Abstract

Compromising between two powers: Q and the Roman Empire. The study underlying this article investigated the attitude of Sayings Source Q towards the Roman authorities and their representatives. It primarily aimed at contributing to scholarly discussions on the relationships between early Christianity and the Roman Empire, but it also attempted to put the research in a broader context of present-day discussions on the issue of ‘church and state’. The first part of the study dealt with Q’s views on the government. The second part studied Q’s views on the emperor cult. The third and final part aimed at putting Q’s views on the authorities and on the veneration of the emperor in the right context. It concluded that Q compromises between idealism and realism. Its attitude towards the government is quite hostile. It portrays worldly power as demonic (Q 4:5–6; 11:18, 20), it regards God as the only true Lord of heaven and earth (Q 10:21) and rejects the legitimacy of the imperial cult (Q 4:5–8). It fully focuses on the completion of the kingdom of God (Q 6:20; 7:28; 10:9; 11:2b). Yet, as a relatively small community (Q 10:2), the Q people seem to have realised that there was no point in standing up against the Roman authorities and their representatives. Q’s propagated views on Roman power are not characterised by active resistance, but by passive dissidence (Q 6:22–23, 27–32; 12:4–5). Within the context of the Roman Empire, it was better to be a realist than a revolutionist.

Highlights

  • Compromising between two powers: Q and the Roman Empire

  • It primarily aimed at contributing to scholarly discussions on the relationships between early Christianity and the Roman Empire, but it attempted to put the research in a broader context of present-day discussions on the issue of ‘church and state’

  • Within the context of the Roman Empire, it was better to be a realist than a revolutionist

Read more

Summary

Original Research

Affiliations: 1Faculteit Theologie en Religiewetenschappen, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, België. Volgens Frenschkowski (2002:112) dient dit te worden verstaan tegen de achtergrond van het keizerschap van Nero, omdat vanaf die tijd ‘heer’ (κύριoς) een gangbaar epitheton en metonymie voor de Romeinse keizer zou zijn geworden. Het voorafgaande betekent dat de centurio in een menselijke context een man van gezag is, maar in vergelijking met de Heer Jezus de mindere is (Catchpole 1993:303). Volgens Frenschkowski (2002:113) veronderstelt dit een zekere mate van gehoorzaamheid aan het Romeinse gezag (zie ook Schottroff 1975:219). De Romeinse macht wordt niet voorgesteld als iets positiefs, maar als een bestaand kwaad waar men nu eenmaal niet omheen kan

Alleen God vereren
Gods superieure macht
Gods koninkrijk
De wereldlijke macht
De keizercultus
Tegenstrijdige belangen
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call