spin

I think that the emperor cult in the east was influenced by eastern religious ideas, so it would be hard to decide whether the terms and concepts were influenced by the emperor cult or by the already prevalent religious ideas.

But so that I can understand a particular point, I'd be interested to know the background to your comment about the parousia.


spin

Ben C Smith

I agree in principle that Christianity could have been influenced by the general eastern religious milieu. But the parallels run deep enough that I really think the emperor cult was one of the primary influences.

Craig Evans writes in his commentary on the second half of Mark (pages lxxxvii-lxxxviii):

The anticipated arrival of the emperor was referred to as a παρουσια (Latin adventus). In honor of the Roman emperors, "advent coins" were struck; e.g., a coin struck in 66 C.E. in honor of Nero reads adventus Augusti, "the coming of Augustus." An inscription in honor of Hadrian speaks of the "first παρουσια of the god Hadrian" (both examples from Deissmann, Light, 371-72). P.Teb. 48 announces the παρουσια of the king to the forum. This manner of speaking is known to Judaism of late antiquity, as seen in Josephus, who also speaks of the "παρουσια of the king" (Ant. 19.8.1. 340; cf. 3 Macc 3:17; T. Abr. 13:4-6).

The evidence may sometimes be overstated; Josephus often uses the word innocently (as does Paul, for that matter). But it can hardly be denied that the word took on connotations of a royal entrance in certain contexts, and I think that is exactly what the word meant when used of Jesus.

Ben.

spin

Thanks, Ben C. It seems strange to me and I hadn't contemplated the connection before, so I'll have to think about it a while, especially the thought of parousia coming from the Latin adventus, or at least an eastern (Greek) reflection of it.


spin

Gregg

Wanted to add to my comment above: The Romans who deified Augustus and declared him Savior did so because of his actions in history--defeating the enemies of order and bringing peace to the Empire. "Jesus" was exalted for living a humble and short life and dying on a cross. Again, except for "Jesus," there is no record of Jews similarly exalting ANY figure in their history, not even Moses or David. Surely there were other Jewish rabbis and revolutionaries who were captured by the Romans and crucified, but apparently nobody tried to turn them into gods. Why? Did only Jesus have the necessary "pedigree?" And in any case, they didn't just turn Jesus into the Messiah, they didn't just turn him into a god, they turned him into God's pre-existent agent of creation, through whom according to a divine arrangement made before time began, the creation was reconciled to the Father. This bespeaks a theology that was already well-developed, not something that was applied "after the fact."

GakuseiDon

Jesus was exalted for his resurrection and visitations, at least according to Paul. Wouldn't this be considered significant?

Philo said that Moses was pre-existent, ushered in a new covenant, and was probably taken to heaven. Isn't this close enough? Simon Magus and his student Menander supposedly declared themselves to have been gods, and had a following:
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/vi...d=798&letter=S

What you don't seem to allow for was the translation of Paul's Moses-like Jewish rabbi into a pagan god. Paul's view of Jesus can easily be explained in terms similar to Philo's view of Moses. Given that Paul -- to a certain extent -- regards Jesus as a new Moses, I can't see how you can explain the coincidence away.

Yes -- post resurrection appearances.

I agree. Those favoured among Jews were called "Sons of God" and regarded as intermediaries with special abilities to intercede with God, for example Honi the Circle-Drawer. The story of a resurrected Jesus who was believed to have ascended to heaven came at a time when the Emperors of Rome were being deified in the same way, suggesting a framework already existed that allowed the continuing "paganization" of Christ. By the Second Century, the idea of the Logos had become associated with Christ, leading to the modern concepts that we have today.

andrewcriddle

How far the ideas about Honi found in the Mishnah go back to the time of Jesus is not clear. They seem to go beyond what we find in Josephus.

Andrew Criddle

Gamera

Perhaps, but it's an odd reaction.

The emperor cult clearly uses the discourse of divinity for cynical, political goals. The whole point is not religious in any spiritual sense, but to legitimize and establish Roman imperial rule. It is a classic case of discourse colonization (using the discourse of one realm of knowledge to shore up another).

Christian discourse about divinity is profoundly anti-political. It explicitly eschews political discourse and attempts to assimilate political power. In some ways it couldn't be more different than emperor cult discourse than if it had fallen from the moon.

Odd things happen in the assimilation of discouse, but this one does seem like a total reversal of content and purpose.