In attempting to understand
the wider implications of this package, Christians, or “kristianos” in the
Greek, were being identified as such, in contrast to those that were identified
as “kaisarianos,” or “Caesar-people.” In that day, “Christian” was every
bit as much a religious title as it was a political identification. Naturally, there were no delineations between
“church” and “state,” and one’s religion was not a private matter of personal
conviction. A Christian was somebody that
looked to Jesus of Nazareth, the One that had been crucified on a Roman cross,
as Messiah and Lord and King and Son of God.
Not only was this
contrary to all reason (crucified Jews are most assuredly NOT the messiah), but
even more importantly, especially as it relates to Paul’s query and Herod’s
response, “Lord” and “King” and “Son of God” were all titles of Caesar, as the Caesar-cult
held him up and worshiped him as the son of god (among other things, including
master, savior, the one who brought light into a dark world, and order into
chaos). In this situation, it is highly probable that Agrippa’s statement
to Paul should be understood along these lines.
It is quite likely
that Agrippa would have been more than aware that proclamations concerning
Jesus, by His followers, included the claim that He was the true King and Ruler
of the world, and that even Caesar was subject to Him. It was
counter-imperial and subversive statements such as these that would and did get
people crucified or thrown to the lions. At the same time, this also
causes the reader to reflect on Paul’s statement about the Messiah being a
light to both Israel and the Gentiles, as Caesar Augustus was hailed as the man
who had brought the world out of darkness, while the darkness was kept at bay
by the “pax Romana” (Roman peace) that was presumed to continue to suffuse
light through the world under the dominion of the Caesar’s that followed.
This created
dangerous territory for Agrippa, as he sits here next to the Rome-appointed
governor as the Rome-appointed, Rome-supported client-king (one of three in the
land of Palestine). A confession by Agrippa of anything that remotely
resembled a belief that what Paul was saying about Jesus was true, was going to
be very bad for him, as it could be looked upon as treasonous. Agrippa
could certainly not afford to be identified as a Jesus-person, in contrast to a
Caesar-person. Paul, in what appears to
be an understanding of Agrippa’s situation, responds by saying, “I pray to God
that whether in a short or a long time not only you but also all those who are
listening to me today could become such as I am, except for these chains”
(26:29). “Yes,” Paul says, “I believe everybody should submit to this
message of the Gospel, recognizing Jesus as Lord and King.”
As this story comes
to an end, “the king got up, and with him the governor and Bernice and those
sitting with them” (26:30). Understandably, this engagement has given
them much to ponder, so “as they were leaving they said to one another, ‘This
man is not doing anything deserving death or even imprisonment’.” (26:31)
In this, and in what follows, as “Agrippa said to Festus, ‘This man could have
been released if he had not appealed to Caesar’” (26:32), one can almost hear a
tacit agreement, from the mouth of Agrippa, with the claims that Paul has
made.
No comments:
Post a Comment