D. Clint Burnett, Paul and Imperial Divine Honors: Christ, Caesar, and the Gospel

Burnett, D. Clint. Paul and Imperial Divine Honors: Christ, Caesar, and the Gospel. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2024. xxvii+332 pp. Hb; $49.99.  Link to Eerdmans

In his Studying the New Testament through Inscriptions (Hendrickson Academic, 2020, reviewed here), Burnett hoped that “one day more New Testament students who use inscriptions in their interpretation of his documents and the historical reconstructions of early Christianity” (p. 165). Paul and Imperial Divine Honors is his first step toward reaching that goal.

Burnett describes an inscription from Gythium (modern Gytheio) in his nineteen-page introduction to the book. The inscription is the sacred law of Gythium and includes the fullest known portrait of an imperial festival ever discovered. This was an eight-day festival honoring five Julio-Claudians (Augustus, Tiberius, Augustus’s wife Livia, and two of Tiberius’s sons). The festival also honored a Roman general and two local benefactors. The festival included sacred process sessions and sacrifices on each day devoted to the various dedicatees. This is a grant of divine honors to certain Roman rulers by an individual city. Although this illustrates what an imperial festival may have looked like, Burnett is clear: this inscription does not describe every imperial festival, nor can it be used to describe the granting of imperial honors in every Roman city.

Burnett must define what he means by “divine honors” clearly. He avoids using the phrase “imperial cult” because it implies that there was some centralized form of worship. Instead, he focuses his attention on individual local grants of divine honors. To define these divine honors, he proposes studying the material culture in Philippi, Thessalonica, and Corinth to demonstrate how each city gave divine honors differently. In doing so, Burnett demonstrates that there is no evidence that terms like kurios and soter were used as imperial titles, nor was euangelion in these inscriptions when Paul wrote his letters. But this does not mean Burnett is “an apologist in favor of imperial divine honors” (238). He wants to reconstruct early Christianity as accurately as possible. The divine honors granted by these cities are still arrogant and blasphemous, but it goes beyond the evidence to include kurios and soter among those honors.

This challenges the assumption among many New Testament scholars that when Paul uses language like kurios and soter he does so subversively, using “anti-imperial rhetoric.” Scholars as early as Deissmann (and more recently, N. T. Wright) assume all Divine imperial honors are the same. If a divine honor (such as kurios in Pergamum, referring to Trajan, for example) is found elsewhere, it is often assumed to apply in other Roman cities, such as Philippi or Corinth. In his commentary on Romans and Paul and the Faithfulness of God, Wright states that kurios and euangelion echo imperial rhetoric. Wright suggests, “Caesar is guilty of giving himself divine.” Burnette points out that the earliest evidence for this comes from A.D. 67 in Greece, after Paul’s death. Aside from Caligula, there was no Julio-Claudian demand for divine honors, and several specifically declined those honors when offered while they were still alive. This includes Nero, who did not want to divine honors while he lived. Burnett concludes, “Most Julio-Claudians tried to curb such honors for themselves from communities under their dominion while they were still alive” (233). Therefore, Cesar was never guilty of giving himself divine honors. With respect to the title kurios as a divine honor, Burnett concludes “There is no evidence that the city [of Thessalonica] hailed any Julio-Claudian, dead or alive, by that epithet, even though Thessalonica called Julius Caesar, Augustus, and Claudius gods after their deaths, and Livia a goddess during her lifetime” (147).

Burnett aims to create a localized, contextual profile of divine honors, using inscriptions, coins, archaeology, and literary sources when available. Each chapter briefly sketches how New Testament scholars describe imperial honors in their commentaries. For example, Karl Donfried considers inscriptions and other evidence to argue that some terms Paul uses have a political connotation. This includes words like basileia (βασιλεία, kingdom; 2:12), parousia (παρουσία, coming, 4:15), and apantēsis (ἀπάντησις , meeting; 4:17). Burnett is used that this generalizing approach to divine honors is inadequate and problematic. Evidence from first-century Thessalonica does not support the idea that parousia and apantēsis are technical terms for a royal imperial visit (109).

For Philippi, Thessalonica, and Corinth, Burnett catalogs the divine honors granted by the local government for each of the Julio-Claudians. This includes inscriptions, coins, and archaeology (usually statues portraying the emperor as a god). Each chapter includes a list of imperial cult officials known from inscriptions and the location of the imperial divine honors (when known). Following this data, he suggests how the imperial divine honors surveyed in the chapter shed light on Paul’s letter to that city. Terms like kurios, parousia, and apantēsis were not used in imperial honors, and euangelion was not a technical imperial term. Nevertheless, he suggests that a study of divine honors indicates that Christians were mistreated by their non-Christian counterparts for more complex reasons than a “Christ-versus-Caesar paradigm (148). 1 Thessalonians 1:6-9 states that Christians faced “much affliction” because they have turned away from idols and were eagerly awaiting the return of the Lord.

Burnett knows that these conclusions differ from those of other Pauline interpreters who see Paul using subversive, anti-imperial rhetoric in Romans 13. However, this does not mean Paul was pro-empire. How could Paul, who clearly abhors any sort of idolatry, ask Christians in Rome to submit to those who celebrate imperial divine honors? For Burnett, the answer lies in Paul’s apocalyptic theology (236). This Jewish perspective is most clearly presented in Daniel. In Daniel 6, for example, the emperor demands a divine honor: to receive prayer from the entire Empire. Daniel refuses, and he faces execution in the lion’s den. Burnett makes a startling observation: “Nowhere in the story does Daniel accuse Darius of blasphemy because he desired divine honors for himself” (237).  Daniel was able to maintain his devotion to the god of Israel, all the while serving an empire that demanded divine honors for itself. How is this possible? For Paul, the Empire is under the cosmic power of sin. Like Daniel, Paul considers the rulers of this age to have already been defeated. Although Burnett does not mention 3 Maccabees or 4 Maccabees, these apocryphal books also illustrate similar attitudes toward blasphemous rulers.

The book includes a fifty-four-page appendix of inscriptions mentioned in the book, including the Greek and Latin transcriptions and English translations. Burnett provides provenance and date with the source in the inscription collections. This is extremely helpful for scholars looking to read the evidence directly. The book is richly illustrated with black-and-white photographs of coins, inscriptions, and other archaeological evidence.

Conclusion. Burnett certainly achieves his goal of providing a database of inscriptions for three Greek cities that are important for interpreting Paul’s letters to Philippi, Thessalonians, and Corinth. His challenge to popular writing on Paul’s relationship with the Roman Empire should convince most to abandon generalizing comments about imperial divine honors or the imperial cult. This correction is helpful. However, he has limited his study to Julio-Claudians from the years that Paul wrote. His conclusions may look different for later divine honors in another location, such as Asia Minor, rather than Greece. However, his point is clear: evidence from the late century Ephesus or Pergamum should not be used to interpret Philippians, Thessalonians, or Corinthians.

Burnett blogs on inscriptions and the New Testament. Follow @DClintBurnett1.

NB: Thanks to Eerdmans for kindly providing me with a review copy of this book. This did not influence my thoughts regarding the work.