Scholars and pastors regularly point to specialized “technical” language in Paul’s epistles to make the case that Paul was intentionally subverting Roman power by applying to Jesus terms that the ancients commonly applied to the Caesars. My guest today has done the hard work of analyzing the inscriptions, coins, and material remains of several key ancient cities to see how they talked about the Roman emperors in the New Testament period. In our conversation he shares his own journey to become an independent scholar as well as how his research offers a corrective to what many are saying about imperial divine honors.
Listen to this episode on Spotify or Apple Podcasts
—— Links ——
- More about Clint Burnett here
- Check out his book Paul & Imperial Divine Honors
- Get the transcript of this episode
- Support Restitutio by donating here
- Join our Restitutio Facebook Group and follow Sean Finnegan on Twitter @RestitutioSF
- Leave a voice message via SpeakPipe with questions or comments and we may play them out on the air
- Intro music: Good Vibes by MBB Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) Free Download / Stream: Music promoted by Audio Library.
- Who is Sean Finnegan? Read Sean’s bio here
Hi Sean,
Thanks for the podcast. I have intuitively felt for some time now that what scholars have said about Paul’s use of titles for Yeshua being polemical against the Ceasars was overstated, though I didn’t have any way to prove it. So I agree with your guest in that regard. But I do disagree on a couple of specific points. He said the first time the title kurios is applied to a Roman Emperor is in 67 AD. Well I don’t know what date of composition he would assign to the book of Acts, but in 25:26 a Roman governor refers to the Emperor as ho kurios. Also, in 1 Cor. 2:8 the “rulers of this age” doesn’t have to be referring to the Roman rulers but only to the Jewish rulers, in which case it is unnecessary to see them as demons. And finally, in 1 Cor. 8:5 Paul says that there are many gods, whether in the heavens or on the earth. he then furhter delineates between these by saying there are many gods ( for the gods in the heavens) and many lords (for the gods on the earth). If Paul were speaking from a Semitic understanding then it makes sense that these lords are human kings, for it was certainly acceptable language in Semitic cultures to refer to kings as gods. It doesn’t matter if in Greek or Roman culture kings were not called gods. Besides, from a biblical unitarian perspective the lords of v. 5 have to be humans because these lords must correspond to the one Lord of v. 6. What do you think?