancestors) quickly became a normative

component of the Roman religious experience.4

1 Novak, R.M, The Worship of the Roman Emperor, Christianity and theRoman Empire Background Texts (Harrisburg: Trinity PressInternational), 2001, p 2672 Price, S.R.F, Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor,(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 1984, p 753 Wright, NT, Pauls Gospel and Caesars Empire, Paul and Politics:Ekklesia, Israel, Imperium, Interpretation, ed Horsley R.A, (Harrisburg:

Trinity), 2000, p 161, Wright suggests it was worship, and not militarymight, that allowed Rome to control its vast empire.4 Gradel, I, Heavenly Honours Decreed by the Senate, Emperor Worshipand the Roman Imperial Cult, (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 2002, pp

260-265, see also Pachis, P, Manufacturing Religion: The Case of DemetraKarapophoros in Ephesos Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting,November 21-25, 2008.


4/39

Julius Caesar

Julius Caesar was the first deified Roman emperor, his apotheosis

was legislated by the senate,5 but the process of his deification

began while he was alive. Two years before his death he washonoured with a statue bearing the inscription God made manifest

in the Greek city of Pharsalus.6 Another statue with an inscription

To the Conquering God was placed in the temple of Quirinius.

Coinage from the time also bears witness to this developing notion

of his divinity. A denarius from shortly before his death features the

inscription Clementia Caesarand the image of a temple of

Clementia and Caesar, a temple that was apparently never built.

7

Augustus

Augustus engaged in a sophisticated campaign to claim divine

authority, while habitually declining divine honours in order to

appear humble. The symbolic appearance of humility was important

for Augustus, as demonstrated by his handing of power back to the

senate, only to have them immediately confer the power back to

him, for life, and give him the title Augustus, as recorded in his

Res Gestae,8a regularly updated list of his achievements.9

First century writers Livy, Suetonius and Dio Cassius, link the title

Augustus with the role ofaugur, a key religious and political role in

the first century.10

5 Novak, R.M, The Worship of the Roman Emperor, Christianity and theRoman Empire Background Texts (Harrisburg: Trinity PressInternational), p 2676 Kreitzer, L, Apotheosis of the Roman Emperor, Biblical Archaeologist.53 December, 1990, pp 211- 217, p 2127 Kreitzer, L, Apotheosis of the Roman Emperor, p 2128Res Gestae, from The Roman Empire: Augustus to Hadrian, p 49, Inreturn for this service of mine, by senatorial decree I was called

Augustus After that time I excelled all men by my authority, but I had nomore official power than other men who were my colleagues in eachmagistracy.

9 Gradel, I Emperor Worship and Roman Religion, p 280 suggests the ResGestae should be understood as a supplement to Augustus will andessentially as his claims to divine office.


5/39

A linen breastplate in the temple of Jupiter Feretrius, described by

Livy inAb Urbe Condita, bore an inscription naming Augustus

Caesar as the founder and restorer of all temples.

Augustus synergised the spheres of church and state by taking the

religious roles of augur, and Pontifex Maximus. 11 His assumption of

religious roles was a step towards obtaining Pax Deorum, the peace

of the gods.

VergilsAeneiddescribes Augustus as the founder of a golden age,

heading for divinity.12 This view of Augustus as the harbinger of a

golden age is corroborated by documentary evidence, including a

decree from the Asian League following a twenty year competition

to find the most appropriate recognition for the emperor, which

describes Augustus as: filled with virtue for the service of mankind,

a saviour, who brings peace, whose arrival surpassed the

anticipation of good news (), outstripping those who

came before and leaving no hope of anybody greater in the future.13

The letter that won the competition, from the Roman proconsul to

the Asian League in 9 BC claims the birthday of our most divine

Caesar as the beginning of all things because Augustus restored

stability in a time of disarray and gave a new look to the entire

world, which led to a reconfiguration of the Roman calendar.14 This

10 Brent, A, The Foundations of the Imperial Cult, The Imperial Cult andthe Development of Church Order: Concepts and Images of Authority inPaganism and Early Christianity before the Age of Cyprian, (Leiden:Brill),1999, pp 24-5211 Brent, A, The Foundations of the Imperial Cult, pp 24-5212 Aeneid, lines 6,791-6,794, Brent, A, p 58, This is the man, this is hewhom you have often heard promised, Augustus Caesar, son of God, whoshall found the golden age once more over the fields where Saturn oncereigned.

13 Inscription of the Asian League, 9 BC, Lines 31-41, 44, 47-53, fromHarden, The Imperial Cult in the Roman Empire and Galatia, 2008

14Letter to the Asian League (Priene: 9 BC), from Harrison, J.R, TheAugustan Age of Grace, Tyndale Bulletin, 50.1, 1999, pp 79-91, at pp 85-86


6/39

competition followed the normative pattern of imperial recognition.

It was most often the result of provinces and cities competing to

glorify the emperor, rather than the initiative of the emperor

himself.

15

Augustus also assumed control of Romes prophetic schools16 and

was able to collate, and edit prophetic expectation of his rule.17 He

was prophet, priest and king, and from there it was only a small

step to divinity.

A statue of Augustus dressed as Apollo, next door to the newly

dedicated Temple of Apollo in Rome, indicates that as far back as 28

BC Augustus was manoeuvring public perception of himself towards

that notion.18

A fusing of Roman virtues (peace, fortune, providence, etc) in the

person of the Emperor led to the fusing of the cults of the empire

(Roma), and emperor. A coin, from 19 BC links worship of the

personified Rome, with worship of the Emperor Augustus the coin

is from Pergamum, the first province to build a temple to

Augustus.19 Augustus also embodied the spes (hope) of the Roman

Empire another Roman virtue that had essentially been

epigraphically and numismatically dormant until his reign.20 The

office, and person, of the emperor was now a sacramental sign of

15 Zanker, P, The Power of Images, Paul and Empire: Religion and Power

in Roman Imperial Society, ed. Horsley, R.A, (Harrisburg: Trinity Press)1997, p 7616 Res Gestae (7.3) I was Pontifex Maximus, augur, quindecimvir ofsacred affairs, septimvir for religious banquets, Arval Brother, fellow of thesociety of Titius, fetial priestFrom The Roman Empire: Augustus toHadrian, Documents of Greece and Rome, Edited and Translated by Sherk,R.K, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 1988, p 43 thequindecimvirwas the keeper of the Sibylline (prophetic) books.17 Brent, A, The Foundations of the Imperial Cult, p 59, this editinginvolved the burning of sibyllines he couldnt apply to himself.18 Brent, A, The Foundations of the Imperial Cult, p 60

19 Kreitzer, L, Apotheosis of the Roman Emperor, p 21420 Clark, M.E, Spes in the Early Imperial Cult: The Hope of Augustus,Numen Vol XXX, Fasc 1, 1983, pp 80-105


7/39

the Golden Age, and the emperor was both priest and god of his

own cult.21

When Augustus took the title ofPontifex Maximus in 13 BC heestablished the practice of swearing oaths to his genius, this

followed the senates decree in 30 BC that every public and private

banquet feature a libation to his genius.22In 7 BC he established the

Lares Compitiales, featuring the image of his genius alongside

images of other gods.

Fishwick (1969) discussing the distinction between genius and

numen, erroneously concludes that the emperors were never

deified, though the public possibly saw them as gods, arguing from

silence that nobody is recorded praying to the emperor for health

and treating ascriptions of divinity as non-literal honorifics.23 This

argument would seem to fail on the basis of epigraphic evidence,

and the decree for oaths and libations to be focused on the imperial

genius (a problem that confronts the first Christians in Corinth).24

Fishwick, in a later work, traces Augustus manipulation of the

imperial cult as a political tool.25 Fishwick takes epigraphic evidence

at face value concluding that the cult was a provincial phenomenon

discouraged in Rome.26 As we will see this undersells the important

role the cult played in the stability of imperial rule.

21 Brent, A, The Foundations of the Imperial Cult, pp 65-6622 Brent, A, The Foundations of the Imperial Cult, p 61, Brent suggests

that this, along with a renewed emphasis on ancestor worship, was a keystep towards the empire wide imperial cult.23 Fishwick, D, Genius and Numen, Harvard Theological Review, 62 no 3,1969, p 356-36724 Discussed below, but see25 Fishwick, D, The Imperial Cult in the Latin West: Studies in the RulerCult of the Western Provinces of the Roman Empire, Vol I, 2nd Edition,(Leiden: Brill) 1993, pp 73-8226 Fishwick, D, The Imperial Cult in the Latin West, p 72 Provincial cult,where alone the state might be involved, was carefully focused on DeaRoma alongside Augustus himself, but otherwise direct cult of the

emperor was avoided in Rome and municipal and private cult were left tolocal or personal initiative; there was no organized, universal religion of agrand design.


8/39

Temples of Augustus from throughout the empire, including in the

west,27 have been dated as early as 27 BC.28 One such inscription

puts Augustus alongside the gods, describing the sacrificing ofoxen to Imperator Caesar Augustus, and to his two sons, and to the

other gods.29 Zanker (1997) contends that by the end of Augustus

reign that there was probably not a single Roman city in Italy or the

western provinces without some form of imperial cultic structure.30

The imperial cult emerged from its chrysalis in the lifetime of

Augustus, and like a chess grandmaster he manoeuvred its pieces

so that upon his death it was inevitable that he would join his

adoptive father in state sanctioned divinity. 31 Worship of a living

emperors numen almost guaranteed their apotheosis.32

The ceremonial exaltation of Augustus as he passed into divinity at

his death caused Tacitus to remark in the Annals of Rome: No

honours were any longer reserved for the gods, when he wanted to

be worshipped with temples and cult images by flamines and

priests.33By the time of his death the imperial cult was a bona fide

institution extending to the imperial family.34

27 Zanker, P, The Power of Images, p 77, Zanker describes an ImperialCultic temple and festival held in 27 BCE and announced in Rome, to the

approval of the emperor.28The Roman Empire: Augustus to Hadrian, ed. and trans. Shrek, R.K, pp11-1629 Hodot in the J. Paul Getty Museum Journal 10 (1982) 166 Cumae, TheRoman Empire: Augustus to Hadrian, ed. and trans. Shrek, R.K, p 1630 Zanker, P, The Power of Images, p 7731 Novak, Christianity and the Roman Empire, p 26732 Turcan, R, The Gods of Ancient Rome, trans, Nevill, A, (New York:Routledge), 2000, orig 1998, p 13833 Tacitus, Ann. 1. 10. 5, Gradel, I, Emperor Worship and Roman Religion,p 276

34 Winter, B.W, Seek the Welfare of the City. Christians as Benefactorsand Citizens, First-Century Christians in the Graeco-Roman World(Michigan: Eerdmans), 1994, p 124.


9/39

Tiberius

Tiberius was a zealous campaigner for the divinity of Augustus, but

when it came to his own divinity, both within his lifetime, and after

his death, he was forwards in going backwards.

Though he accepted one temple in his honour he felt compelled to

publicly defend that decision on the basis of Augustan precedent,35

and as a result of zeal for Augustus to refuse all future honours.36

Tacitus Annals of Rome records him declining honours and wishing

that rather than divinity he might have a quiet mind, gifted with

the understanding of law human, and divine and that on his death

he might be thought of kindly.37

The suspicious reaction to Tiberius persistent contemptuous

rejection of divine honours, in contrast to Augustus hopeful pursuit

of posthumous divinity, is also recorded by Tacitus.38

35 Tacitus, Annals of Imperial Rome 4.37-38, in Novak, R.M, Christianityand the Roman Empire Background Texts (Harrisburg: Trinity PressInternational), pp 267-268, Since the deified Augustus had not forbiddenthe construction of a temple at Pergamum to himself and the City ofRome, observing as I do his every action and word as law, I followed the

precedent already sealed by his approval, with all the more readiness thatwith worship of myself was associated veneration of the senate.

36 Tacitus, Annals of Imperial Rome 4.37-38, in Novak, R.M, Christianityand the Roman Empire Background Texts (Harrisburg: Trinity PressInternational), pp 267-268, ...to be consecrated in the image of deity

through all the provinces would be vanity and arrogance and the honourpaid to Augustus will soon be a mockery, if it is vulgarised by promiscuousexperiments in flattery.

37 Tacitus, Annals of Imperial Rome 4.37-38, in Novak, R.M, Christianityand the Roman Empire Background Texts (Harrisburg: Trinity PressInternational), pp 267-26838 Tacitus, Annals of Imperial Rome 4.37-38, in Novak, R.M, Christianityand the Roman Empire Background Texts (Harrisburg: Trinity PressInternational), pp 267-268 an attitude by some interpreted asmodesty, by many as self-distrust, and by a few as degeneracy of soul:The best of men, they argued, desired the greatest heights: so

Hercules and Liber among the Greeks, and among ourselves Quirinus, hadbeen added to the number of the gods. The better way had been that ofAugustus who hoped!


10/39

Tiberius wishes regarding his own posthumous divinity were

perhaps understood in the light of his speech, upon his death, when

the process of apotheosis was normally ratified by the senate, and

despite attempts by Caligula to procure his granduncles divinity,the senate opposed his deification.39

His adopted son, Germanicus (father of Caligula), repudiated divinity

by association in his time in Egypt in 18-19AD. A papyrus scroll from

the time contains his threat to no longer appear before them,

declining their odious shouts, as appropriate to the true saviour

only and the benefactor of the entire race of men, my father.40

Gaius Caligula

Caligula, like his granduncle, was denied apotheosis by the senate.

He was the first of the emperors to overtly promote his divine

status.41

Suetonius, in his second century Life of Caligularecords details of

his personal campaign for divinity which involved placing his head

on ancient statues of the gods, sitting as a living god within a

temple, and creating his own temple with priests.42

An inscription from his reign reveals his personal campaign for

divinity, in the context of providing recognition for the bodyguard

kings of his provinces, the inscription describes his friends inability

39 Kreitzer, L, Apotheosis of the Roman Emperor, p 21540 Documents 320, Papyrus from Egypt, The Roman Empire: Augustus toHadrian, ed. and trans. Shrek, R.K, p 61, also Inscriptions of the RomanEmpire. AD 14-117, edited by B. H. Warmington, B. H. and S. J. Miller(London: The London Association of Classical Teachers, 1996), p 1141 McLaren, Jews and the Imperial Cult,Journal for the Study of the NewTestament, 27.3 (2005), pp 257-278, p 274

42 Suetonius, Life of Caligula, 22.2-3, in Novak, R.M, Christianity and theRoman Empire Background Texts (Harrisburg: Trinity PressInternational), pp 268-269


11/39

to find an appropriate response to the gracious act of such a great

god.43

Caligula famously planned to set up statues to himself on the altarof the temple in Jerusalem. Both Philo and Josephus devote

significant attention to reporting this incident, from their accounts it

seems that a persistent outcry from the Jews was enough to see the

procedure aborted.44

By the reign of Caligula the ruler cult was an overt method

employed by Emperors to maintain power and control of their

subjects.

Claudius

Claudius, in a letter to the Alexandrians, acknowledged the citys

piety towards theAugusti, and, with a show of humility, accepted

the honours they had directed to him, he allowed the Alexandrians

to venerate his birthday, and reluctantly45 let them erect statues

of himself in Alexandria and Rome, he granted them a Claudian

tribe, and Egyptian styled grove, but rejected their offer of a

temple and priests.46 In return for thesehonourifics he granted them

citizenship, and all benefits that they had enjoyed from the time of

Augustus.47

43 SIG 798, Cyzicus, The Roman Empire: Augustus to Hadrian, ed. andtrans. Shrek, R.K, p 79 - He began from that time on to lay claim to divinemajesty; for after giving orders that such statutes of the gods as were

especially famous for their sanctity or their artistic merit, including that ofJupiter of Olympia, should be brought from Greece in order to removetheir heads and put his own in their place He also set up a specialtemple to his own godhead with priests and with victims of the choicestkind.

44 McLaren, Jews and the Imperial Cult, p 26645 Of the two golden statues even when I wished to reject the idea forfear of seeming to be quite arrogant, shall be erected at Rome, and theothers shall be carried in the manner you requested

46But a priest for me and erection of temples I reject, not wishing to beoffensive to the men of my time and judging that temples and such things

to the gods alone should be reserved and granted every age.47 Letter of Claudius to the Alexandrians,Papyrus found at Philadelphia inthe Fayum, Egypt. The Roman Empire: Augustus to Hadrian, ed. and trans.


12/39

A plinth of a statue of Claudius read the saviour of all mankind,48

and in the announcement of the arrival of Nero describes the

departing Claudius as the manifest god, Caesar.

49

Nero

Nero was posthumously refused divinity by the Roman Senate, and

thus no coins display his apotheosis.50 Like his ancestors he initially

declined cultic offerings, while simultaneously awarding benefits to

those offering them. In a papyrus scroll sent from Nero to the

province of Egypt he declined a temple in his honour, sent back a

golden crown and assured the province it would keep the benefits

given to them by his ancestors.51

Neros designation of tax-exempt status for the province of Achaia is

an example of the exchange of titles for benefits, and evidence that

he pursued recognition as a deity.

An inscription from Boeotia contains Neros decree, freeing noble

minded Greece from taxation for its goodwill and piety towards

himself, and the Achaean response calling Nero lord of the whole

world.52

Refusing Divine Titles and the importance of the

Imperial Cult

The foundation of the cult was laid with Julius Caesars deification,

and the parameters of the cult were established by Augustan

precedent rather than by formal edict. This provided flexibility in

accepting or refusing divine offers throughout the empire.53

Refusing cultic offerings was a performance of humility orchestrated

for the populace. The emperor had to maintain the legal and social

faade of being a citizen of the empire, in a privileged position by

Shrek, R.K, pp 83-86


13/39

the will of the people.54 He was trapped between consolidating his

position within Roman cultural mores,55 and being culturally

sensitive to the Hellenistic segment of the empire.

Glorification of the emperor was a form of political currency, or a

system of exchange whereby cities and provinces curried favour

with the Roman emperor.56 Price (1984), in examining a cultic

offering to Augustus from the city of Sardis,57 notes cultic offerings

were accompanied by requests for the emperor to act as

benefactor, which were often granted.58

48 Winter, B.W, Sharing Divine Titles While Declining New Temples,Sharing the Throne of God: Imperial Cultic Activities and Early ChristianResponses (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans), forthcoming, Harrison, J.R, Pauland the Imperial Gospel at Thessoloniki,JSNT25 1, 2002, pp 71-96, p 81describes a statue inscription which reads Tiberius Claudius CaesarSebastos Gemanicus god manifest ( ), saviour () ofour people too.49 Draft of a Proclamation of Nero as emperor (Papyrus from Oxyrhynchus

in Egypt), The Roman Empire: Augustus to Hadrian, ed. and trans. Shrek,R.K,pp 102-10350 Kreitzer, L, Apotheosis of the Roman Emperor, p 21651 Greek papyrus from the Arsonoite Nome, Egypt, The Roman Empire:

Augustus to Hadrian, ed. and trans. Shrek, R.K,p 10352 Nero Liberates the Province of Greece (AD 67), Marble stele containinga speech of Nero, discovered in Boeotia, The Roman Empire: Augustus toHadrian, ed. and trans. Shrek, R.K, pp 110-112, It also names him fatherof his country, a benefactor of Greece while dedicating an altarconflating Nero and Zeus inscribed To Zeus the Deliverer, Nero forever.Statues of Nero were then placed in other temples so that our city might

seem to have fulfilled every honour and act of piety toward the house ofour lord Augustus Nero.

53 McLaren, Jews and the Imperial Cult, p 275, also, the case of Tiberiusdeclining temples on the basis of Augustan precedent would seem to bearthis out.54 Price, S.R.F, Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor,(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 1984, p 7355 Particularly under the early emperors where memory of the republiclingered.56 Price, S.R.F, Rituals and Power, p 6557 IGR IV 1756 = Sardis VII I 8, Sardis sought approval to erect a statue of

his son in his temple. His approval of this request is recorded in thisinscription.58 Price, S.R.F, Rituals and Power, pp 66-71


14/39

It is an oversimplification of a delicate political construction to view

the process as an exchange of goods for worship rendered. It was

important for both parties that these traditionally Greek cultic

exchanges continue under Imperial rule.

59

It was also important,from a traditional Roman perspective, for the emperor to maintain

the appearance of ordinary citizenship.60 These socio-political

complexities, and the need to maintain an air of benevolence in

imperial transactions,61 led to what Price calls the sincere fiction of

disinterested exchange.62

Winter (forthcoming) suggests that even when offers to construct

imperial temples were declined by emperors they were still

constructed in their honour.63 Oakes suggests inscriptions recording

cultic offerings were used to enhance the citys imperial standing

and were occasionally prone to hyperbole (for example when calling

for unilateral conduct from an entire city).64

The cult began almost instantaneously in the Roman east,65 and was

eventually spread throughout the empire,66 and demographically

diverse.67 Religion and politics were not separate spheres in Rome,

they were synonymous, the imperial cult was not on the sidelines,

nor was it simply political window dressing.68

59 Price, S.R.F, Rituals and Power, p 7260 Price, S.R.F, Rituals and Power, pp 73-7461 It could not be the case that a deposit of imperial worship was

automatically met with reward.62 Price, S.R.F, Rituals and Power, p 7463 Winter, B.W, Winter, B.W, Sharing Divine Titles while Declining New

Temples, Sharing the Throne of God: Imperial Cultic Activities and EarlyChristian Responses (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans), forthcoming, p 764 Oakes, P, Re-mapping the Universe: Paul and the Emperor in 1

Thessalonians and Philippians, JSNT273 (2005) 301-322, p 31265 Winter, B.W, The Imperial Cult, The Book of Acts in its First CenturySettings: Vol 2: Graeco Roman Settings, ed Gill, D.W.J and Gempf, C,(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans), 1994, pp 93-10366 Price, S.R.F, Rituals and Power, pp 65-72

67 Oakes, P, Re-mapping the Universe, p 311, Price, S.R.F,Rituals and

Power, pp. 107-108, it was not just the realm of the wealthy or powerful68 Price, S.R.F, Rituals and Power, p 234


15/39

The birth of the Imperial Cult at the ludi saeculares of 13 BC was a

political and religious reformation.69 The ruler cult was more than

means to facilitate efficient government,

70

a methodology of socialcontrol,71 the legitimisation of rule,72 or the axiomatic result of

holding power.73 The cult, diplomacy and politics were essentially a

triumvirate of tools that constructed the reality of the Roman

empire.74

The cult, through civic distributions of food, and entertainment,

provided the rich fabric of Roman civic life and contributed to the

growth of the empire,75 an inscription details a series of imperial

cultic distributions in Galatia during the reign of Tiberius.76 It

integrated the religious, political, and commercial aspects of city life

into one system.77 Cultic temples were geographically located in

positions that reflected the cults prominence.78

The veneration of men who became gods was the stitching that held

together the fabric of life in the first century Roman Empire;

69 Brent, A, The Foundations of the Imperial Cult, p 1770 Price , S.R.F, Rituals and Power, p 23971 Price, S.R.F, Rituals and Power, p 24072 Price, S.R.F, Rituals and Power, p 24173 Price, S.R.F, Rituals and Power, p 24174 Price, S.R.F, Rituals and Power, p 24875 Mitchell, S,Anatolia: land, men, and gods in Asia Minor, (Oxford:

Oxford University Press), 1995, pp 108-11776 This inscription goes on to list several similar distributions from avariety of cultic priests, Mitchell, S, p 108, Inscription on the left anta of atemple in Ancyra OGIS 533, The Roman Empire: Augustus to Hadrian,Documents of Greece and Rome, Edited and Translated by Sherk, R.K pp73-74 those who were priests of the god Augustus and of the goddessRoma. In the governorship of ------, son of King Brigatos, gave a publicbanquet, distributed olive oil for four months, presented public spectacles,gave a show of thirty pairs of gladiators and a hunt of bulls and wildanimals.

77 Hardin, J.KGalatians and the Imperial Cult(Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck,

2008), pp 32-37.78 Hardin, J.K, Galatians and the Imperial Cult, p 31, Winter, B.W, Seek theWelfare of the City, p 127, Mitchell, S,Anatolia, p 107


16/39

stitching that was torn asunder for the first Christians by the

competing, and similar claims of an alternate king.

The Man Gods

Winter (2010) and Gradel (2002) explore the significance of the

Latin terminology of divinity when assessing the divinity of

emperors. The Latin words divus (a deified human) and deus (an

eternal God) are both translated in Greek. This presented a

challenge for identifying the theological category in which to

understand the imperial claims to divinity. Winter, following Wardle

(2002) suggests Caesar was described as a divus because he was a

man who been attributed divine status by law.79 Wardle suggests

this decision was both theological and philological,80 but mostly

political.81

Contra Wardle and Winter, Gradel suggests that divus traditionally

described eternal gods. He cites the lack of a similar title for

Hercules and Romulus (both state gods who had once been human),

and the dying words of Vespian: Vae, puto dues fio(I think I am

becoming a god), as evidence for a reverse understanding of the

nature of divinity.82 He acknowledges that the application of the

terminology to the divinity of dead emperors changed the meaning,

that for Varro a divus was a deus who had always been divine, and

men who were made divine upon death were deus. Gradel argues

that as the ruler cult developed the place of the divine, but

departed, emperors was below that ofgenius of the living emperor

when it came to worship.83 Wardel convincingly suggests that

Varros distinction was a minority position in the light of common

79 Winter, B.W Sharing Divine Titles, pp 2-3, Wardle, D, Deus or Divus:The Genesis of Roman Terminology for Deified Emperors and aPhilosophers Contribution, in Philosophy and Power in the Graeco RomanWorld: Essays in Honour of Miriam Griffin, edd Clark, G and Rajak, T,(Oxford: Oxford University Press), 2002, pp 181-191, esp p 18780 Wardle, D, Deus or Divus, p 18281 Wardle, D, Deus or Divus, p 19182 Gradel, I, Emperor Worship and Roman Religion, p 26583 Gradel, I, Emperor Worship and Roman Religion, pp 275-276


17/39

usage from his time,84 and points out that the qualification ofdivus

was unnecessary for gods whose status was well known.85

Fundamental to the theological understanding of the divinity of theemperor is that they were men, who rose up to grasp divinity. This

was Tacitus implicit criticism of Tiberius failure to hope for divinity.

Competing Claims

In 20 BC, Herod the Great erected a statue of Augustus modelled on

the Olympian statue of Zeus in Caesarea. Marks gospel records

Caesarea as the location of Peters declaration that it is Jesus, not

Caesar, who is the Christ and Son of the Living God (Mark 8:27-

30).86 Living under these parallel claims of divinity was the day-to-

day reality of the first Christians.

Shared Titles Jesus as the Lord of a competing

kingdom

A cursory glance at the titles of the Roman Emperors recorded in

the primary sources reveals significant parallels between both Jesusdescription of himself, and the New Testaments testimony.

Spicq (1994), in an analysis of the League of Asias proclamation of

Augustus noted just how similar the Imperial claims were to those of

the early church.

A saviour who realised ancestral hopes; who has a uniqueimportance for humanity; who is so great that he will be never

surpassed; whose birth marks the beginning of a new era: so many

descriptions that one might think were created by Christian piety,

but which nevertheless are found in a pagan inscription from not

long before the birth of Jesus.87

84 Wardle, D, Deus or Divus, p 18385 eg Romulus, or Hercules, Wardle, D, Deus or Divus, p 19186 Brent, p 72


18/39

It was not simply the shared titles of Jesus and the emperor that had

the potential to cause trouble, but the manner in which those titles

were used, the shared terminology, that presented a predicament

for the first Christians.

Shared terminology

The New Testament documents were redolent with Imperial

terminology for their first readers. The writers penned their texts

against a backdrop of Judaism and Roman rule.88 This context leads

us to the conclusion that this shared terminology was deliberate,

inevitable, and unavoidable.89

Oakes (2005) supplies a helpful rubric for analysing authorial

intention in the case of shared terminology from independent

sources. While acknowledging that the outcome of overlapping

language may have created conflict with Rome, he points out that

the language of lordship employed by New Testament authors was

also the language of the Septuagint Jew. Oakes contends that

parallels arising from a common model do not a priori supply

grounds for understanding the relationship between Christianity and

Rome.90 To read any terms commonly employed by the empire as

an implicit challenge of its authority is an illegitimate totality

87 C. Spicq, Theological Lexicon of the New Testament, Vol. 3 (Peabody:Hendrickson), 1994, pp 353-54,88 Wright, N.T, Paul: Fresh Perspectives, p 5989 Deliberate because the writers were heralding the arrival of a new andcompeting claim to Lordship, inevitable because of the common Greek

parlance of the writers of the gospels and imperial proclamations, andunavoidable because to aptly frame Jesus claims to divine kingship thewriters had to employ both the terminology of royalty, and this language,whether purposefully or otherwise.90 Oakes, P, Re-mapping the Universe: Paul and the Emperor in 1

Thessalonians and Philippians, JSNT 273 (2005) 301-322, p 303, 309,Oakes suggests that any challenge to the perceived structure of socialorder would be interpreted as a challenge to Rome, but argues thatbecause Roman ideology both provided, and adopted commonterminology about authority, any first century writer discussing the notionof power or authority must borrow Roman language and concepts. Not all

uses of Roman terminology are implicit challenges to Roman rule, someare the inevitable by-product of this reality. Rome used all the goodlanguage.


19/39

transfer. Sandmels (1962) warning against parallelomania stands,91

and is rightly invoked by Burks (2008) criticism of some proponents

of the Fresh Perspective on Paul,92 and indeed against some who

take parallels past the nth degree.

93

Oakes supplies four interpretative options for assessing parallel

terminology:

1. The parallel is a coincidence based on use of the same prior

model;

2. Christians are borrowing some aspect of Roman discourse or

practice (without intentionally creating conflict);

3. Christian discourse uses Roman language to react against

trouble caused by Rome;

4. Christians write in Roman terms to directly oppose Rome.94

Given Romes intolerance of opposition within the empire it is

likely that use in any of these four categories could be misconstrued

against the first Christians.

Deissmann (1927) suggests the heralds of Christianity endeavour

to reserve for Christ the words already in use for worship in that

world, words that had just been transferred to the new deified

emperors. He acknowledges the operation of categories one and

two but suggests that these chance coincidences might later

awaken a powerful sense of contrast.95

91 Sandmel, S, Parallelomania,Journal of Biblical Literature, 81 (1962),pp 1-13.92 Burk, D, Is Pauls Gospel Counter-Imperial? Evaluating the prospects ofthe Fresh Perspective for evangelical theology,Journal of theEvangelical Theology Society, 51/2, June, 2008, pp 309-33793 Carotta, F,Jesus was Caesar: The Julian Origin of Christianity,(Soesterberg: Aspekt) 200594 Oakes, P, Re-mapping the Universe: Paul and the Emperor in 1

Thessalonians and Philippians, p 30795 Deissmann, A, Light from the Ancient Near East Or The New TestamentIllustrated by Recently Discovered Texts of the Graeco Roman World


20/39


21/39

Winter (2010) suggests that comparisons between the God who

became man and earthly rulers who became gods were

inevitable.

102

The conflicting claims of Caesar were everywhere infirst century life literally from the pillar to post.103

Competing Claims Kingdom of God v kingdom of gods

When Paul arrived in Athens proclaiming his of Jesus

Christ, the locals said he appears to be a herald of foreign

divinities.104 A charge fitting with Wrights repackaging of the

gospel mission. But is this true of every testimony to the Lordship of

Jesus in the New Testament, namely the gospels, the epistles and

the apocalypse?

The cult was most certainly operating in each of the cities

addressed by the epistles,105 and a body of scholarship exists to

importance practices of providing divine titles and recognition to emperorsspread throughout the empire. See Novak, R.M, Christianity and theRoman Empire Background Texts (Harrisburg: Trinity PressInternational), p 267102 Winter, B.W, Sharing Divine Titles while Declining New Temples,Sharing the Throne of God: Imperial Cultic Activities and Early ChristianResponses (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans), forthcoming, p 10103 At the very least from inscriptions on temple pillars to milestones bythe side of the road, where ILS 100, a milestone from Arles in 3 BC readsfather of the fatherland, the emperor Caesar, son of the deified PontiusMaximus,Winter, B.W, Sharing the Throne of God, p 4104 Winter, B.W, Identifying the Offering, the Cup, and the Table of theDemons in 1 Corinthians 10:20-21, Saint Paul and Corinth: 1950 YearsSince the Writing of the Epistles to the Corinthians, International ScholarlyConference Proceedings, (Corinth, 23-25 September 2007), p 815 makes

the point that divinities here was actually , a point we will getto below.105 Harland, P.A, Honours and Worship: Emperors, Imperial Cults andAssociations at Ephesus (first to third centuries C.E.), Studies in Religion /Sciences religieuses, 25 (1996), pp 319-34, Maier, H.O, A Sly Civility:Colossians and Empire,JSNT, 213 (2005) pp 323-349, Oakes, P, Re-mapping the Universe: Paul and the Emperor in 1 Thessalonians andPhilippians, pp 307-308, Harrison, Paul and the Imperial Gospel at

Thessoloniki,JSNT25 1, 2002, pp 71-96 Harrison relies on numismaticevidence and inscriptions to establish a flourishing cult in the city of

Thessolonica, Spawforth, A.J.S, The Achaean Federal Cult Part I:Pseudo-

Julian, Letters 1981, Tyndale Bulletin 46.1 (1995), pp 151-168, Winter,B.W, The Achaean Federal Imperial Cult II. Tyndale Bulletin, 46 no 1 My1995, pp 169-178, Winter, B.W, The Imperial Cult and Early Christians in


22/39

suggest that such a claim is born out with regards to the gospels,

and the letters to Rome,106 Corinth, Galatia, Ephesus,107 Philippi,108

Colossae,109 and Thessalonica,110 and Johns apocalypse.111 A full

study of this scholarship is beyond the ambit (and word limit)

112

ofthis essay. We will, however, consider three case studies the

gospels, the letter to the Galatians, and 1 Corinthians.

Competing Claims A Gospel Case Study

The language used to describe Jesus in the gospels is identical to

that found in epigraphic descriptions of the Roman Emperors.

Nowhere is this clearer than in Johns gospel. Jesus was with God,

and was God, he became flesh (the manifest God) and entered the

Roman Galatia (Acts XIII 13-50 and Galatians VI 11-18), inActes du lerCongres International sur Antioche de Pisidie, eds., T. Drew-Bear, M.

Tashalan and C. M. Thomas: Iniversite Lumiere - Lyon 2 and Diffusion deBoccard, 2002, 67-75, Hardin, J.K, Galatians and the Imperial Cult,(Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck), 2008106 Wright, N.T, Paul and Caesar: a new reading of Romans,A RoyalPriesthood: The Use of the Bible Ethically and Politically, ed. C.Bartholemew, (Carlisle: Paternoster), 2002, pp 173193, Harrison, J.R, TheAugustan Age of Grace, The Augustan Age of Grace, Tyndale Bulletin,

50.1, 1999, pp 79-91, Charlesworth, M.P , Some Observations on Ruler-Cult Especially in Rome, Harvard Theological Review, 28 no 1,1935, p 5-44107 Strelan, R, Paul, Artemis, and the Jews in Ephesus, (Berlin: Walter DeGruyter), 1996, p 110, contra Horsley, Pauls Counter-Imperial Gospel:Introduction, p 142, and Elliott N, The Anti-Imperial Message of the Cross,Paul and Empire, pp 178-181 who deny Pauline authorship of Ephesiansand thus minimise his focus on powers in Eph 6:12.108 Oakes, P, Re-mapping the Universe: Paul and the Emperor in 1

Thessalonians and Philippians,JSNT273 (2005) 301-322109 Maier, pp 326-344 suggests several passages in Colossians are

directly related to the imperial cult and concludes that the letter disavowsthe empire even as it mimics it.110 Harrison, Paul and the Imperial Gospel at Thessoloniki,JSNT25 1,2002, pp 71-96, Donfried, K.P, The Imperial Cults and Political Conflict in 1

Thessalonians, Paul and Empire, ed Horsley, R.A, pp 221-223, Oakes, P,Re-mapping the Universe111 Friesen, Satan 's Throne, Imperial Cults and Revelation, Journal forthe Study of the New Testament27.3 (2005), Barr, D.L, Johns IronicEmpire, Interpretation vol 63 no 1, Jan 2009, pp 20-30, Van Kooten, G.H,The Year of the Four Emperors and the Revelation of John: The 'pro-Neronian9 Emperors Otho and Vitellius, and the Images and Colossus of

Nero in Rome, Journal for the Study of the New Testament30.2 (2007), pp205-248112 Though an extended edition is available upon request


23/39

world that was his. These competing claims run through all four

gospels.

Brent (1999) argues that Luke-Acts frames Christianity as thefulfilment of Judaism in a direct parallel to the Augustan fulfilment of

Roman religious belief.113 He sees Lukes linking of the chronology of

Jesus ministry with Roman chronology, and the recording of

interactions with key Roman characters, as part of this deliberate

parallel between the two kings,114 suggesting Lukes focus on

salvation as the role of the king is another direct contrast with

Roman theology. He identifies parallels between the Augustan

decree from 9 BC, and Zechariahs song (Luke 1:78-79).115

Luke contrasts the Roman notion of the emperors as sons of gods

with the direct claim that Jesus is an actual son of god (Luke 1:35).

Matthew records Jesus claim that all authority on earth is his (Matt

28:18), Luke records Jesus words against the so called benefactors

the kings of the Gentiles (Luke 22:25), conferring a God given

kingdom on his disciples (Luke 22:29). These statements of

authority similar to Pauls description of Jesus current rule (Phil

2:9-11) deliberately contrasted Romes imperial claims.116 Rowe

(2005) suggests that Lukes priority is to clarify the appropriate

relationship between Christians and the empire, focusing on his use

of the word for both Jesus and Caesar. Concluding that

Lukes view of a Christian response is that they may refer to the

as , as indeed Luke himself does (Acts 25.26),

but Jesus is the (Acts 10.36).117 Brent

113 Brent, A, The Foundations of the Imperial Cult, p 77114 Brent, A, The Foundations of the Imperial Cult, pp 82-85115 Brent, A, The Foundations of the Imperial Cult, pp 92-94116 Oakes, P, Re-mapping the Universe, p 309117 Rowe, C.K, Luke-Acts and the Imperial Cult: A way through theconundrum,JSNT213 (2005), pp 279-300, Rowe spends the first half ofhis article wandering the Roman forest of Luke-Acts blindly ignoring the

Imperial trees, before suddenly opening his eyes, even his abstract isconfused: This article points out the serious difficulties inherent in tryingto relate Luke-Acts to the imperial cult. Having acknowledged such


24/39

suggests Luke-Acts is predicated on providing Christians with

reasons not to participate in the cult.118

John paints the Roman Empire in a negative light, establishinggrounds for criticism of the emperor on the basis that Rome was

culpable for the death of Jesus. In John the Jewish agitators persuade

Pilate that Jesus stands in opposition to Caesar, and thus is worthy

of death (John 19:12). The Jews claim to have no king but Caesar

(John 19:15). Koester (1990) points out the contrast John creates

between the Jews and the Samaritans reception of Jesus, where

they proclaim him the saviour of the world a phrase steeped in

Imperial significance (John 4:42).119

Mark focuses on Jesus claims to lordship, which culminate with his

account of Jesus trial, and the Roman Centurions testimony that

Jesus is the Son of God. Kim (1998) argues that the anarthrous use

of the in Marks account (Mark 15:39) is a purposeful

parallel with the ruler cults use of son of god to establish imperial

authority.120 Winn (2008) dates Mark at around 70AD, and reads his

account against a Sitz im Leben of intertwined Jewish messianism

and imperial cultish ideas.121 Assuming an earlier (pre-Nero)

difficulties, the attempt is made nonetheless to relate concretely Luke-Acts to the cult on the basis of the significance of Acts 10.36 for Luke-Actsas a whole and its potential impact upon auditors in the ancientMediterranean world.

118 Brent, pp 127-128: Luke-Acts offers a positive reason for non-

participation, namely that the purpose of the Imperial Cult, namely thepax deorum and the sacramental means for the continuance of thesaeculum aureum is far better achieved through the of Bethlehemand the Triumphal Entry and and that follow the birth of theChild from the Virgin, and his death and resurrection

119 Koester, C.R, The Savior of the World (John 4:42),Journal of BiblicalLiterature, 109/4, 1990, 665-680, p 678120 Kim, T.H, The Anarthrous in Mark 15,39 and the RomanImperial Cult, Biblica 79, 1998, pp 221-241121 Winn, A, The Purpose of Marks Gospel: An early Christian response toRoman Imperial Propaganda, (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck), 2008, pp 172-175,

Winn cites heightened Roman sensitivity to Jewish messianic ideas (in thewake of failed messianic revolts) and Vespians claims to be the fulfilmentof messianic prophecy as factors contributing to this setting.


25/39

composition for Marks gospel does not necessarily negate Winns

observations regarding its political setting.122

It is clear, from this small sample of apparently deliberate contrasts,that the heralds of the new empire saw the kingdom of God

occupying the same space as the kingdom of Rome, or at the very

least in the same space as the cultic aspect of the emperor of that

kingdom.

Competing Claims A Galatian Case Study

The question of references to the Imperial Cult in Galatians is a

Jewish question. Winters (2002) thesis on the motives behind Jewish

agitation in Galatia (Galatians 6:12) is that Jewish Christians were

encouraging gentile converts to use Jewish camouflage to avoid

participating in imperial cult, or persecution for failing to

participate.123 Jews in the Roman Empire are understood to have

been exempt from cultic practices, free instead to practice their own

religion.124 This freedom varied from emperor to emperor, and

region to region. There was no written charter providing such

freedom.125

122 The persecution Christians faced under Nero would likely produce thesame Judeo-Christian sentiment regarding Roman rule, and failedmessiahs were common in the first century AD.123 Winter, B.W, The Imperial Cult and Early Christians in Roman Galatia(Acts XIII 13-50 and Galatians VI 11-18), inActes du ler CongresInternational sur Antioche de Pisidie, eds., T. Drew-Bear, M. Tashalan andC. M. Thomas: Iniversite Lumiere - Lyon 2 and Diffusion de Boccard, 2002,67-75, This thesis finds some support from Stanton, G,Jesus and Gospel,

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 2004, pp 43-46, and Hardin, J.K,Avoiding Persecution and the Imperial Cult, Galatians and the ImperialCult, (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck), 2008, pp 85-115124 Letter of Claudius to the Alexandrians,Papyrus found at Philadelphiain the Fayum, Egypt,The Roman Empire: Augustus to Hadrian, ed. andtrans. Shrek, R.K,pp 83-86 Therefore, even now I earnestly ask of youthat the Alexandrians conduct themselves more gently and kindly towardthe Jews who have lived in the same city for a long time, and that they donot inflict indignities upon any of their customs in the worship of their god,but that they allow them to keep their own practices just as in the time ofthe god Augustus, which practices I too have confirmed after hearing both

sides125 Rajak, T, Was there a Roman Charter for the Jews?, The Journal ofRoman Studies, Vol 74 (1984) pp 107-123, Pucci Ben Zeev, M, Jewish


26/39

Josephus and Philo record that the Jews abrogated their cultic

responsibilities by offering sacrifices for the emperor,126 Herod, not

content with this arrangement, built three temples dedicated to theemperor and Rome, McLaren (2005) suggests honouring the cult

was a major priority in Judea.127 This did not prevent the use of the

cult as a weapon in Jewish-Roman relations.128

Winter (2001) argues that Gallios decision (Acts 18:12-17) initially

served to protect Christians from participating in the Imperial Cult

under the mos maiorum, and Gentile converts to Judaism were

recognised as Jewish by imperial law.129

Hardin (2008) in his extensive treatment of the situation follows

Winter, adding a minor addendum to reflect his findings that the

Jews actually participated almost fully in the practices of the

Imperial Cult. He suggests Christians were in no mans land

neither Jew, nor gentile, and that the agitators, Jewish converts,

Rights in the Roman World The Greek and Roman Documents quoted byJosephus Flavius, 1998, Mohr Siebek, pg 412, Rutgers, L.V, Roman PolicyTowards Jews,Judaism and Christianity in First Century Rome edited byDonfried, K.P and Richardson, P, pp 93-116, one only needs to considerCaligulas aborted attempt to hijack the temple, and its destruction underNero to accept this point.126 McLaren, J.S, Jews and the Imperial Cult,Journal for the Study of theNew Testament, 27.3 (2005), pp 257-278, p 271127 McLaren, J.S, Jews and the Imperial Cult, p 259, these temples wereconstructed at Caesarea Maritima, Sebaste, and Banias

128 McLaren, J.S, Jews and the Imperial Cult, p 262, Imperial culticrequirements were a flashpoint. The Greek citizens of Alexandria triggeredthe incident leading to Claudius missive by erecting statues of theemperor in the synagogue. If the Jews removed the statues this may beseen as imperial impropriety, Josephus account of the incident suggeststhe Greek citizens used the cult as a weapon, Pilate also caused someconsternation in Judea by introducing inscribed shields to Jerusalem, seeFuks, G, Again on the episode of the gilded Roman shields at Jerusalem,Harvard Theological Review, 75 no 4, 1982, pp 503-507

129 Winter, B.W, After Paul Left Corinth, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans),

2001, pp 278-280, Winter, B.W, Gallios Ruling on the Legal Status of

Early Christianity (Acts 18:14-15), Tyndale Bulletin 50.2 (1999) 213-

224.


27/39

wanted the church to pick a side.130 He concludes his monograph by

suggesting that the imperial cult forms an important backdrop for

the study of Galatians, and the New Testament as a whole.131

Competing Claims - In Corinthians (1 & 2)

The Imperial Cult was part of the fabric of Corinth from its inception

as a Roman colony.132 Oakes interprets 1 Corinthians 8-10 as Paul

providing concessions for the Corinthians to take part in the Imperial

Cult,133 Winter (2007) offers a better reading of these chapters,

arguing that Paul wanted his readers to have no part of the

emperors cup and table (1 Corinthians 10:20-21).134 They were not

to drink from the cup of the , the emperors genius,135

Tertullians Apology demonstrates that this was how the earliest

readers understood Pauls instructions.136

Legal exemption from the cult did not matter, because Christians

were choosing to exercise their rights to partake in cultic activities.

130 Hardin, J.K, Avoiding Persecution and the Imperial Cult, Galatiansand the Imperial Cult, (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck), 2008, pp 85-115131 Hardin, J.K, Galatians and the Imperial Cult, p 155132 Winter, B.W, The Achaean Federal Imperial Cult II, p 170133 Oakes, P, p 309, on the basis of knowledge that the gods arefalse.134 Winter, B.W, Identifying the Offering, the Cup, and the Table ofthe Demons in 1 Corinthians 10:20-21, Saint Paul and Corinth:1950 Years Since the Writing of the Epistles to the Corinthians,International Scholarly Conference Proceedings, (Corinth, 23-25September 2007), pp 815-836135 Winter, B.W, Identifying the Offering, the Cup and the Table of

the Demons, p 836, drinking libations to the emperors geniusstarted in the time of Augustus, here Winter argues that it becamepart of the veneration of living emperors under Claudius and Nero.

136 Tertullian, Apology, 32.3, in Novak, p 270, We make our oaths too, not by the genius of the Caesar but byhis health, which is more august than any genius. Do you not knowthat genius is a name for demon, or in the diminutive daemonium?We respect the judgment of God in the Emperors, who has set themover that nations. We know that to be in them which God wished tobe there, and so we wish that safe, which God wished; and we countthat a great oath. But demons, or geniuses, we are accustomed toexorcise in order to drive them out of men not to swear by themand so give them the honour of divinity.


28/39

Caught Between Two worlds - In Ephesians

The Imperial Cult was already established in Ephesus at the time of

Pauls visit (Acts 19).137 Harland (1996) makes the case for a

significant adherence to the cult operating in the city.138

Modern scholarships fascination with denying Pauline authorship of

Ephesians, and reducing the spiritual significance of the imperial

cult in the lives of Roman citizens,139 has diminished the focus on

Pauls condemnation of powers. Horsley suggests deutero-Paul pulls

his punches by spiritualising imperial powers,140 Elliot (1997), in

distinguishing Pauls approach from the so called pseudo-Paul ofEphesians, suggests that Paul only ever deals with the powers in the

earthly plane.141

Strelan (1996) suggests the language of powers (Ephesians 6:12)

can be read in line with a struggle against the Roman system,142

which is essentially a struggle against the imperial cult.

Caught Between Two worlds - In Colossae

The city of Colossae was situated 100km away from the Sebasteion

of Aphrodisias, which was completed at around the same time as

the epistle.143

137 Brent, pp 120-121138 Harland, P.A, Honours and Worship: Emperors, Imperial Cults

and Associations at Ephesus (first to third centuries C.E.), Studies inReligion / Sciences religieuses, 25 (1996), pp 319-34.139 Horsley, R.A, Pauls Counter-Imperial Gospel: Introduction,Paul and Empire, pp 142-144140 Horsley, Pauls Counter-Imperial Gospel: Introduction, p 142141 Elliott, N, The Anti-Imperial Message of the Cross, Paul andEmpire, pp 178-181142 Strelan, R, Paul, Artemis, and the Jews in Ephesus, (Berlin:Walter De Gruyter), 1996, p 110143 Maier, H.O, A Sly Civility: Colossians and Empire,JSNT, 213(2005) 323-349 p 336, a monument to the divinity of the Julio-Claudian dynasty featuring statues of the imperial family alongsidethe gods of Olympia.


29/39

Pauls proclamation of for the whole world (Colossians

1:6, 23), and the language of Roman Triumph (Colossians 2:15)

have been interpreted as the clearest links with imperial theology.

Maier (2005) identifies the language of the kingdom of Godsbeloved son, (Colossians 1:13), universal reconciliation, beyond the

boundaries of Romes empire (Colossians 3:1) and Gods making

peace with enemies (Colossians 1:20-23), the renewal brought

about by Christs enthronement, and resulting peace of Christ

(Colossians 3:1, 10, 15) as playing in the contact zone of imperial

politics,144 and capturing the zeitgeist of Roman utopian ideas.145

Maier speculates that the language of peace in Colossians is a

reference to the Roman Pax, and associated imperial honorific.146

Colossians 1:15-21 presents the narrative of Jesus life in divine

terms he unlike Caesar, was a God who became man, and who has

a natural claim on the world. Maier suggests the language of this

passage resonates with the language of imperial rule, so that first

readers could not fail to make a comparison.147 By identifying his

crucifixion at the hands of Rome as his triumph (Colossians 2:15),

Paul draws an ironic parallel with the triumphs of Roman rulers, a

parallel Maier suggests continues in the putting off the old nature

and putting on the new (Colossians 3:8-15). Roman triumph rituals

required the symbolic changing of clothes to celebrate victorious

rule.148

Maier concludes that Colossians deliberately echoes imperial ideas,

without replicating them, and that the cross disavows the empire

even as it mimics it.149

144 Maier, p 326-328145 Maier, p 340146 Maier, p 333147 Maier, p 339148 Maier, p 344, Maier also suggests the aorist middle (2.15) refers to Christ's death as a disrobing inpreparation for the victory parade to follow149 Maier, p 349


30/39


31/39

subvert this idea.156 He suggests use of without deference to

Rome was inconceivable.157

Numismatic and epigraphic evidence support the notion of aflourishing imperial cult in the city.158 Its citizens are zealous for the

emperor. The accusation brought against Jason and his fellow

Christians in Thessalonica (Acts 17:5-7) is that they preach a

different emperor. Judge (1971) suggests this charge arises from an

oath of fealty the Thessalonians swore to the emperor as part of

their cultic practices.159 Donfried (1997) suggests Christians in

Thessalonica had been martyred at the time of Pauls epistle, for

breaking this oath.160

156 Oakes, P, p 306, Harrison, Paul and the Imperial Gospel atThessoloniki,JSNT25 1, 2002, pp 71-96, Harrison suggests 1 Thess4:13-5:11 is a deliberate and provocative reimagining of Augustaneschatology, post death Augustus is believed to rule the world fromheaven via his star sign, maintaining the political status quo. Paulscontrast of a king who will return from death is couched in imperial

terminology and could not fail to be understood that way.157 Harrison, J.R, p 78158 Harrison, J.R, Paul and the Imperial Gospel at Thessoloniki, p81, The obverse of a series of Thessalonian coins show the laureatehead of Caesar and carry the legend . The reverse displays thebare head of Octavian either with the legend or|159 Judge, E.A, The Decrees of Caesar at Thessalonica, The FirstChristians in the Roman World: Augustan and New TestamentEssays, ed. Harrison, J.R, (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck), pp 456-462, orig1971, the oath (CIL II172) the people of Antium swore to Caligula

thirteen years before Thessalonians was written reads: On myconscience, I shall be an enemy of those persons whom I know to beenemies of Gaius Caesar Germanicus, and if anyone imperils orshall imperil him or his safety by arms or by civil war I shall notcease to hunt him down by land and by sea, until he pays thepenalty to Caesar in full I shall not hold myself or my childrendearer than his safety and I shall consider as my enemies thosepersons who are hostile to him If consciously I swear falsely or amproved false may Jupiter Optimus Maximus and the deified Augustusand all the other immortal gods punish me and my children withloss of country, safety, and all my fortune.160 Donfried, K.P, The Imperial Cults and Political Conflict in 1Thessalonians, Paul and Empire, ed Horsley, R.A, pp 221-223


32/39


33/39

churches (Revelation 2-3) contain no references to Imperial Cults,168

and that he only makes use of the cult as a rhetorical device for a

broader purpose of fostering agreement between disparate

communities in the later chapters (Revelation 13-19).

169

He does,begrudgingly, admit that Johns purposes are to foster an orientation

of resistance to Roman imperialism.170 Barr (2009) reads Johns

vision not against a backdrop of persecution from Rome, but rather

a backdrop of participation in cultic practice.171

Van Kooten (2007) argues convincingly for a much earlier

composition of Revelation, which brings the imperial cult back to

front and centre for interpretations of Revelation.172

Caught between two worlds the life of the

first Christians

Recognition that for the first century reader being caught between

two worlds was not a metaphysical conception but their day-to-day

social, political and religious reality is an emerging trend in Biblical

scholarship.173 It was not on the periphery, or a fiction created by a

Christian apocalyptic propaganda machine.174

168 Friesen, Satan 's Throne, Imperial Cults and Revelation,Journal for the Study of the New Testament27.3 (2005), p 366169 Friesen, Satan 's Throne, Imperial Cults and Revelation,p 367170 Friesen, Satan 's Throne, Imperial Cults and Revelation,p 373171 Barr, D.L, Johns Ironic Empire, Interpretation vol 63 no 1, Jan

2009, pp 20-30172 Van Kooten, G.H, The Year of the Four Emperors and theRevelation of John: The 'pro-Neronian9 Emperors Otho and Vitellius,and the Images and Colossus of Nero in Rome, Journal for the Studyof the New Testament30.2 (2007), pp 205-248

173 Winter, B.W, The Achaean Federal Imperial Cult II, Tyndale Bulletin,46 no 1 My 1995, pp 169-178, p 170, Contrary to the popular perceptionof New Testament scholars, emperor worship was subsequently neitherrejected by Tiberius, nor did it lie dormant until the reign of Domitian,except for spasmodic periods in the reigns of Caligula and Nero.

174 This argument persists, for example in Harland, P.A, Honouring TheEmperor Or Assailing The Beast: Participation In Civic Life AmongAssociations (Jewish, Christian And Other) In Asia Minor And The


34/39

Converting to Christianity presented problems for anyone living in

the Roman Empire. Christian ideas inherently challenged the

imperial cult, and thus the Roman ideology.175 Correspondence

between Pliny and the Emperor Trajan indicates that worshiping theemperor eventually became a litmus test for apostasy, but the

competing claims of Christ and Caesar were a catalyst for trouble

Rome and the first Christians.176

Participating in the imperial cult was always anathema for

Christians,177 the Christian empires eschatology and Christology are

in conflict with Roman ideology.178They were two incongruous

systems employing shared terminology.179 Christianity may have

employed similar titles to the empire, but they did this with the

intention of expanding imperial ideas to capture the superior

majesty of Christ.180Comparisons were inevitable. The propaganda

of imperial rule carried the terminology of Christian gospel

proclamation.

The colourful trappings of the imperial cult were a snare for the first

Christians, and its place in civic life made life as citizens difficult for

Apocalypse Of John,Journal for the Study of the New Testament, no 77,2000, p 99-121, at pp 103-104, The traditional view of the Apocalypse isthat the author's references to martyrdoms in the futuristic visions are infact references to the actual, current situation faced by most Christiansinvolving a substantial and official persecution under Domitian, whoforced inhabitants to worship him as 'lord and god'Many scholars nowconvincingly argue that persecution of Christians in the first two centuries

in Asia Minor is better characterized as local and sporadic, relating tosocial harassment and verbal abuse by some inhabitants that couldoccasionally lead to physical abuse or martyrdom.An early (pre Nero)dating of Revelation solves the conundrum posited by Harland et al whominimise the impact of imperial persecution.175 Oakes, P, Re-mapping the Universe, p 314176 Oster, R, Christianity/Emperor Veneration in Ephesus, RestorationQuarterly, 25 no 3 1982, p 143-149177 Oakes, P, Re-mapping the Universe, p 311178 Oakes, P, Re-mapping the Universe, p 321179 Winter, B.W, Sharing Divine Titles,p 10

180 Maier, H.O, A Sly Civility: Colossians and Empire, JSNT213 (2005)323-349, p 325, note 5


35/39

conscientious objectors. Tertullians Apology demonstrates that this

refusal to worship the men who became gods, in the place of the

God who became man, was a problem for the first Christians:

You do not worship the gods,' you say to us, 'and you do not offer

sacrifices for the emperors.' It follows that we do not sacrifice for

others, for the same reason that we do not sacrifice for ourselves

in a word, from our not worshipping the gods. Consequently we are

judicially charged with sacrilege and disloyalty. This is the chief

point in the case, or rather it is the whole caseWe cease to

worship your gods from that moment when we recognize that they

do not exist.


36/39

Bibliography

Barr, D.L, Johns Ironic Empire, Interpretation, vol 63 no 1, Jan 2009, pp 20-

30Brent, A, The Foundations of the Imperial Cult, The Imperial Cult and the

Development of Church Order: Concepts and Images of Authority in

Paganism and Early Christianity before the Age of Cyprian, (Leiden:Brill),

1999Burk, D, Is Pauls Gospel Counter-Imperial? Evaluating the prospects of the

Fresh Perspective for evangelical theology,Journal of the Evangelical

Theology Society, 51/2, June, 2008, pp 309-337

C. Spicq, Theological Lexicon of the New Testament, Vol. 3 (Peabody:

Hendrickson), 1994Carotta, F,Jesus was Caesar: The Julian Origin of Christianity, (Soesterberg:

Aspekt) 2005Charlesworth, M.P , Some Observations on Ruler-Cult Especially in Rome,

Harvard Theological Review, 28 no 1, 1935, pp 5-44Clark, M.E, Spes in the Early Imperial Cult: The Hope of Augustus, Numen

Vol XXX, Fasc 1, 1983, pp 80-105

Deissmann, A,Light from the Ancient Near East Or The New Testament

Illustrated by Recently Discovered Texts of the Graeco Roman World (1927),

trans Strachan, L.R.M, (Whitefish: Kessinger), 2003Donfried, K.P, The Imperial Cults and Political Conflict in 1 Thessalonians,

Paul and Empire, ed Horsley, R.A, 1997, pp 221-223Elliott N, The Anti-Imperial Message of the Cross, Paul and Empire, ed.

Horsley, R.A, 1997, pp 178-181Fishwick, D, Genius and Numen, Harvard Theological Review, 62 no 3, 1969,

p 356-367Fishwick, D, The Imperial Cult in the Latin West: Studies in the Ruler Cult of

the Western Provinces of the Roman Empire, Vol I, 2nd Edition, (Leiden: Brill)

1993Friesen, Satan 's Throne, Imperial Cults and Revelation,Journal for the Study

of the New Testament27.3 (2005) pp 351-373.Fuks, G, Again on the episode of the gilded Roman shields at Jerusalem,

Harvard Theological Review, 75 no 4, 1982, pp 503-507Gradel, I, Heavenly Honours Decreed by the Senate, Emperor Worship and

the Roman Imperial Cult, (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 2002Hardin, J.K, Galatians and the Imperial Cult, (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck), 2008


37/39

Harland, P.A, Honouring The Emperor Or Assailing The Beast: Participation In

Civic Life Among Associations (Jewish, Christian And Other) In Asia Minor And

The Apocalypse Of John,Journal for the Study of the New Testament, no 77,

2000, p 99-121,Harland, P.A, Honours and Worship: Emperors, Imperial Cults and

Associations at Ephesus (first to third centuries C.E.), Studies in Religion /

Sciences religieuses, 25 (1996), pp 319-34,Harrison, J.R, Paul and the Imperial Gospel at Thessoloniki,Journal for the

Study of the New Testament, 25 1, 2002, pp 71-96Harrison, J.R, The Augustan Age of Grace, Tyndale Bulletin, 50.1, 1999, pp

79-91, at pp 85-86Horsley, R.A, Pauls Counter-Imperial Gospel: Introduction, Paul and Empire,

ed. Horsley, R.AInscriptions of the Roman Empire. AD 14-117, edited by B. H. Warmington, B.

H. and S. J. Miller (London: The London Association of Classical Teachers),

1996Kim, T.H, The Anarthrous in Mark 15,39 and the Roman Imperial

Cult, Biblica 79, 1998, pp 221-241Koester, C.R, The Savior of the World (John 4:42),Journal of Biblical

Literature, 109/4, 1990, pp 665-680

Kreitzer, L, Apotheosis of the Roman Emperor, Biblical Archaeologist. 53December, 1990, pp 211- 217Maier, H.O, A Sly Civility: Colossians and Empire,Journal for the Study of the

New Testament, 213 (2005) pp 323-349,McLaren, Jews and the Imperial Cult,Journal for the Study of the New

Testament, 27.3 (2005), pp 257-278Mitchell, S,Anatolia: land, men, and gods in Asia Minor, (Oxford: Oxford

University Press), 1995Novak, R.M, Christianity and the Roman Empire Background Texts

(Harrisburg: Trinity Press International), 2001Oakes, P, Re-mapping the Universe: Paul and the Emperor in 1 Thessalonians

and Philippians,Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 273 (2005) 301-

322Oster, R, Christianity/Emperor Veneration in Ephesus, Restoration Quarterly,

25 no 3 1982, p 143-149Pachis, P, Manufacturing Religion: The Case of Demetra Karapophoros in

Ephesos Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting, November 21-25,

2008, from http://post.queensu.ca/~rsa/redescribing/Panayotits.pdf
http://post.queensu.ca/~rsa/redescribing/Panayotits.pdfhttp://post.queensu.ca/~rsa/redescribing/Panayotits.pdf


38/39

Price, S.R.F, Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor,

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 1984Pucci Ben Zeev, M,Jewish Rights in the Roman World The Greek and Roman

Documents quoted by Josephus Flavius, 1998, (Tubingen: Mohr Siebek)

Rajak, T, Was there a Roman Charter for the Jews?, The Journal of Roman

Studies, Vol 74 (1984) pp 107-123,Rowe, C.K, Luke-Acts and the Imperial Cult: A way through the conundrum,

Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 213 (2005), pp 279-300,Rutgers, L.V, Roman Policy Towards Jews,Judaism and Christianity in First

Century Rome, edited by Donfried, K.P and Richardson, P, pp 93-116Sandmel, S, Parallelomania,Journal of Biblical Literature, 81 (1962), pp 1-13.Spawforth, A.J.S, The Achaean Federal Cult Part I:Pseudo-Julian, Letters

1981, Tyndale Bulletin, 46.1 (1995), pp 151-168,Stanton, G,Jesus and Gospel, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 2004Strelan, R, Paul, Artemis, and the Jews in Ephesus, (Berlin: Walter De

Gruyter), 1996The Roman Empire: Augustus to Hadrian, Documents of Greece and Rome,

Edited and Translated by Sherk, R.K, (Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press), 1988The Roman Empire: Augustus to Hadrian, ed. and trans. Shrek, R.K, pp 102-

103

Turcan, R, The Gods of Ancient Rome, trans, Nevill, A, (New York: Routledge),2000, orig 1998Van Kooten, G.H, The Year of the Four Emperors and the Revelation of John:

The 'pro-Neronian9 Emperors Otho and Vitellius, and the Images and

Colossus of Nero in Rome,Journal for the Study of the New Testament30.2

(2007), pp 205-248Wardle, D, Deus or Divus: The Genesis of Roman Terminology for Deified

Emperors and a Philosophers Contribution, in Philosophy and Power in the

Graeco Roman World: Essays in Honour of Miriam Griffin, edd Clark, G and

Rajak, T, (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 2002Winn, A, The Purpose of Marks Gospel: An early Christian response to Roman

Imperial Propaganda, (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck), 2008Winter, B.W, Gallios Ruling on the Legal Status of Early Christianity (Acts

18:14-15), Tyndale Bulletin 50.2 (1999) 213-224.Winter, B.W, Identifying the Offering, the Cup, and the Table of the Demons

in 1 Corinthians 10:20-21, Saint Paul and Corinth: 1950 Years Since the

Writing of the Epistles to the Corinthians, International Scholarly Conference


39/39