Three Parts of the New Testament that are Enriched By Knowing Roman Culture and History 

For Christians, it is a core belief that God came in human flesh as Jesus and made himself known in a specific time and place —  1st Century C.E. Palestine. While Christians have long held that our beliefs can be translated into every language and culture (unlike other religions such as Islam, which holds the Q’aran is only the perfect word of Allah when it’s written in Arabic), it is nevertheless the case that one’s understanding of Jesus and his teachings will be enhanced if we bear in mind the contexts and cultures he was speaking to. There are two immediate ways that this must be applied. First, I strongly believe Christians need to increase their understanding of ancient Jewish laws, customs, and culture. Without that, Jesus’ references to things like Jubilee, Sabbath, and even his death on the cross during Passover lose much of their significance. I strongly believe that much of what makes Christianity unique and special is lost when we ignore the Jewish underpinnings of the New Testament. 

However, the second cultural context that we must keep in mind is that of the Roman Empire, which by the time of Jesus had displaced the Greek empire and established control of the entire Mediterranean region. While in our time it has become fashionable in elite circles to jettison learning about the “Classics” in favor of non-Western perspectives, Christians of all backgrounds will always derive benefits from learning about ancient Greek and Roman culture because it is in that context that the New Testament was written. When Paul, Luke, Mark, and others write to their readers, they include many words, phrases, and concepts that are loaded with meaning that would have been commonly understood by those who lived in this Greco-Roman context, but that are harder for us modern readers to grasp. Thus while the Good News of Jesus is simple enough that even a child can understand it, modern adults can benefit from a more thorough understanding of Roman history and culture. Jesus could have come at another time in history (say, during the Babylonian or Persian empires), but he was born right at the dawn of the Roman Empire—which has significance for how we understand his teachings and ministry. 

Here are three specific insights that have been on my mind recently. 

1. Adopted by God

While Julius Caesar was the man who effectively ended the Roman Republic by crossing the Rubicon with his army and assuming emergency powers in 49 BCE, it was his adopted son Octavian (known now as Caesar Augustus) who really ushered in the age of Roman Empire. It is this same Caesar Augustsus who is named in the beginning of Luke, and every person in the Roman Empire would be well familiar with his story. After Julius Caesar was assassinated in 44 BCE, his will stated that Octavian, who was biologically only a great nephew, was to be considered as his adopted son. As historian Adrian Goldsworthy writes in Augustus: First Emperor of Rome, “Adoption was taken very seriously by the Romans, and an adopted son became to all intents and purposes the same as a true son…a young man who received Julius Caesar’s wealth and name inevitably also took on the political expectations of continuing the family’s success.” Interestingly, Julius Caesar was soon to be consecrated as a god, and Augustus therefore became known as “the son of god.” This Augustus, the son of a god, would go on to defeat all his enemies, both domestic and foreign, conquer the entire known world, and establish a long era of “peace” through overwhelming military might. Moreover, he would also be installed as “pontifex maximus”, or “high priest,” therefore solidifying his status as both ruler of the physical world and interceding for his people to the gods in the spiritual realm.

[As one example of how this was understood by the people of this time, in 9 BCE an inscription in western Turkey described Augustus this way: “Since Providence, which has ordered all things and is deeply interested in our life, has set in most perfect order by giving us Augustus, whom she filled with virtue that he might benefit humankind, sending him as a savior, both for us and for our descendants, that he might end war and arrange all things, and since he, Caesar, by his appearance (excelled even our anticipations), surpassing all previous benefactors, and not even leaving to posterity any hope of surpassing what he has done, and since the birthday of the god Augustus was the beginning of the good news/gospel/evangelion [εὐαγγέλιον] for the world that came by reason of him.” Notice how much of this language about Caesar would later be appropriated by early Christians to refer to Jesus! To call Jesus as savior and lord was to say that Caesar was not—a very controversial and dangerous claim.]

Augustus would die in about 14 CE, when Jesus was a teenager, dying at about the ninth hour of the day (the same hour Jesus would later die on the cross). Augustus’ face was the most recognized in the entire ancient world, having been copied onto millions of coins. It is very likely that the coin that Jesus held in the Temple when questioned about the matter of taxation had Caesar Augustus’ face on it. 

Denarius (Coin) Portraying Emperor Augustus | The Art Institute of Chicago
Caesar August, son of the “Divine Julius” –aka the “son of god”

 With all this in mind, it is incredibly interesting to me that in Paul’s letter to the Roman Christians, he explicitly uses the imagery of “adoption” to describe our relationship to God. In Romans 8 he writes, “The Spirit you received does not make you slaves, so that you live in fear again; rather the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship….Now if we are children, then we are heirs — heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his suffering in order that we may also share in his glory.” These Roman Christians would be well aware of Augustus’ adoption as a son of god, and now, Paul was using similar imagery to describe the status of Christians in relation to God! Paul was stating that in the same way that Augustus inherited his adopted father’s kingdom, with all of the rights and responsibilities, so we as Christians now inherit our adopted Father’s Kingdom! And unlike Augustus, who died and left his kingdom to others, as Christians we believe that Jesus rose again and continues to reign, as our brother and co-heir to the Kingdom of God. However unlike the peace that Rome brings, which comes through violence and domination, the peace of Christ comes through love, servanthood and suffering. Thus Romans 8 —a powerful passage even without these insights— becomes even more potent and interesting once we know the cultural and historical context. 

2. Crowned as King

In the Roman Empire, emperors were seen as quasi-gods, worthy of worship and elaborate ceremonies establishing their status and right to rule. Interestingly, the coronation ceremony for a Roman Emperor is directly adapted in the Gospel of Mark in reference to the crucifixion of Jesus. Compare the following description of a Roman emperor’s inauguration to how Mark describes Good Friday (taken from Shane Claiborne’s Jesus For President): 

A Roman Coronation

The Praetorian Guard (six thousand soldiers) gathered in the Praetorium. The would-be Caesar was brought into the middle of the gathering. 

Guards went to the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, got a purple robe, and placed it on the candidate. The candidate was also given an olive-leaf wreath made of gold and a scepter for the authority of Rome. 

Caesar was loudly acclaimed as triumphant by the Praetorian Guard. 

A procession began through the streets of Rome, led by soldiers. In the middle was Caesura. Wlalking behind him was a sacrificial bull, whose death and blood would mark Caesar’s entrance into the divine pantheon. Walking next to the bulls as a slave, who carried an axe to kill the bull. 

The procession moved to the highest hill in Rome, the Capitolene hill (“head hill.”) On this hill is the Capitoleum temple. 

The candidate stood before the temple altar and was offered, by the slave, a bowl of wine mixed with myrrh. He took as if to accept, and then gave it back. The slave also refused, and then the wine was poured out either onto the altar or onto the bull. Right after the wine was poured, the bull was killed. 

The Caesar-to-be gathered his second in command on his right hand and his third in command on his left. Then they ascended to the throne of the Capitoleum. 

The crowd acclaimed the inaugurated emperor. And for the divine seal of approval, the gods would send signs such as a flock of doves or a solar eclipse. 

VERSUS

Jesus’ Coronation in Mark

Jesus was brought to the Praetorium in Jerusalem. The whole company of soldiers (200+) was gathered there.

Soldiers brought Jesus a wreath (of thorns), a scepter (an old stick), and a purple robe.

Sarcastically, the soldiers acclaimed, mocked, and paid homage to Jesus. 

The procession began. But instead of a bull, the would-be king and god became the sacrifice, the bull. But he could not carry the instrument of death and be the sacrifice, so they stopped Simon of Cyrene and gave him the cross to carry. 

Jesus was led up to Golgotha, which means “head hill.” 

Jesus was offered wine, and he refused. Right after, it is written, “and they crucified him.”

Next came the account of those being crucified on his right and his left. The word for them —lestes—can mean terrorist or insurrectionist. 

Jesus was again acclaimed (mocked) and a divine sign confirmed God’s presence. The temple curtain ripped in two, the sky darkened, and an earthquake hit. Finally, the Roman centurion (who had undoubtedly pledged allegiance to Caesar, the other ‘son of god”), converted and sincerely acclaimed this man as the ‘son of God.” 

Once we notice these parallels, which are so similar that they have to be intentional by Mark, it gives us more insight into the significance of Jesus’ death on the cross. Some Christians only view his death as comparable to that of a sacrificial lamb, taking on sins like that of a Jewish sin offering. While that is certainly part of the metaphor, we see here that Jesus’ death on the cross is also connected to his enthronement as the son of God and ruler of the kingdom. But in contrast to the enthronement and deification of a Caesar, which was all about praising Caesar’s strength and giving honor to him, Jesus’ enthronement comes through suffering, dishonor, and weakness. Jesus’ upside-down Kingdom stands in market contrast to the Kingdom of Caesar. And similarly, if Jesus tells his followers to take up our crosses and follow him, then we must understand that our path to glory will similarly involve suffering and weakness, rather than worldly strength and domination. 

3. Jesus as the Ultimate “Trophy” 

I wrote in a previous blog post how Jesus’ death on the cross seems incredibly similar to the ancient Greek practice of erecting “trophies”, which involve placing the empty armor of one’s defeated and disarmed enemy on a tall wooden post to display to everyone. What I recently learned was how this practice was adopted by the Romans and even explicitly put in place in Jerusalem, very near to where Jesus would be crucified! Adrian Goldsworthy writes that around 20 BCE, King Herod (operating under Rome’s authority) built a massive hippodrome (amphitheater) in Jerusalem in honor of Augustus Caesar. This hippodrome was decorated with “mounted trophies commemorating his victories and listing them by name. The trophies were to the traditional Roman design, representing a post and crossbeams bearing shields and topped by a helmet, all supposedly taken from the enemy. A crowd of [Jewish] Jerusalemites mistook the shapes for crude figures of men and immediately broke into an uproar,” since it seemed to be a violation of the commandment against graven images. King Herod, eager to calm the mob, had the helmet and shields removed, showing that it was not a figure of a man at all but merely a post and crossbeam. At this the crowd was relieved and able to move on. 

 Trophée des Alpes photo turbie-trophy0021_22b.jpg
The “Roman Trophy of Augustus,” built in 6 BCE near Provence, France

BUT— think about the significance of this imagery, that just a few football fields from where Jesus would be crucified, stood a massive Roman hippodrome decorated with wooden…crosses! The connection may be lost to us, but would have been very clear to the early Christians—Jesus death on the cross would have been seen as a victory for Rome and Jesus’ opponents; his beaten and bloody body nailed on a cross a visual trophy of who really had power—Caesar. But for the early Christians, it was this very death on the cross that was actually the emblem of Jesus’ power and victory, because it was there that he exhausted and overcame all the power of sin and evil, triumphing over them through his resurrection on the third day. Thus we see Christians appropriating the very symbol of Roman power and authority—the cross—and using it as an illustration of the way that Jesus conquers his enemies. But unlike Rome, which uses the cross to dominate and humiliate the opponents of Caesar, Jesus is the one who willingly chooses to be killed and humiliated—and it’s in this way that he shows his true power. Christ crucified is a “stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the Gentiles” (1 Corinthians 1:23), but for Christians, Jesus on the cross is the ultimate trophy of the great victory he accomplished there. While a Roman trophy is showing that the victim has been disarmed, at the cross it was Jesus who “having disarmed the powers and authorities, made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross” (Colossians 2:15). Do you see how much more potent and interesting these Bible verses become when better understand the historical context? 

There are many more examples that we could go into, of obscure Roman customs and traditions that give greater insight into the New Testament. But hopefully for now these three serve to whet your appetite, illustrating just how vital it is that Christians study history and culture—otherwise we are only scratching the surface of what the authors of the New Testament wanted us to know about Jesus. 

A Bible story from John … paraphrased for 2023

[Read the actual Bible story from John 8:2-11 here.]

At dawn Jesus appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught being problematic. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught being problematic. The law of Twitter tells us to cancel such people. Now what do you say?” They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him. [Either he would have to defend her problematic behavior, or he would have to join the mob in canceling her.]

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who has never done anything problematic be the first to cancel her.” Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground. At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one canceled you?”

11 “No one, sir,” she said.

“Then neither do I cancel you,” Jesus declared. “Go and sin no more.”

Tweets I never Tweeted

I left Twitter a couple years ago, but sometimes I have pithy thoughts that are roughly the length of a 280 character Tweet. Here are some of them, in no particular order. [WARNING: As tweets, they are not very nuanced and tend to be pretty black-and-white…so please don’t read too much into them. Any intelligent person, including myself, could probably rebut every single one of these Tweets if given enough time and thought. Moreover, I myself don’t necessarily fully agree with all of them. But I think some of them are interesting and hopefully they provide some food for thought.]

  • To have CONVICTION is to affirm that everything you believe right now is true. To have HUMILITY is to realize that you’ve been wrong in the past about some things, and thus are probably wrong about some things in the present. To be a healthy pursuer of truth is to have BOTH conviction AND humility, and thus to respect those you disagree with (even if you think they’re wrong—after all, you have also been wrong in the past).
  • The invasion of Ukraine has simultaneously illustrated the benefits of local nuclear energy (more dependable than oil and gas imports) and the potential danger (intentional or accident incidents threatening to spread radiation).
  • I’m generally not a fan of how “masculinity” is defined in American culture, but even if I were, it’s strange to me why so many people view Donald Trump as such a manly man. He doesn’t drink alcohol or coffee, doesn’t exercise, wears makeup, is unfaithful to his wife, doesn’t hunt, never served in the military, rarely laughs…
  • If your theology is far more similar to the theology found among elite, educated, wealthy white American liberals than it is to that found among impoverished, oppressed, and persecuted Christians in non-Western nations, then I have some bad news about how “decolonized” your theology actually is…
  • People may wonder what a Christian pacifist view of the Ukraine war would be: What would a pacifist (such as myself) do in the situation? Well, given that ~70% of Russians identify as Christian, it can be assumed that if all the Christians in the Russian army held to Jesus’ view on violence (“love your enemies”), they would immediately throw down their arms and return home, ending the war outright.
  • There are two deep ironies to the Trump presidency. The first is that his most significant historic achievement, Operation Warp Speed, is the one accomplishment that means nothing to his most loyal supporters. The second is that his biggest legacy, the overturn of Roe v. Wade, is destined to hinder his party’s political popularity for a generation.
  • If you are unwilling or unable to understand the appeal of an ideology that you disagree with, then at best your efforts to oppose it will be ineffective, and at worst they will actually encourage it all the more.
  • When Democrats lost an important election in 2016, they knitted ‘pussy’ hats, wore black, and cried. When Republicans lost an important election in 2020, they claimed the election was stolen, bought guns, and assaulted the US Capitol. One side is clearly more likely to start a civil war than the other. (Given that fact, there’s probably not a real need to worry about a domestic civil war until liberals start buying guns. That’s when you should start to worry.)
  • The solution to the age-old Euthryphro Dilemma is similar to the solution of asking , “which side of a quarter is more important?” While the question makes sense on a logical level, the answer is to simply point out that both sides are not just equally important, but inseparable from each other. Similarly for the Euthryphro problem the answer is that ‘God’ and ‘Justice’ are two sides of the same coin.
  • The sentiment that “I have a right to sex and if I’m not getting any, it’s society’s fault in some way” is a subtly broken sentiment on several levels. While it sounds deeply progressive on the surface, it is also the sentiment at the foundation of the misogynistic and far-right “incel” movement. No one has a fundamental right to sex that must be granted to them by others.
  • Cattails seeds are like the kingdom of God. They are spread by the wind, and especially after being pecked at by others.
  • What percentage of people does “The System” have to work for for that system to be worth keeping ? (Assuming that no system can work for everyone). 99% ? 51% ? Something else? We should be cautious before throwing out a system without having a good idea of whether the system that replaces it would work any better.
  • Putins biggest mistake was not invading Ukraine while Trump was still president. There’s no way the US under Trump would have marshaled the resources that have come through for the Ukrainians in the past year.
  • I saw a tweet that said that “Any reason to get an abortion is the right one.” But I disagree; I can think of many reasons that a person could get an abortion that don’t seem like great reasons. For ex: 1. Genetic testing shows that I’m pregnant with a female. 2. My boyfriend is telling me to get an abortion or he’s going to leave me. 3. I am afraid my baby is going to be gay. 4. My job doesn’t offer parental leave. Etc.
  • There’s a loophole in Jesus’ command to “love your neighbor as yourself” in that if you don’t feel like loving them, you can just deport them somewhere else… and then they’re not your neighbor anymore!
  • The Bible is a bit like an invitation to a wedding. It contains immense value not only because of the words on the page but especially because it points to a wondrous banquet and invites one to RSVP “yes” or “no.”
  • For many Christians , Jesus is their Savior but he is not their Lord.
  • To help white people divest from white supremacy, it is not enough to simply love people of color. You must also love white people.
  • One ironic difference between an unarmed, committed pacifist and, say, one of the heavily armed Uvalde SWAT police officers (who refused to storm the school building while the shooter was inside actively shooting people), is that the pacifist is willing to risk death for the sake of their convictions, and the SWAT officers weren’t. 
  • As we see women slowly gain equality to men in society, will we see an increase in certain rates, such as female murderers, female mass shooters, etc? If not, why not? I actually think the answer really matters, because in it lies the clue for how to help modern men.
  • I think you can be a pacifist without being a universalist, however I find it hard to believe one can be a universalist without being a pacifist. If you believe no one is unworthy of being in God’s perfect presence in heaven, then how could you believe it would ever be justified to use deadly violence against them on earth? To be a universalist but not a pacifist is essentially to say: “God wouldn’t ever hold any of your sins against you-but I might!”
    • Elite liberals fixating on school shooters’ access to assault rifles as the most important topic in gun control is an example of the gentrification of an important political issue. Handguns kill far more people through gang shootings, suicides, and accidents, but those get a lot less attention than the specter of a shooter with an AR-15 in a peaceful suburban town.
    • There’s a perspective among some Christians that hell is not about burning in fire, but is merely just about being separated from God. Well, sure, I could buy that. However, if you believe that being completely separated from God‘s entire is the worst thing in the world, then that is actually worse than being in a lake of fire. If God is who He says he is, it would be far better to burn in fire with God (like Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego), than to live in paradise without him!
    • Arguments about arming teachers in schools are pretty hilarious to me. When I taught middle school in Baltimore, I safely and effectively broke up 22 fights between students by physically intervening. I also broke up a high school fight on my street in Carlisle two years ago. I cannot think of a single fight where the presence of a sidearm strapped to my side would have made the situation safer, and more likely it would have made it far more dangerous (e.g., if the gun had accidentally discharged, or a student grabbed it in the middle of the tussle.) I think an argument could be made for there to be one or two armed resource officers in a school, but arming teachers–even with training– is just asking for trouble.
    • There’s actually some key ways that one can use arguments from the perspective of “progressivism/CRT” (loosely defined) in order to defend certain core Christian doctrines. For example, “Oh, you don’t believe in a Judgment Day? That’s a very privileged stance, to believe that no matter what systems of oppression you participate in, that God ultimately just doesn’t care. Most marginalized and oppressed groups long for a day when God judges the righteous and unrighteous.” Or – “ oh, you believe that truth is relative and each individual should figure out what is right and wrong for themselves? That’s a very individualistic, white Western perspective on morality. Most non-white and non-Western cultures have a more group-oriented perspective that takes into consideration the needs of the entire community, and the most marginalized within it, not just whatever a privileged person decides on their own.”
    • When edgy progressivism becomes the norm and institutionalized, it ceases to feel edgy. Instead it is conservatism that begins to feel edgy. 
    • Christians–whether more progressive or conservative–who portray Jesus as entirely different from the “violent, strict, legalistic” God of the Old Testament are showing how little they understand Jesus’ teachings, and moreover are engaging in theological anti-Semitism. Jews have worshipped the “God of the Old Testament” for 5000+ years, and to simply write him off as a hateful has-been is to indict their entire religion. 
    • Republicans who think we should cut back support for Ukraine and instead “be tough on China” are hopelessly confused. China is watching carefully how the US responds to Russian aggression in Ukraine, and if we are perceived as weak in any way, that will further encourage China to attack Taiwan and other nations. In our broken world, the best way to deter a Chinese invasion is to prove to them that US weapons can defend any ally against any aggressor.

Jesus’ Commands Don’t Always Feel Loving

As a Christian, I believe that 1. God is love, and 2. Jesus is God. As a corollary to those two beliefs, I believe that everything Jesus said and did on Earth was an act of love. Over and over Jesus expresses radical love to those around him, and that was illustrated most powerfully through his sacrificial death on the cross and resurrection three days later.

However, just because everything Jesus did was loving does not mean that every person around him experienced it as love. Sometimes they may have been offended, or angry, or mournful, or disheartened, etc. The love that Jesus expressed through his every action did not always feel like it was “good news,” even if it actually was! Sometimes following Jesus is extremely costly, hard, and burdensome. For example, take the following incidents found in the Gospels:

  • When Jesus commanded the rich young ruler to sell all his possessions and give it away to the poor, the young man went away very sad. He probably didn’t think this was a very loving thing for Jesus to command.
  • When Jesus initially ignored the Syrophonecian woman and referred to her as a dog, that does not sound very loving.
  • When Jesus defended the woman caught in adultery but then told her to go and sin no more, she might not have experienced that final statement as loving.
  • When Jesus told his disciples to pick up their cross and deny themselves, that does not sound very loving.
  • When Jesus told the Samaritan woman that her religious beliefs were wrong, and that salvation comes from the Jews, she might not have experienced that as loving.
  • When Jesus rebuked the Pharisees and his disciples, they may not have experienced it as love.
  • When Jesus told his followers to “hate” their father, mother, children, and even their own lives, for the sake of following him, that does not sound very loving.
  • When Jesus promised weeping and gnashing of teeth for those who do not care for the “least of these brothers and sisters of mine,” that does not sound loving.
  • When Jesus said that it is better not to marry and to live as a eunuch for the sake of the Kingdom of God, that does not sound very loving.
  • When Jesus said to love your enemies, and to do good to those who hurt you, that does not sound loving. It sounds like a recipe for disaster.
  • When Jesus told his disciples that he would need to die on the cross, that did not sound like a loving act of self-sacrifice, it sounded like foolishness. And when why Peter rebuked him for talking about such things, Jesus called him Satan! That doesn’t sound very loving.

These are just a few instances that I could think of the top of my head where the commands of Jesus don’t always feel loving to our modern ears. I’m sure there are many more. Depending on who you are and your life experiences, Jesus’ commands can feel challenging, risky, and potentially damaging to your mind, emotions, and body. Thus it can be incredibly tempting to reinterpret the words of Jesus through a hermeneutic wherein “only commands that feel loving are valid.” But to adopt that hermeneutic is to re-make Jesus into our own image, and to miss out on the potential liberation that may come through obedience. The rich young ruler may have kept his wealth and his security when he walked away from Jesus, but he missed out on the opportunity to do justice, experience God’s provision, and follow Jesus.

The question for Christians today is, which of God’s commands are we tempted to discount simply because they don’t feel loving? I would argue probably the most universally-ignored command is the one to love our enemies, but there are many others as well. Do we have the faith to believe that Jesus’ words are good news even if it doesn’t always feel like it?