Pt1-09-CHRIST OR CÆSAR?

CHRIST OR CÆSAR?

PAUL makes the demand, as the Revised rendering of Romans 10:9 shows, that the believer must confess with the mouth that Jesus is Lord. An examination of the immediate context will disclose the fact that the apostle is making allusion to a passage in Deuteronomy 30:11-14, where it is taught that the word of commandment is not far-off--in heaven or beyond the sea--but near, "in thy mouth and in thy heart". So Paul argues that the word of faith which he preaches presents no obstacle because of its being out of reach, but it simply demands the expression of faith. It must be remembered that the whole section (Romans 9 : to xi) is a discussion of Israel’s rejection of the gospel, and that chapter x declares that Israel’s failure was due to neglect of knowledge within easy grasp. Nevertheless the principle laid down is of wider application. There is no need for any attempt to bring Christ down from heaven--He has already come. Nor is there need for any to seek His resurrection--He has already been raised, and has ascended to the Father’s right hand. No further divine demonstration is necessary; what remains is for the sinner to accept the righteousness which is of faith. This is true for all time; hence we are right in urging believers to make this good confession to-day.

Recent research among the buried treasures of antiquity has caused a brilliant and almost fierce light to shine on this and other passages of Scripture which demand open confession. It is in all probability the case that Paul, writing to a people in the imperial city, intended his words to place the Lordship of Jesus over against the lordship of Cæsar. If the Israelite of old was compelled to choose between Moses and Pharaoh, the disciple in the days of Paul must choose between Christ and the Emperor. In order to make this clear, it will be necessary to trace a few facts in the development of Cæsar-worship. The idea of men becoming gods was familiar in early Greek and other mythology, although in the more enlightened days of the Greek Republic apotheosis, or enrolment of men among the gods, was not common. Ancestor-worship was practised by the Romans, and in very early times departed rulers received divine honours. "Consecratio" was the Latin word for apotheosis, and it was used for the deification of emperors. Immediately after his death, Julius Cæsar was added to the gods of Rome by a decree of the Senate and people (42 B.C.), and the event was celebrated by elaborate ceremonies. There followed a worship of the Roman Emperor which took a threefold shape: (1) The Emperor Augustus was worshipped by certain cults as a god during his lifetime; (2) the institution of the "Divi", dead emperors and their relations being worshipped; (3) the worship of "Rome and Augustus", not so much the name of a particular man as the title of the supreme ruler.

These are facts well supported in Roman literature, but the recent discoveries throw fresh light upon this Cæsar-worship. The title "Saviour of the World" was bestowed on Julius Cæsar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan and others, while Domitian allowed himself to be called "our lord and god". "It may be said with certainty," says Deissmann in Light from the Ancient East, "that at the time when Christianity originated ’Lord’ was a divine predicate intelligible to the whole Eastern world." Again, "there is literary record that Caligula allowed himself to be called ’lord’. An Egyptian document of the year 49 and an ostracon from Thebes of the year 54 call Claudius ’the lord’. For Nero ’the lord’ . . . the number of examples suddenly rushes up tremendously." In view of these facts, it is important to note that the Epistle to the Romans was written about 56, two years after the succession of Nero to the imperial throne.

Now Rome was tolerant in matters of religion. When Emperor-worship was established, it did not become the State religion in the sense that no other worship was permitted, but it demanded a place above any other. The Jews were exempted from Cæsar-worship, but Caligula attempted, without success, to secure the erection of a statue to himself in the Temple at Jerusalem. Later on attempts were made in some parts to enforce this false worship on the Jews. Josephus tells us that in Alexandria certain Jews were persecuted, but when all sorts of torments and vexations of their bodies that could be devised were made use of to them, they could not get any one of them to comply so far as to confess that Cæsar was their lord". For some time Christians were identified with the Jews by the Roman Emperors, and consequently were tolerated. But as Deissmann says, "We cannot escape the conclusion that the Christians of the East who heard Paul preach in the style of Php 2:9; Php 2:11, and 1 Corinthians 8:5-6 must have found in the solemn confession that Jesus Christ is ’the Lord’, a silent protest against other ’lords’ and against ’the lord’, as people were beginning to call the Roman Cæsar". Active persecution of Christians by Rome did not break out till after the great fire in A.D. 64, but Cæsar-worship and other idolatrous practices made it impossible for followers of Christ to join the clubs and guilds of the day. "Ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and of the table of devils." So the "table of the Lord Serapis in the house of Claudius Serapean ", an invitation to which has been discovered (Milligan, Greek Papyri), would not be a fit place for a Christian.

Soon after the death of Paul, the Christians came into deadly conflict With Rome, and the refusal to call Cæsar lord was made a crucial test. Many gave their lives rather than acknowledge Emperor-worship, prominent among those in the second century being Polycarp, who, when asked, "What harm is it to say, lord Cæsar!--and to sacrifice, and be safe?" replied, "I will not follow your advice".

It can readily be seen, then, that the open confession demanded in Romans 10:9 was of the utmost importance. "No man can serve two masters"; the Christian must declare his faith whenever the demand is made. Furthermore, in the words of Dr. Cobern, "for the first time we possess a new argument for the deity of Jesus Christ, since the title ’lord’ could be used only after the Cæsar had been acknowledged as God. We now see that the term Lord Jesus was a distinct ascription of deity to Christ, and that its use must almost have been accounted an act of direct antagonism to the claims of the Roman Emperor".