Paul, Artemis, and the Jews in Ephesus [Reprint 2014 ed.] 3110150204, 9783110150209

Table of contents :
Preface
Table of Contents
Abbreviations
Introduction
Section One: Artemis and other cults in Ephesus
Section Two: Paul in Ephesus
Appendices
Bibliography

Citation preview

Rick Strelan Paul, Artemis, and the Jews in Ephesus

W G DE

Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche

Herausgegeben von Erich Gräßer

Band 80

Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York 1996

Rick Strelan

Paul, Artemis, and the Jews in Ephesus

Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York 1996

© Printed on acid-free paper which falls within the guidelines of the ANSI to ensure permanence and durability.

Die Deutsche Bibliothek — Cataloging-in-Publication Data [Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche / Beihefte] Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamendiche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche. - Berlin ; New York : de Gruyter. Früher Schriftenreihe Reihe Beihefte zu: Zeitschrift für die neutestamendiche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche NE: HST Bd. 80. Strelan, Rick: Paul, Artemis, and the Jews in Ephesus. — 1996 Strelan, Rick: Paul, Artemis, and the Jews in Ephesus / Rick Strelan. — Berlin ; New York : de Gruyter, 1996 (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamendiche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche ; Bd. 80) Zugl.: Queensland, Univ., Diss., 1995 ISBN 3-11-015020-4

ISSN 0171-6441 © Copyright 1996 by Walter de Gruyter & Co., D-10785 Berlin All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Printed in Germany Prindng: Werner Hildebrand, Berlin Binding: Lüderitz & Bauer-GmbH, Berlin

Dedicated with gratitude to MICHAEL LATTKE teacher and scholar

Preface This book is a revision of my dissertation accepted by the University of Queensland in 1995 for the award of Doctor of Philosophy. The revision has been shaped partly by the comments on the thesis by its examiners, Professor Greg Horsley of the University of New England, Annidale, and Dr. Paul Trebilco of Knox Theological Hall, University of Otago, Dunedin. For their pertinent and helpful criticisms I am very grateful, but they have not seen this revised work and this book still reflects very much the standard of my own scholarship rather than theirs. I am indebted to Professor Michael Lattke of the Studies in Religion Department of the University of Queensland, Brisbane, for his patient encouragement and advice beginning in my undergraduate studies and continuing over many years through to the publication of this book. Thanks are also due to my brother, Dr. John Strelan of Luther Seminary, North Adelaide, for the hours spent discussing with me some of the difficult biblical passages, and for his reading of the original thesis. This is also an opportune moment for me to thank Dr. Victor Pfitzner of Luther Seminary, North Adelaide, for instilling in me a love of the New Testament and an awareness of relevant Jewish literature. Thanks also go to Dr. Ian Gillman for reading my initial proposal and for helpful comments which set me on the path to this book. Unfortunately, Werner Thiessen's Christen in Ephesos: Die historische und theologische Situation in vorpaulinischer und paulinischer Zeit und zur Zeit der Apostelgeschichte und der Pastoralbriefe (FrankeVerlag, Tübingen 1995) arrived too late for me to consider. I acknowledge the generous assistance of the staff of the libraries in the University of Queensland; and I thank Ms Annelies Aurich of de Gruyters for her patience and direction which eventually shaped my material into this published form. Finally, I pay tribute to three women: Joy, Charla, and Chellie, who have been patient and loving towards their husband and father for the many times he was so often "away in Ephesus". Rick Strelan

Brisbane 1995

Table of Contents

Preface

vii

Table of Contents

ix

Abbreviations

xv

Introduction

1

1. Ephesus

1

1.1. 1.2. 1.3. 1.4.

1 3 6 11

The aim The need to study the cultic environment of Ephesus Ephesus in the history of biblical scholarship Paul among Ephesian Gentiles and Jews

2. Some Methodological Problems 2.1. 2.2. 2.3. 2.4.

The use of data The use of language Jewish Christianity and Christian Jews The historical value of Acts

3. Summary

13 13 14 17 20

23

Section One Artemis and other Cults in Ephesus 1. Aspects of the Artemis Cult in Ephesus 1. Introduction

24 24

χ

Table of Contents

1.1.1. 1.1.2. 1.1.3. 1.1.4. 1.1.5.

The significance of eusebeia Citizenship in Ephesus Political and social groupings in Ephesus Civic disorder The strength of local cults in Ephesus

25 31 34 36 37

1.2.

Artemis

41

1.2.1. 1.2.2. 1.2.3. 1.2.4. 1.2.5. 1.2.6. 1.2.7.

Background and history The attributes of Artemis Ephesian myths of Artemis Ephesian cultic festivals The Temple of Artemis at Ephesus The wealth of Artemis The survival and decline of Artemis

41 48 53 57 68 76 79

1.3.

The Thesis of Arnold

83

1.3.1. 1.3.2. 1.3.3.

Artemis as evil and demonic Artemis, Ephesus, and magic Artemis in other recent biblical scholarship

83 86 89

2. Aspects of some other cults in Ephesus

94

2.1.

The Imperial Cült

94

2.1.1. 2.1.2. 2.1.3. 2.1.4. 2.1.5. 2.1.6. 2.1.7.

A brief history of Rome-Ephesus relations The imperial cult in Ephesus Christians and the imperial cult in Asia Minor Revelation The Letter to the Ephesians The significance of statues and images Jews, Christians, and statues

95 98 105 108 110 110 112

2.2.

The variety of cults in Ephesus

114

2.3.

Women in Ephesian cults

118

2.3.1. 2.3.2. 2.3.3.

The status of women The participation of women in the cults Women in the cults of demeter and Dionysos

119 120 121

2.4.

Summary

125

Table of Contents

xi

Section Two Paul in Ephesus 1. Paul and Artemis in Ephesus

126

1.1.

Introduction

126

1.2.

The Evidence from Acts

129

1.2.1. 1.2.2. 1.2.3. 1.2.4.

Introduction Paul and Artemis in Acts Biblical scholarship on Acts 19: 23-41 Acts 19: 23-27

129 130 132 134

Excursus: Guilds and Associations

140

1.2.5.

Acts 19: 28-41

143

1.3.

Artemis in Post-Pauline Literature

153

1.3.1. 1.3.2.

First Timothy The Letter to the Ephesians

153 155

1.3.3.

The non-canonical literature

162

1.4.

Summary

163

2. Paul among Jews in Ephesus

165

2.1.

The Traditional View

165

2.2.

Diaspora Jews

172

2.2.1. 2.2.2. 2.2.3. 2.2.4. 2.2.5. 2.3.

The relation of diaspora Jews with non-Jews Evidence of apostate behavior God-fearers and proselytes Synagogues The status and role of Jewish women in Asia Minor Jews in Ephesus

173 177 184 188 190 192

2.3.1. 2.3.2.

Some literary and epigraphical evidence The evidence from Josephus

192 194

xii

Table of Contents

2.4.

Paul among Jews in Acts

199

2.4.1. 2.4.2. 2.4.3. 2.4.4. 2.4.5. 2.4.6. 2.4.7. 2.4.8. 2.4.9.

The debate in scholarship The Ephesian episodes in Acts Acts 18: 19-21 Acts 18: 24-28 Acts 19: 1-7 Acts 19: 8-10 Acts 19: 11-20 Acts 20: 16-38 Acts 21: 27-29

199 204 204 210 230 245 257 265 271

2.5.

Summary

273

3. The Evidence from Paul

273

3.1.

Introduction

273

3.2.

The Corinthian Correspondence

276

3.2.1. 3.2.2. 3.2.3. 3.2.4. 3.2.5. 3.2.6.

1 Corinthians 1: 11 1 Corinthians 4: 6-13 1 Corinthians 15: 30-33 1 Corinthians 16: 8-9 1 Corinthians 16: 12-19 2 Corinthians 1:8-11

277 279 281 283 285 286

3.3.

Other Canonical Writings

289

3.3.1. 3.3.2. 3.3.3.

Romans 16 The Letter to the Ephesians The Pastorals

289 291 293

4. Conclusions

294

4.1.

Ephesus as a Mission Centre

295

4.2.

The Survival of Pauline Influence in Ephesus

297

4.3.

The Importance of Ephesus after Paul

298

4.4.

The Relation between 'Paul' and 'John' in Ephesus

301

Table of Contents

Appendices

xiii

303

Appendix 1: What did Paul mean when he spoke of himself as έθνών απόστολο??... 303 Appendix 2: The survival of Jewish thought and practice in Ephesus Bibliography

306 311

Abbreviations AB ABD Abod. Zarah ACW ad Phil Aeg A.H. A.J. AJA AJJS AJP AJT AmSchol Anab ANCL ANRW

ANRW I ANRW II Ant. A. P. AR W AS ASOR Ass.Mos. ATANT ATLA BAG

BAR

Anchor Bible Anchor Bible Dictionary Abodah Zarah Ancient Christian Writings Polycarp, Letter to the Philippians Aegyptus Adversus Haereses The Acts of John American Journal of Archaeology Australian Journal of Jewish Studies American Journal of Philology American Journal of Theology American Scholar Anabasis Ante-Nicene Christian Library Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. — I. Von den Anfangen Roms bis zum Ausgang der Republik. —II. Principat. The Antiquities of the Jews The Acts of Paul Archiv für Religionswissenschaft Anatolian Studies American School of Oriental Research The Assumption of Moses Abhandlungen zur Theologie des Alten und Neuen Testaments American Theological Library Association W. Bauer, W.F. Arndt, and F.W. Gingrich Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Biblical Archaeologist Reader

xvi BARev BCE Bib BibRev BJRL BJS BR BT Β Bull. épig. BurH BZ BZNW C. Apion CAH CBQ CChr CD CE 1 Chron CIG CIJ CIL Contemp. Life 1 Cor 2 Cor CP CR CRINT CSCO CTM Dan DB De Abrah. De Ioseph. De somniis Deipno. Deut

Abbreviations

Biblical Archaeology Review Before the Common Era Biblica Bible Review Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester Brown Judaic Studies Biblical Research Biblical Theology Bulletin Bulletin épigraphique Buried History Biblische Zeitschrift Beihefte zur ZNW Contra Apion Cambridge Ancient History Catholic Biblical Quarterly Corpus Christianorum Cairo (Genizah text of the) Damascus Document The Common Era First Chronicles Corpus inscriptionum graecarum Corpus inscriptionum judaicarum Corpus inscriptionum latinarum On the Contemplative Life (De vita contemplativa) 1 Corinthians 2 Corinthians Classical Philology Classical Review Compendia rerum iudaicarum ad novum testamentum Corpus scriptorum christianorum orientalium Concordia Theological Monthly Daniel Dictionary of the Bible de Abrahamo de Iosepho On Dreams (de somniis) The Deipnosophists Deuteronomy

Abbreviations

De vita Mos. Dial. Diog. Laert. Dion. Halic Disc. Disc. Arrian Eccl. Hist. EDNT EKKNT Ep. Ep. ad Attic. Ep. ad fam. Eph EPRO et al Etym. Magn. Ex ExpTim Ezek F.G.H. FiE Frag. FRLANT Gal Gen GNB GrB.S GRBS Gyn. Habb HAR H.E. Horn. Od. HR HSCP HTR HTKNT

xvii

de vita Mosis Dialogue Diogenes Laertes Dionysius of Halicarnassus Discourse The Discourses of Arrian Ecclesiastical History Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament Evangelisch-katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament Epistola Epistola ad Atticum Epistola ad familiares Ephesians Etudes préliminaires aux religions orientales dans l'empire Romain etalii Etymologicon Magnum Exodus Expository Times Ezekiel Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker Forschungen in Ephesos Fragments Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments Galatians Genesis Good News Bible Grazer Beiträge Supplement Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies Gynecology Habakkuk Hebrew Annual Review Historia Ecclesiastica ad Homeri Odysseam History of Religions Harvard Studies in Classical Philology Harvard Theological Review Herders Theologischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament

xviii HUCA HZNT IB ICC I.Eph. Ign. Eph Ign. Rom IGRR I.Mag. Int Iph. T. IQR Is JAAR JAC JBL JEH JES JETS JHS JJS Josh JQR JRS JSJ JSNT JSOT JSS JTS KJV L'Année épig. LCL Lev LSJ LTP LTQ

Abbreviations

Hebrew Union College Annual Handbuch zum Neuen Testament Interpreter's Bible International Critical Commentary Inschriften von Ephesos Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians Ignatius, Letter to the Romans Inscriptiones graecae ad res romanas pertinentes Inschriften von Magnesia Interpretation Iphigenia inTauris Irish Quarterly Review Isaiah Journal of the American Academy of Religion Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Ecclesiastical History Journal of Ecumenical Studies Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society Journal of Hellenic Studies Journal of Jewish Studies Joshua Jewish Quarterly Review Journal of Roman Studies Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period Journal for the Study of the New Testament Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Jewish Social Studies Journal of Theological Studies King James Version L'Année épigraphique Loeb Classical Library Leviticus Liddell-Scott-Jones, Greek-English Lexicon Laval théologique et philosophique Lexington Theological Quarterly

Abbreviations

LXX 1 Macc 2Macc 4 Macc Mai Matt MM MNTC Neot New Docs N.H. NIBC NIV NovT NPNF NTD NTOA NTS Num Ν um Chron OGIS ÖJh Oneiro. Or. Oxy. P. 1 Pet PG PGM Phil PL PO Ps Ps Sol PW Quod Deus

Septuaginta First Maccabees Second Maccabees Fourth Maccabees Malachi Matthew J.H. Moulton & G. Milligan The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament Moffat New Testament Commentary Neotestamentica New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity Natural History (Naturalis Historiae) New International Biblical Commentary New International Version Novum Testamentum Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Das Neue Testament Deutsch Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus New Testament Studies Numbers Numismatic Chronicle Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae Jahreshefte des Österreichischen Archaeologischen Instituts Oneirocritica Oration Oxyrhynchus Papyri First Peter J. Migne, Patrologia graeca K. Preisendanz (ed.) Papyri graecae magicae Philippians J. Migne, Patrologia latina Patrologia Orientalis Psalms Psalms of Solomon Pauly-Wissowa, Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft On the Unchangeableness of God ( Quod Deus immutabilis sit)

xix

XX

ÎQS 4QFlor RB ResQ Rev RevThom RHPR Rom RR RSV 1 Sam SBL SCI SCM SecCent SEG Sib. Or. SIG SJT SNTS Spec. Laws SPCK ST TAPA TDNT Test. Levi Test. Joseph 1 Thess THZNT 1 Tim 2 Tim TRE TrinJ TSBA TynBull

Abbreviations

Serek hayyahad (Rule of the Community, Manual of Discipline) Florilegium from Qumran Cave 4 Revue biblique Restoration Quarterly Revelation Revue thomiste Revue d'histoire des religions Romans Review of Religion Revised Standard Version First Samuel Society for Biblical Literature Scripta Classica Israelica Student Christian Movement Second Century Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum Sibylline Oracles Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum Scottish Journal of Theology Society for New Testament Studies On the Special Laws (de specialibus legibus) Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge Studia theologica Transactions of the American Philological Association Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Testament of Levi Testament of Joseph First Thessalonians Theologischer Handkommentar zum Neuen Testament First Timothy Second Timothy Theologische Realenzyklopädie Trinity Journal Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archaeology Tyndale Bulletin

Abbreviations

VC V.H. Vit. Apoll. Vit. Soph. Wars

WUNT WW Zeph ZNW ZPE

xxi

Vigilae christianae Varia Historia Vita Apollinaris Vitae Sophistorum The Wars of the Jews Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Word and World Zephaniah Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik

Introduction

1. Ephesus 1.1. The aim The ancient city of Ephesus in Asia Minor, in its history νεωκόρο? of both Artemis and the cult of the emperor, has been touted by many scholars as the centre of the apostle Paul's mission to the region and the stage for his most successful gentile mission. According to Acts, Paul spent over two years in Ephesus (19: 8, 10), yet biblical scholarship has taken comparatively little interest in the city itself and the environment in which Paul lived and worked. Murphy-O'Connor draws attention to the fact that "there is no book on Ephesus in the first century that would bring to life the social texture of the city" (1988: 458). In addition, Gerd Lüdemann once remarked, almost as an aside, that the early history of Christianity in Ephesus needs to be thoroughly analyzed. He noted that it was Luke's concern to demonstrate the priority of the Pauline proclamation in this city and to domesticate Apollos' Christianity ... Luke also seems to know that opposition to Paul had the upper hand in Ephesus ... The analysis should also take into consideration the question of the addressees of Ephesians, 1 Timothy l:3ff; Revelation 2: I f f ; and Ignatius, the Epistle to the Ephesians and the problem of the group of traditions of John connected with Ephesus (1984: 134 η 177).

This book aims to contribute towards filling the lack perceived by MurphyO'Connor and to add to the analysis which Lüdemann requests. However, to meet all these demands requires more than this book can take on board, so the matter of the addressees in the literature mentioned and the questions raised by the Johannine tradition associated with Ephesus will not be covered. The Lukan material concerning Ephesus in Acts and the sparse data provided by the indubitably Pauline letters will be a major focus. Lüdemann's awareness of the strength and success of the opposition to Paul puts him in the Tübingen tradition which understood the influence of Paul to be short-lived, granted that he himself may have had some success in the city. But not all scholars have accepted this view. Many claim that Paul founded the

2

Introduction

Christian church in Ephesus (Bauer 1971: 82); that he had "fantastic success" there (Orr and Walther 1976: 90); and that there is no evidence for any suggestion of decline in the period after his death (for example, J. Weiss, J. Lightfoot, J. Knox). The book is divided into two sections. The first intends to set the local context in which Paul and other Christians lived and worked in the first decades of a Christian presence in Ephesus. Apart from the invaluable work of Oster and Horsley, little of substance has been available to English-speaking biblical scholarship on the state of the Artemis cult in Ephesus in the early Christian period. And yet it is essential that if the Ephesian mission of Paul is to be understood, it must be seen in the context of what was going on in the city of Ephesus. It will be shown that Artemis maintained a strong and ancient tradition in the city and that her cult well survived any impact of the Christian message. Because understanding the imperial cult is important for an understanding of Revelation (which contains a letter addressed to Ephesus, 2:1-7) that cult and others will also be examined, but more briefly. The second section maintains two major points: first, that evidence for Paul's success in Ephesus is slight, and that Paul found Ephesus a very difficult place in which to work; and second, that Paul had negligible impact among gentiles of Ephesus, but achieved a following among some Ephesian Jews. This is in no way to totally reject the traditional view of scholarship that Paul had some influence on some gentiles in Ephesus - an influence always painted in the picture of Paul's work in Ephesus. But it is important to balance the picture by drawing attention to his influence also among Jews. While recent biblical scholarship has shown interest in the Christian communities of Corinth and Rome in particular and Jerusalem and Antioch to a lesser degree,1 little detailed attention has been directed towards Ephesus. This is surprising inasmuch as not only is Paul supposed to have spent over two years in that city, but the Johannine tradition makes reasonably strong - if rather late - claims associating it with Ephesus. One explanation for the comparative lack of interest in Ephesus is that centres like Rome and Corinth had correspondence from Paul which has remained for scholars to examine and study while there is no similar indisputably genuine correspondence from Paul to Ephesus. Rome also has understandable attraction for scholars in the Roman Catholic tradition. Jerusalem attracts attention because it was the centre of Jewish or Palestinian Christianity under the leadership of James; while Antioch is attractive at least for its role in the first Christian movements into the gentile

See R. Brown and J. Meier (1983) on Antioch and Rome; P. Lampe (1989) on Rome; R. Wilken and W. Meeks (1978) on Antioch; G. Theissen (1982) and J. MurphyO'Connor (1983) on Corinth.

Ephesus

3

world and for its claim to be where Christians were first called by that name (Acts 11:26). All these places have left ample archaeological and epigraphical remains which provide material for a more detailed and more accurate construction of the world of the first Christians in those centres. But in this regard, Ephesus ought to claim pride of place, since next to Athens and Rome, it has provided the greatest archaeological and epigraphical data. The eight volumes of Die Inschriften von Ephesos, the volumes of Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum, the journal Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, the volumes of New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity, and the article of Horsley (1992) are some of the excellent recent sources for inscriptional data which make for a deeper understanding of the New Testament text and of the context of the Christian mission in Ephesus. New Testament scholars are only slowly taking the lead (set by classicists and other non-biblical scholars already a century ago) in using this material for their understanding of the beginnings and development of Christian movements in Ephesus and elsewhere. While nonbiblical scholars such as Price and Friesen have shown interest in the imperial cult in Ephesus, biblical scholars only recently have begun to look more closely at that politico-religious aspect of Ephesian society. It needs to be said from the outset that I have only had very limited first-hand access to the epigraphical and archaeological data from Ephesus and therefore I am heavily dependent on secondary sources (especially the contributors to the Pauly-Wissowa Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft and the work of Ramsay, Oster, Fleischer, and Horsley) and their interpretation of that data. I begin with a stammering attempt to view Ephesus from "inside the native's skin". Unlike modern Western countries of Europe and North America where Jewish and Christian theologies and ethics have been fundamental in the shaping of their societies, Ephesian society was founded on the theological and ethical culture of ancient Asia modified and shaped by the influences of other cultures. To read the cultural "texts" of Ephesus through modern Western Christian glasses distorts those texts. Ephesian Jews and Christians lived as minority groups in the city, but they could not have avoided contact with the local cults and culture. Evidence of that contact will be sought and examined. 1.2. The need to study the cultic environment of Ephesus The variety and strength of local Ephesian cults has been known to non-biblical scholars for at least a century. The work of Bürchner, Jessen, and Wernicke, and more recently of Knibbe and Alzinger, in the Pauly-Wissowa Real Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft is still an important source of data in this regard. More recently, Austrian archaeologists have provided a wealth of data for other scholars. Recent publications benefitting from this

4

Introduction

information have been those of Elliger (1985), and of Oster (1990), who contributes a valuable monograph on Ephesus as a religious centre in which he refers to past scholarship on the subject, lists the numerous cults and deities of Ephesus, and importantly for my purposes, highlights the centrality and importance of Artemis whose "cult and activities epitomized the cultural and religious spirit of the city" (1990: 1727). Oster works on the basis of literary, epigraphical, and numismatic evidence. He says: There is, indeed, hardly a phase or dimension of the excavation and research which has not contributed to piecing together the multifarious and variegated phenomenon of religious life in ancient Ephesus. Whether it be sculpture, architectural remains, numismatic evidence, mosaics and frescoes, or epigraphical sources, each sheds its distinctive light on this sometimes penumbral facet of ancient civilization (1990: 1663-64).

A recent study of one particular epigraphical find is that of Rogers (1991) who has provided a valuable examination of a lengthy inscription which details not only the gift of Caius Vibius Salutaris to the city of Ephesus in 104 CE, but also the conditions under which that gift was to be used. Rogers underlines the strength of the Artemis cult at that time, the importance of processions, and the role of inscriptions as religious, social, and political propaganda in Ephesus. Among biblical scholars, it is true that "only marginal attention is given to the Ephesian Artemis" (Oster 1976: 25 η 4). Recently, only Gritz (1991) and Arnold (1989) have shown significant interest in Artemis and other Ephesian cults. But their interest is to depict the cults as inimical to the Christian message, and neither writer makes any attempt to objectively evaluate the status and role of Artemis in Ephesus. Arnold's work in particular will be scrutinized in a later chapter and found wanting in important areas. Generally, biblical scholars have been very slow to pick up the melody let alone to dance to it. This may be understandable since the New Testament, rather curiously, speaks so very little about the "pagan" cultic milieu in which it was written. Very few of the gods are mentioned by name, and of those that are, Artemis is the only one of whom any detail is given.2 One would expect, Apart from Artemis, the only other pagan gods mentioned by name are Hermes and Zeus (Acts 14:12). Other references are very general and few (Rom 1:18-25; 1 Cor 8; 10:14-21; 1 Thess 1:9; Gal 4:8). This paucity of clear signs that the New Testament writers knew the pagan environment of their audiences in any significant detail stands in marked contrast to the later writings of Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and others who obviously knew the mythological and cultic world of their neighbors very well. Appeal cannot be made to Jewish monotheism to explain the silence since, if Philo is any indication, Jewish writers of the first century CE also knew that world very well. There cannot be any doubt that Paul and other New Testament writers knew about these practices and myths, since it would have been impossible to live and work in

Ephesus

5

then, that biblical scholars would seize on this one goddess, at least, in order to gain insight into the milieu in which Christians lived. Artemis cannot be ignored if for no other reason than that if Paul is the apostle to the gentiles par excellence, and if he spent over two years in Ephesus, then New Testament scholarship is obligated to take seriously the gentile population among whom Paul worked and from whom, presumably, his converts came. This becomes particularly important in the revision and correction of any suggestion that Paul worked so successfully in Ephesus that all other gods just "lay down and died".3 In any study of the local Ephesian cults, the inscriptional, epigraphical, and numismatic evidence plays a significant role.4 While literary remains certainly demonstrate the status of the Artemis cult, such evidence invariably comes from "outsiders" - non-Ephesians writing about Artemis and about Ephesus from the outside. The inscriptional remains, however, come from the city itself and generally from its own inhabitants and so are of great significance and importance. These inscriptions indicate clearly the exceptional status of Artemis, and also throw light on the cultic, civic and personal language used in her honor. Biblical scholars have relied very heavily on the ancient written literary texts, and create their understanding of that world from those texts. But the vast majority of Ephesians, for example, would not have read those texts, whereas the texts of the inscriptions were in the public eye and served as a very powerful form of propaganda in the city. As Veyne says, "an inscription possessed a dignity equal to that of a book. Inscription (epigraphe) and book were two modes of publication of like value" (1992: 127).5 It is not coincidental that Christian inscriptions are comparatively rare until the fourth century CE when Christianity became a political instrument of government. cities like Corinth, Athens, Rome and Ephesus without observing them at very close quarters, no matter how objectionable they may have been. One possible explanation for the silence in the New Testament is that the majority of the recipients of the writings were not gentiles. This is what Harnack suggests. He thinks Asia was ripe for Christianity since "here singular mixtures of Judaism and paganism were to be met with in the realm of ideas ... as well as in mythology; the population were open for a new syncretism ... Here paganism was absorbed. There were no fierce struggles. Paganism simply disappeared, to emerge again, in proportion to the measure of its disappearance, in the Christian church" (1905: 2.327, 328). For a few years, Oster is one who has called on biblical scholars to take such evidence seriously. Recently, he has made another plea but is hopeful that "fresh winds are blowing in academic circles" (1992: 53). Inscriptions were read aloud in a low voice. Reading aloud "gave new life to the epitaph ... The reader also spoke the name of deceased and thereby made him live again" (Veyne 1992: 178 η 172). What was true of epitaph-reading was generally true in the reading of all inscriptions.

6

Introduction

Conversely, Christian written literary texts were influential and important to the Christian communities.6 As will be noted, imperial Rome restructured cities like Ephesus to such a degree that the very city-plan was part of strategic propaganda to remind citizens and inhabitants just "who ran the show".7 It is not surprising that the prophet of Revelation urges his followers to come outside of the city (18:4) and to look for another city - God's city, which will bear all the marks of God's propaganda (21:1-8). It is understandable that this prophecy is bound up in a book (22:18-19) and not inscribed on stone since Christians had no access to the official and approved media of Rome.8 From the perspective of the New Testament scholar, the inscriptions give valuable insight into the cultural circumstances of Ephesus, enabling the scholar to recreate with some accuracy the conditions in which Paul and other Christians lived and worked in Ephesus.9 Christian communities did not spring up in a vacuum and did not grow in a vacuum. If Ephesus was the centre of gentile Christianity par excellence, then one could expect to see signs of its gentile background either in the language in which the converts are addressed or in the problems experienced, or in the character and behavior of the converts. I am wanting to claim that such signs are difficult to find. 1.3. Ephesus in the history of biblical scholarship It is well known that the Eusebian model of church history remained the dominant model until the middle of the nineteenth century. Eusebius claims that Ephesus was of Pauline origin, with Johannine apostolic authority following In addition to their own writings, the Christians were also responsible to some large extent for the survival of many Jewish (non-Christian) texts. There are a number of valuable recent publications on the imperial cult in Ephesus: Price (1984a), Rogers (1991), and Friesen (1993). The epigraphical evidence is pivotal to their work. It is therefore not surprising that when Christians do have access to this form of public press, they deface the original gods who controlled the media. So in the fourth or fifth century, Demeas in Ephesus defaces an inscription of Artemis and replaces her with the cross of Christ (l.Eph. IV. 1351). Revolutionary movements often seek to gain access to the media as a form of power and control over public opinion and thought. It is readily acknowledged that such evidence does not give the complete picture. It costs money to set up a monument or to have an inscription carved, and many individuals certainly, and even some associations, would not have been able to afford such costs. Very many inscriptions honor benefactors who made contributions of one kind or another to the city. Inscriptions announcing citizenship also indicate that such honor was granted either because of actions which brought honor to the city or because citizenship was bought at a price.

Ephesus

7

smoothly after Paul (H.E. 3.23). Ephesus was apostolic and therefore orthodox. German scholars of the nineteenth century, especially Ferdinand Christian Baur, influenced as they were by Hegel and contemporary philosophical views of history based on conflict and tension, began to question this Eusebian model. They claimed that the New Testament sources traditionally used for uncovering the history of the church are not reliable as historical sources either because they were very late (second century writings) or because they were too biased by their theological framework and motives. It is not surprising that Ephesus did not greatly attract the attention of these scholars since much of the material available to them was from Acts or from the Pastorals and they were both dismissed as being of late composition, historically unreliable, full of legendary material, theologically constructed, and in contradiction with the Pauline material. There are scholars who would still hold that view today. However, the Tiibingen school was still comparatively traditional and conservative in its understanding of Christian origins in Ephesus. It accepted that Paul was the founder of Christianity there; but it also thought that his influence was short-lived and that a wave of Palestinian Christianity (which was seen to be essentially in opposition and contradiction to Pauline Christianity) took over and gained ascendancy in Asia Minor generally. No one of this school concentrated energy on a detailed study of Ephesus, even though some epigraphical and archaeological data were available to them at the time. What interest there has been in Ephesus has been shown by the historians of early Christianity (Weizsäcker, Jedin, Goguel, Kidd, Carrington et al), who have contributed valuable information and hypotheses concerning Ephesian Christian origins. 10 Commentators on The Acts of the Apostles cannot avoid examining aspects of Ephesian life if only in passing (Dibelius, Haenchen, Conzelmann, Bruce et al); nor can scholars who construct the life of Paul (Bornkamm, Knox, and Lüdemann, for example). There are also those few scholars whose attention has been attracted to Ephesus not because of the city per se but because of peculiar events or people associated with the city. So there is the occasional short monograph or article on Paul's supposed imprisonment in the city (Duncan), on Apollos (Wynne, Barton, Schweizer), and on the twelve disciples of 19:1-7 (Kaiser, Käsemann, Norris). Ephesus has also come under some scrutiny because of the relation between baptism, the Holy Spirit, and John the Baptist (Dunn, Ernst). The question of the ordination of women has forced some modern scholars into a detailed study of 1 Tim 2:11-15 and with that some sideway glances at the Ephesian context (Moo, Spencer, Padgett, Kroeger, Gritz). The interest in sociological approaches to New Weizsäcker in particular offers a lengthy, detailed, and interesting chapter on Ephesus (1902: 354-398). It seems to have been ignored by later scholars.

8

Introduction

Testament studies has led to studies on the Demetrius "riot" in Acts 19:23-41 and in that context to studies on Ephesian religio-political structures (Baugh, Stoops jr., Lampe). Finally, Ephesus has come to the attention of scholars interested in Revelation and in the Jewish and/or Christian communities of Asia Minor generally (S.E. Johnson, Hemer, Mussies, Thompson, Trebilco). There was initial interest in Ephesus about a century ago because the British and then Austrian archaeologists and scholars of Asia Minor began publishing their findings (which included the long-awaited discovery of the location of the Artemis temple). In some cases this led to a review of the Baur thesis and a greater reliance on the trustworthiness of Acts. Ramsay, for example, was converted from the Baur scepticism towards the Lukan material of Acts to be convinced of its historical reliability and to see Luke as a "historian of the highest order" (1935: v). Ramsay spent much time in Asia Minor, especially in Phrygia, and wrote voluminously on his valuable and significant findings in the region, but he appeared to neglect Ephesus in favor of cities and areas further east. This could be explained by the difficulties Ramsay had with the Ephesian episodes in Acts : "The writer is here rather a picker-up of current gossip, like Herodotus, than a real historian" (1935: 273).11 It might have been expected that interest in Ephesus would have been aroused by the work of Walter Bauer and the publication of his Rechtgläubigkeit und Ketzerei im ältesten Christentum in 1934. But only passing interest has been shown with the exception of Robinson's 1985 thesis 12 which attempts to disprove Bauer using Ephesus and Asia Minor as evidence. Bauer's thesis led to a new understanding of early Christianity (and to a common rejection of that very term "early Christianity"). His main thrust was to challenge scholars to look at Christianity not as a monolithic movement, uniform wherever it went, but to see that local variations were considerable and so each centre is to be studied in and for itself, within its own context and for its own end. Nearly all modern scholars to various degrees would accept this aspect of Bauer's approach and acknowledge that Christianity was "conspicuously marked by diversification from the very beginning" (Koester 1965: 281). In addition, Bauer challenged the Eusebian model of a church which began in all areas as doctrinally orthodox but which was then corrupted through heresy. Bauer claimed that some centres were in their very origins heretical and often remained so.13 This latter fact of Bauer's work has not gone unchallenged, and some scholars have rejected it outright. In terms of Ephesus, 11

12

13

Archaeological evidence for Jews and Christians is stronger further east than it is in Ephesus where it is so far disappointingly sparse. Published in 1988 as The Bauer Thesis Examined: The geography of heresy in the early Christian Church. Bauer claimed heretical origins for nearly every centre he examined. In that regard, the variations were even greater than he imagined.

Ephesus

9

Bauer did not shift from the Tübingen view that Ephesus was founded by Paul and although the Pauline influence was short-lived in the city, she still remained within the camp of the orthodox. As Norris rightly points out, "the case for competing understandings of the gospel at Ephesus could be made much more strongly than Bauer attempted" (1982: 372). The question of the orthodoxy or otherwise of Ephesus (allowing the anachronism of the language for the first and second centuries of the Christian era) is an exceedingly complex area, well beyond the scope of this book, since, as Trevett remarks: "There exists almost endless permutations of questions about Christianity in Asia" (1989: 131). Since it is possible that Acts, the Pastorals, the Ignatian letters, Revelation, the Johannine epistles, and the Fourth Gospel all have a common link in Ephesus and that all derive from a period of about twenty years of each other, such permutations are seemingly endless. 14 In more recent years, there have been few studies concentrating on Christian origins in Ephesus. Grundmann (1964) provides one of few articles of substance on the subject, and particularly on the ministry of Paul in the city; however, it is little more than an overview on the basis of the episodes in Acts. He claims Ephesus was of überragend significance and was founded by Paul (1964: 49). Like most scholars, he believes Luke has a particular theological agenda and that Ephesus fits into that scheme as "der letzte Ort der freien apostolischen Wirksamkeit des Paulus" (49) and, as representative of all the communities of Paul's mission, is the high point of Paul's work (50). But despite "die fruchtbare und grosse Tätigkeit in Ephesus" (67), Grundmann is aware that Ephesus was for Paul "einer der spannungsreichsten und schwersten [Wirkungsabschnitte]" (79). Of relevance for my purposes is the work of Pereira (1983), an Indian Jesuit scholar. His study offers valuable historical critical work on Acts 18:21-20:1, but his major proposal is that Ephesus was, for Luke, the climax of universalism. So like Grundmann, Pereira thinks Ephesus is significant in Luke's picture, a significance summarised by Acts 19:10. Ephesus is the climax of Paul's work resulting in Jews and Greeks now belonging to a new community separated from the synagogue but in which they both have equal status and are preached to on an equal footing. But that is not the end of the story for Luke, says Pereira. Luke ultimately wants Paul to be in Rome preaching the gospel to gentiles "unhindered" (with the odd individual Jew not Donahue has reasonably suggested that "[A]s long as the private home remained the principal locus for Christian worship, Christians ... could go their diverse ways with a minimum of conflict. Christians from different religious and social backgrounds tended to form different congregations. These congregations developed theology to some extent independent of one another" (1978: 92). He could have added that charismatic and prophetic leadership would also have contributed to the diversity.

10

Introduction

excluded), and so, thinks Pereira, Ephesus is the halfway point but "the events which take place in Rome are already orientated from Ephesus by means of the resolve of Paul to visit Rome as a divine dei (Acts 19:21)" (1983: 258). Pereira's work will be a point of reference when dealing with the text of Acts, even if his thesis is not critiqued. At this stage, it is sufficient to note that Pereira dismisses the Jews and their significance in the Christian community of Ephesus too easily. As of many who insist on Luke as a writer of theological history, the question can also be asked of Pereira whether he does not make Luke too clever in his construction and in his use of the Ephesian material in that construction. Pereira, like others, places great importance on Acts 19:10 as the key to understanding the significance of Ephesus in Luke's picture. But the other episodes compiled and edited by Luke concerning Ephesus do not fit the picture which Pereira paints of Ephesus as the centre where Paul's Christianity became a universal movement, treating Jews and gentiles on an equal footing. Elliger (1985) offers little new. He follows the standard view that Paul made Ephesus the Mittelpunkt of his mission in Asia Minor and that according to Luke, Paul "ist der Triumphator" (1985: 140). What cannot be sustained is his claim that Paul was involved in a great battle against the pagan world and so threatened to endanger the Artemis cult (140). He gives a brief history of the Christian movement in Ephesus in the first five centuries, but the value of his work lies in the archaeological and inscriptional data it offers. Mussies (1990), in overview article on Ephesus, rightly acknowledges the significance and duration of Artemis in the city. He is also aware of the paucity of evidence for Jews there, but he follows the standard understanding of the Christian movement as being founded by Paul, separated almost immediately from the Jews. He concludes with an extremely brief summary of post-Pauline Ephesian Christianity from Ephesians to Justin, and then to Chrysostom and the fifth century. Mussies also provides non-Christian literary data and inscriptional parallels to illuminate the New Testament text in which he has very little interest per se. Schnackenburg has written a substantial article entitled "Ephesus: Entwicklung einer Gemeinde von Paulus zu Johannes" (1991), which as the title suggests attempts to see links and continuity between Paul and John. Like many scholars, Schnackenburg assumes that the "church" of Paul and that of John at Ephesus are one and the same. This is a questionable assumption. Schnackenburg also follows the tradition of seeing Ephesus as central to the Pauline mission in Asia Minor and a successful Pauline church of the faithful who were "überwiegend Heidenchristen" (1991: 47). That Ephesus was central for Paul while he was in Asia is a logical assumption noting the significant political and economical status of the city in the region, but the claim that Paul was successful and that gentiles constituted the overwhelming majority in his communities is more questionable. If it can be shown that at Ephesus Paul had

Ephesus

11

little success among gentiles and that if he had any success at all it was among Jews, this would have implications for understanding Paul's missionary activity generally, and for an understanding of the terms "Pauline", "Gentile Christianity" and "Jewish Christianity" and the relation between them. 1.4. Paul among Ephesian Gentiles and Jews Schnackenburg shares with the vast majority of others the opinion that Paul had great success among gentiles of Ephesus, and that Ephesus was the centre par excellence of Pauline (= Gentile) Christianity. "Ephesus was the centre of the gentile mission" (C.S. Williams 1964: 22). How Pauline it is understood to have been is best expressed by Streeter who holds that the church at Ephesus was the most thoroughly Greek, or rather Hellenistic, of the churches ... and it was the most Pauline. Ephesian Christianity ... was the gospel of Paul insofar as the religion of one reared in the discipline of Pharisaic Judaism could be assimilated and understood by any minds formed in an environment essentially Hellenistic (1928: 61).

More recently, Robinson dismisses Artemis (Diana) as not important for a study of Christianity (1988: 111) and yet claims Ephesus as "the chief city of Paul's most successful mission" (1988: 95) and that to the gentiles. This is a curious position to take. If Paul was successful among gentiles, then it is quite likely that he had success among some cultists of Artemis and therefore Artemis cannot be so easily ignored. Robinson's position will be challenged and it will be concluded that Artemis survived well after Paul (and other Christians) and cannot be so easily ignored; and secondly, that there is little evidence of great numbers of gentiles in the Pauline community in Ephesus, and the claim that gentile Christianity was dominant there has little to support it. So accepted is the assumption that Paul worked successfully among gentiles that his association and work among Jews in Ephesus is almost ignored, and the contribution of Jews to Pauline Christianity in Ephesus is regarded as negligible. Robinson claims: "Ephesus is an example of another city in which a large Jewish population does not mould the early Christian community into a consciously Jewish group" (1988: 68). The contact Paul does have with Jews is understood by many scholars to fit the Lukan theological construction of a Paul who goes to the synagogue which then rejects him so he abandons the Jews for the gentiles. Luke constructs his story as an attempt to explain the transition of the Christian movement from Jews to gentiles.15 Kraabel (1981) is a strong proponent of this view.

12

Introduction

Earlier scholars had a slightly different understanding. They were more aware of the "Jewishness" of the Christianity in Ephesus and in Asia Minor generally. Renan believed the "Judaeo-Christian party existed without doubt at Ephesus from the first year" (n.d.: 3. 227) and that party was in conflict with Paul (182). Renan explains the shift from Paul to the community of Revelation as due to a second wave of a Judaeo-Christian mission from Palestine (189). John was the head of this movement and he was "the chief of all the JudeoChristian churches" (4. 101). Scholars like Renan saw "Jewish Christianity" winning out in Asia Minor and in Ephesus, and claimed that Paul's influence was short-lived and his mission a failure. For them, these two facts go hand in hand. If Christians in Ephesus are Jewish then Paul must have failed. Or, if Pauline influence declined rapidly, it must be because of Jewish Christian influence, since the latter was seen as irrevocably opposed to the Pauline line. Because of this conflict thesis and the historical construct on which it was based, it was seemingly not possible for these scholars (and for many today) to conceive of Jews who were convinced by Paul, supported him, and adopted his view of the gospel - only gentiles could do that. Later, the "Jewishness" of Jesus and Paul became the accepted starting point.16 Weiss thinks Paul was "always bound by his obligation to Judaism" as were Priscilla, Aquila, and Apollos, and that it was only the post-Pauline church which saw itself as devoted exclusively to the gentile mission (1937: 661). Munck could at one stage in his thinking say: "Paul is more interested in the salvation of Israel than in that of the Gentiles, and he continues to carry on Jewish mission work wherever he goes" (1965: 80). There can be no doubt that Paul never lost his interest in and concern for his own people, the Jews. Romans 9-11 and 1 Cor 9:19-23 alone make that clear. It would also seem questionable to claim that Luke has constructed a Paul who is still faithful to the traditions and that this construction conflicts with the Paul of his letters. Kraabel and Goodenough claim that "Acts seems to be a tendentious document written to exaggerate Paul's Jewish conservatism" (1970: 25). After all, Acts also portrays many Jews as being in opposition to Paul, and the reasons given for that opposition are that he speaks against the temple, against the people, and against the Law (Acts 21:28), and that he was encouraging "all the Jews who are among the gentiles"17 not to live according

For the Jewishness of Paul, see especially W.D. Davies (1965) and more recently, Segal (1990). For the history of scholarship on the Jewishness of Paul, see the dialogue between Rabbi Perelmutter and Professor Wuellner in the Twentieth Anniversary Symposium of the Center for Hermeneutical Studies 60 (1990) 1-20. Τού? κατά τά Ιθνη is an interesting phrase suggesting that Paul had a particular message for diaspora Jews.

Some Methodological Problems

13

to the Law of Moses (Acts 21:21). This is hardly the portrayal of a faithful, law-abiding, conservative, traditional Jew. A later chapter will examine Paul's contact with the Jews of Ephesus and will suggest that there were those Jews who claimed Paul as their authority and so it would be correct to speak of a form of Pauline Jewish Christianity.

2. Some Methodological Problems 2.1. The use of data The writing of early Christian history is fraught with problems, some of which are implicit in what has already been said. The most substantial problem (acknowledging the extreme paucity of data in the first place) is how to use the material available, the data which form not only the foundation but especially the walls, windows, and ceiling of the construction. The dating of the data, for example, is crucial.18 Precise dating in the first place is difficult for much of the data, but there is the additional question as to whether or not it is legitimate to take material from later (or earlier) times and assume that similar circumstances applied to the first century of the Common Era. And the provenance of the data is also important. 19 If there are no data available for Ephesus from any period, but data are available in some other city or region, is it legitimate to construct an Ephesus with bricks from Antioch or Alexandria, for example? The bricks will very rarely fit across chronological and geographical lines. While it is probably legitimate to build with them until better and more suitable local bricks are discovered, these bricks must be lightly placed and not cemented in with other bricks as if they were meant to be there in the first place. In other words, great caution must be observed when reconstructing the first Christian century in any particular place. Such caution is necessary also, of course, with any reconstruction of the Artemis cult. As Oster rightly points out: Because of the duration of the tenure of Artemis as the regnant deity in Ephesus, and since, attendant to this regality, she was so inextricably tied to the changing fortunes and misfortunes of the city of Ephesus, one must See Oster's critical observations on the abuse of archaeological data from Corinth (1992: 55) and his concerns for correct methodology in the use of such evidence. Over a century ago, Hatch was aware of the problems with both dating and provenance. He emphasised that changes can and do occur over a hundred year period and so the temptation to lump periods together must be avoided. In addition, "we cannot determine the value of any item of evidence until we have localized it" (1882: 10-12).

14

Introduction

be careful not to collapse the span of her reign (at least a millenium) and the vicissitudes of her cult (under Anatolian, Persian, Greek, Roman, and Christian influences) into one synoptic construct (1990: 1699). 2 0

In the case of Artemis at Ephesus, the available data are relatively scarce considering that they come from a period covering a millenium, and so the problem always is, as Oster says, what legitimate use can be made of such data? Is Artemis of the fourth century BCE the same as she of the fourth century CE? The question is not rhetorical; the answer not simple. On the one hand, a period of eight hundred years undoubtedly saw changes in the Ephesian understanding of their Artemis; but on the other hand, tradition is a critical factor and tradition plays an important role in preserving a cult with a minimum of change. While there were changes in the cult, such changes were effected in such a way as to allow the claim to stand that in fact nothing had changed and that those who promoted and supported change claimed that they were still preserving the tradition or even returning to it. A later chapter will also want to emphasise that Artemis of Ephesus cannot be assumed to represent the same goddess as Artemis say of Priene or of Athens and mainland Greece. And yet Artemis Ephesia as she was known in different regions appears to have been iconographically at least the same goddess, and presumably her cult was very similar if not identical in other regions to that practiced in Ephesus itself. To complicate matters, it is very doubtful that Artemis Ephesia can be readily equated with Artemis Soteira or any other epitheted Artemis even at Ephesus.

2.2. The use of language A related methodological matter concerns language. It is anachronistic to speak of Christian orthodoxy and heresy in the first century of the Common Era. 21 More importantly, it is anachronistic to speak of "church", since that term carries too many historical and modern connotations. Markus rightly suggests that scholars do not always know what they are talking about when speaking of the "church" in the first and second centuries (1980: 3). What does it mean to speak of "the church at Ephesus"? Time and again it is assumed in scholarship that there was one "church" in Ephesus. This is particularly true when scholars write of the church of Ephesus addressed in Revelation. Weizsäcker, for LiDonnici remarks similarly: "We have meagre evidence [of Artemis] spread out across a millenium" (1992: 390). R. Williams (1989) discusses the issue. He is right to point out that "[t]he prevailing early forms of Christianity are generally at odds with what later defined itself as normative" (2).

Some Methodological Problems

15

example, says that the author of that writing calls the church at Ephesus to start again because the Pauline influence had collapsed; that start was initiated by "John" going to Ephesus (1902: 480). Two assumptions are inherent here: First, that the seven churches addressed in Revelation must have had some Pauline contact, if they were not directly founded by him; 22 and second, that the "Johannine church" in some way continued or followed on from the Pauline. For other related reasons, Revelation becomes a problem for Bornkamm. He cannot see the possibility of Ephesus and other churches in Asia Minor ("Paul's old mission field") being "still spiritual and prophetic communities and [having] no office bearers towards the end of the first century" since Acts, the Pastorals, 1 Peter, Ignatius and Polycarp make this idea impossible (1964: 669). The possibility that the "church" addressed in Revelation and the church(es) addressed in the other writings were not one and the same does not enter Bornkamm's mind, apparently. Müller's problem is no different: How could John, with his views of church structure, influence Christian communities who held views like Eph 2:20? (1976: 29, 49). To give one more example, Fee argues that the Pastoral Letters and Ephesians cannot have been written at the same time as the Revelation and the letters of Ignatius, therefore the former must be Pauline (1988: 28 η 12). Fee, Bornkamm, Müller and others do not conceive that "the church" in Ephesus at the end of the first century consisted of a number of "churches" each with their own structures, and some with no single tradition.23 Orr and Walther claim this is "undoubtedly" so (1976: 88) and many scholars assume it. The claim is often based on Acts 19:10 and 1 Cor 16:19 which cannot bear the weight of such claims, as will be shown later. This possibility cannot be ignored even though it makes the reconstruction of church history most difficult and frustrating. One leader may have been Pauline and the next in the same "church" Johannine or Ignatian or whatever. According to Theodoret, in the fourth century it was possible for a city such as Antioch or Alexandria to have orthodox, Arian, Eustathian, and "heretic" bishops succeeding one another (Hist. Eccl. 5.39). It is also too easy to speak of "traditions". Traditions develop over long periods of time and can be seen often only in restrospect. In the first century, the so-called leaders, especially the charismatic ones, did not consciously see themselves as being in any tradition. I am familiar with missions in Papua New Guinea where the first missionary in an area may have worked for a number of years (ten to thirty or even more) but the locals do not necessarily follow implicitly his pattern of leadership or of teaching; nor did the next missionary for that matter. He had his own understanding of the mission; he may have come from another area of the world than the first missionary. It is not unlikely that something similar happened in Ephesus. We know that Paul was not a local; that Apollos probably came from Alexandria; that Prisca and Aquila had been in Rome and were native of Pontus; it is possible that after 70 CE, some Palestinian Jews moved into Ephesus; it is known that bishops of a later

16

Introduction

Some scholars appear to have greater facility acknowledging this than others. Brown, for example, envisages Ephesus as not simply having a "distinctive theology" but as having different churches with different theologies (1984: 2223). But Brown too still has tunnel-vision. He notes that in Ephesians Jew and gentile are reconciled, but Revelation 2 suggests that the wall has not been broken down (1984: 21, 23). The crucial question Brown does not ask: Are these two letters addressed to the same "church"? The assumption is because they are addressed to Ephesus, they must be to the same Christian community. That such assumptions are important is reflected in the provenance that scholars allocate to various writings. Is the Fourth Gospel eliminated from Ephesus and allocated to Syria or elsewhere24 partly because the "church at Ephesus" is regarded as being "Pauline" and that does not "fit" with the Johannine view of things? It is surely a very rigid view of "the church" of the time. Not only is extreme fluidity and change reasonable, there is sufficient evidence available within the New Testament itself to verify and substantiate the hypothesis that there were contemporaneously various streams in various relations with each other or none. I want to avoid wherever possible the use of the term "church" because of its loaded connotations. Instead, early Christians will be seen in "communities" or "groups". The archaeological evidence of housing in Ephesus, Corinth and other Greek cities would firmly suggest that the size of the groupings was comparatively small - between ten and fifty members.25

period were sent from other areas to places like Ephesus; and that in the sixth century, James of Edessa had some imput into Ephesus. For the various theories of the Gospel's provenance, see Kümmel (1966: 175). Verner says "there is considerable evidence to suggest that the Christians of second century Rome were worshipping in numerous relatively small bodies in private homes" (1983: 168). See also Banks (1979) who thinks 40-45 per house was the upper limit. Robinson suggests 30 people comprised a house-church (1985: 52) and that there were "scores of these small primary house church units" in Ephesus (201). Renan thought a church often numbered no more than 12-15 persons (n.d. 3.298). The same problem terminologically exists with "early Christianity". The variations from area to area make it unwise to use such a general term. And Overman rightly points out that when talking of synagogue "we should not envisage a full-blown sophisticated institution when we encounter this word in first and second century documents" (1990: 57).

Some Methodological Problems

17

2.3. Jewish Christianity and Christian Jews26 Before briefly discussing these terms, it needs to be noted that more and more scholars are aware that even such terms as "Jew" and "Christian" are not as clear-cut as has been assumed in the past, and that they must be used with more care, especially as being contradictory one to the other. Kee advises that "the serious modern investigator of Christian origins ... cannot even responsibly use terms like 'Jew' or 'Christian' as though they had unambiguous, self-evident meaning" (1992: 184). This is also and especially true in depicting the relation between "Christians" and "Jews" and the point at which they became distinctive and divergent faiths. Yarbro Collins writes: The separation between Jews and Christians cannot be understood as a simple event which took place at a single moment in time and which held for every locality. The separation was gradual and very likely relative to individual perceptions and to the particular circumstances of each geographical area (1981:401).

It is a question important to J.T. Sanders who believes Luke "looks forward to the time when the Jews are all wiped off the earth" (1991: 438; compare a very similar statement, 1987: 317) and an explanation for that Lukan attitude lies in "the complexion of Judaism and Christianity in the Roman province of Asia around the year 100 CE". To understand that complexion, Sanders believes, is "the outstanding task in the study of Acts" (1991: 455). Sanders' claim regarding Luke's attitude towards the Jews is astonishing, but it implies that he thinks Luke understands the relation between Jew and Christian at the end of the first century to be one of total divorce and antagonism, at least in Luke's territory, which Sanders believes may have been Ephesus (1993: 180). Sanders is convinced that Luke has totally given up on the Jews: 'We gentiles', thinks Luke, 'are in charge here, and you Jews can just sit down and shut up'. Luke does not imply that Jews cannot join his church, although he would have been surprised - shocked, even - if any actually did (1987: 129).

Sanders' language may be startling, and for that reason alone his version of the situation must be examined closely. It will be argued that Sanders is wrong, or at least greatly exaggerates the point. It is at Ephesus, if nowhere else, that some Jews continued to be attracted to a Christian community, at least into

For literature on this terminology, see Lake (Beginnings 5 [1933] 220); Daniélou (1964: 7-9); Malina (1976); Riegel (1978); Davies (1984); Lüdemann (1989: 1-78).

18

Introduction

Luke's time. Luke testifies to that continuation and does so without embarrassment or apology, if not even deliberately. Taylor recently asks the question whether or not the term "Jewish Christianity" expresses a reality or a scholarly invention (1990). She correctly rejects the restriction of the term to the Jerusalem church27 and underlines the importance of the success of the mission of the Aramaic-speaking Jewish church (316). She also joins with an increasing number of others who acknowledge that "the division between what is somehow exclusively Christian and what is Jewish is an impossible one to make in the early Church" (317; compare also Overman 1990: 60). Her conclusion is: We can say, then, with some degree of certainty, that Jewish praxis was abandoned by most Jews within the Church during the last part of the first century and the first part of the second, so that by the end of this century few of these Jews maintained their links with Judaism (320).

This is probably accurate, at least generally speaking. But the decline in Jewish praxis among Christian Jews does not necessarily indicate a decline in Jews joining Christian communities. Taylor is one of few to consider that there were Jews who, while not maintaining their links with Judaism, still saw themselves as Jews, included some gentiles into their communities, and saw their being Christian as consistent with their pre-baptismal Jewish praxis (327). She could have called on Ephesus as testimony. Taylor's raising of the question indicates the trend in recent scholarship to be much tighter with the definition and use of such terms. So J.T. Sanders also writes "the issue of gentile Christianity and Jewish Christianity is a highly complicated one that seems in need of redefinition in each case" (1993: 11). He suggests that the latter term be understood as "any form of Christianity that includes Jews, welcomes Jews, and understood itself to be Jewish - that is, is not separate from or opposed to Judaism" (260 η 2). But what would he call that form of Christianity that includes Jews, is predominantly composed of Jews, welcomes other Jews (and any gentiles who were interested), understood themselves to be Jewish, but saw themselves as separate from all forms of "Judaism"! I am suggesting that it is these Jews who supported Paul, accepted Munck identifies Jewish Christianity with Jerusalem and so claims "we do not encounter Jerusalem Christians in the Pauline churches" (1965: 80). It would seem that Luke would not agree with Munck, even if possibly Paul himself would. Munck then claims that Jewish Christianity is not the same as the Judaizing movement that took place in some communities because that was a gentile movement of those who insisted that in order to be Christian one needed to be "Jew" first (1965: 88). It is just as likely - and more understandable - that Jews (who had become Christians) would have insisted on this for both fellow-Jews and for gentiles.

Some Methodological Problems

19

his version of the gospel, and found themselves in conflict with fellow-Jews of the kind Sanders describes as Jewish Christian. And it is both these kinds of Christian Jews who were in Ephesus. Lüdemann still equates Jewish Christianity with Jerusalem and believes that James and others from Jerusalem "assumed a preponderantly anti-Pauline attitude" (1989: 61). Understandably, he believes "[t]here certainly existed a Jewish Christianity that was not influenced by Paul at all - either positively or negatively" (1989: 31) and he points to the pre-Matthew and pre-John communities and the opponents of Ignatius (233 η 247). He thinks that James is an off-shoot of anti-Pauline Jewish Christianity (1989: 148). The community addressed in Revelation probably is of that ilk, although it is more a matter of it being independent of Paul and the Pauline tradition than of being opposed to it. It is worth avoiding the labels "Jewish Christianity" and "Gentile Christianity" for any Christian community or movement because such definition is too limiting. The view that Jerusalem (= Jewish) Christianity was inimical to and the opposite of Pauline (= Gentile) Christianity, for example, does not allow for variables and variations and the role that individuals, who can rarely be so labelled, play in these relations. It is quite possible, for example, that within a generation or two of Paul's death, there were Christians who may have seen themselves as Pauline, but in fact had moved quite substantially from their champion's position in some matters. The Pastorals give some suggestion of this, as does Colossians. The interest is in those Jews of the diaspora who became Christian without insisting on the full observance of Torah and some form of halakhot, possibly not for themselves and certainly not for others, Jew or gentile. In other words, Jews who became "Pauline Christians", even though that was certainly never a term they used of themselves. Generally, they will be referred to as Christian Jews. The word "Jews" means their ethnic origins: "Once a Jew always a Jew". The word "Christian" means they accepted Jesus as the Christ of prophecy and, if they did maintain practices of Judaism such as sabbath, circumcision and dietary laws, they did not insist they be kept by all Christians. The fact that some Christian Jews could be called "Pauline" (albeit anachronistically - it was a term Paul himself eschewed [1 Cor 1:12]) means that to be "Pauline" cannot be limited to or even equated with "Gentile Christianity". The claim of McGiffert can no longer stand that in securing recognition of his own gospel, therefore, Paul gave his approval to the gospel of the Jewish Christians. The compact was a mutual one and it meant the division of the church by common consent into two denominations, a Jewish and a Gentile, or rather it meant the express sanction and perpetuation of a division already existing (1897: 199-200).

20

Introduction

There were no such two denominations. In Pauline churches, at least, there were both Jews and gentiles, and I am arguing that Ephesus may well have had a predominance of Jews. And conflict - which certainly occurred in these Christian communities - was not only between Jew and gentile Christian but also - and in some places possibly more so - between Jew and Jew. 28 The gentiles may have been caught in the cross-fire or used as pawns in the struggle. Borgen says that the debates and conflicts within each Jewish community were more crucial than the differences between Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaism (1983: 57). Similarly, the crucial issues facing individual Christian communities were far more crucial than the issue of the relation between Pauline churches (supposing that they were limited to outside of Palestine) and the Jerusalem or Palestinian church(es). An additional thought: A close study of the Christian movements in the first century of their existence reveals that many groups of Christians saw themselves (for whatever reasons at this stage is not the concern) as separated ("holy") from others. As Fornberg says, "exclusivity was a sine qua non" (1977: 131). This is more obviously the case with the so-called Johannine communities, but it is easily forgotten that Paul himself was not as inclusive as it is often thought and as even he himself sometimes appeared to be (Gal 3:28, for example). He clearly saw Christians as separate from "the world" and exhorted Christians to live that way (Rom 1:18-25; 12:1-2; 1 Cor 5:9-10; 2 Cor 6:14-18; 1 Thess 4:4). In addition, Paul frequently called Christians to separate themselves from other "Christians" (Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:11; 16:22; Gal 1:8-9; 2:4; Phil 3:18-19). Hann rightly rejects any portrayal of harmonious relationships, and referring especially to Gal 1:8-9 and 2:4, says that if this way of talking by Paul does not "testify to a break in fellowship, one may wonder what the latter might consist of' (1986: 341 η 2). The first century (at least) was such a dynamic and fluid period that terminology has great difficulty in capturing it. 2.4. The historical value of Acts29 This continues to be a complex and disputed issue. British scholars like Bruce, Howard Marshall, and Hemer have argued for the reliability of Acts as a historical source, claiming that the author (Luke) shows an accurate awareness of local conditions and of local linguistic usage. Bruce goes so far as to say that Luke's purpose "was to record what actually happened" (1983: 56). Jervell also believes that Luke is reliable and that what Paul has placed in the shade, Luke 28 29

This view has recently been advocated by Dunn in understanding Galatians (1993). For helpful surveys of the history of scholarship on the issue, see Gasque (1975); Walther and Orr (1976:46-71); Bruce (1983); and Lüdemann (1988).

Some Methodological Problems

21

puts out in the sun (1979: 300). But a large number of scholars have tended to see Acts as unreliable, full of Lukan theological and literary constructions. For them, the Pauline letters always take preference, certainly where there is conflict. 30 Baur and Dibelius have been highly influential in this understanding of the relation between Acts and the Pauline epistles on the question of historicity. While the Baur opinion that Acts is a second-century writing generally has been abandoned, the opinion that Luke's speeches and reporting of many events such as miracles are all part of Luke's literary devices, shaped by his theological goals and biases, is very common. Haenchen's commentary on Acts (1971) is a classic representation of this approach. I intend to view the work and movements of Paul predominantly from a Lukan perspective. There are significant signs that Luke knew or had access to a deal of material about Ephesus. He undoubtedly used that material for his own theological ends, but that does not of necessity call the historical accuracy of the events described into question. In fact, the very "strangeness" of nearly all the Ephesian episodes (Apollos, the 12 disciples, the Jewish miracleworkers) and the lengthy telling of the Demetrius episode, including accurate knowledge of many details relevant to Ephesus and the Artemis cult, may all be signs that Luke had a very good knowledge of what "actually happened" in Ephesus and that his sources were historically reliable. But it is obvious that Luke tends to bunch local incidents which he receives from his sources so that the Ephesian episodes are loosely strung together into some kind of sequence, as if they all "happened" chronologically and in the space of a few weeks. "It seems likely ... that this bunching of incidents represents redaction rather than history" (J. Knox 1987: xvi; similarly, Lüdemann 1984: 17-18). Like with all writing of history, Luke constructs the past; and as with ancient history generally, so also with Luke's work, it is almost impossible to construct history on its basis simply because the data are not available. At best, Luke's story can only be retold, and retold as Luke's story. This means that Liidemann's call for a critical analysis of the traditions known and used by Luke (1988: 121) is something not possible since most of the data available comes from Luke himself. Data from other sources for the late first century (the time of Luke's writing) and the mid-first century (the time of the events depicted) are so very few that Luke can virtually only be critiqued on his own terms. To claim that Paul is any more reliable as an historical source must take into account that Paul too constructs his "history".

For the general position of German scholarship, see Dassmann (1979). Those holding a similar viewpoint in the English-speaking world are well-represented by Kraabel (1970) and J. Knox (1987).

22

Introduction

There is little question that Luke has theological Tendenzen and that these took precedence over any attempt to be "historically accurate" - in other words, he used his sources in a way that suited his purposes which were "theologically historical".31 But it is also true to say that Luke has an historical bias as well he writes from his own time and for his own time, and is not interested in constructing a life of Paul per se. Haenchen and others need to be corrected for the dichotomy they make between theology and history in Luke. The two are not mutually exclusive. To those who want to play Luke off against Paul, it must be said that the issue is fundamentally not who is historically accurate, but who is theologically accurate. Paul's construction of "history" is as theologically biased as Luke's. To take a classic example: The "history" of Paul's call/ conversion in Galatians is intensely personal, almost subjectively ecstatic, but it also serves a definite theological purpose, namely, to establish Paul's authority to be called an apostle. Luke's version(s) of what presumably is the same "event" is also undoubtedly colored by his own theological purposes. Neither is interested in saying "what actually happened" but in what that event means for Paul. Each does it in his own way. As has been said: Is the real question not the historical accuracy of Luke vis a vis Paul, but his theological accuracy? To take a typical point of dispute: Did Paul go into synagogues first or did he work directly among gentiles? Meeks claims that "[t]he pattern of beginning always in synagogues accords ill with Paul's own declarations that he saw his mission as primarily or even exclusively to the gentiles" (1983: 26). But it is more than feasible that in many, if not most, centres, Paul's initial contact was with Jews, and that the initial "converts" were Jews - which is how Luke depicts the movement. Some were Paul's own συγγενεΐ? (Rom 16: 7, 11) and some his συνεργοί (Rom 16: 3, 9). Paul worked with his own hands and it is possible that he worked in a guild of fellow-Jews. In terms of his message, a similar conclusion is reasonable. It is quite likely that "Jesus is the Christ" (or, "the Christ is Jesus") was his basic message, as Luke says it was.32 It is not crystal clear from Paul's letters what he said to his initial contacts, but Gal 3:1 would suggest that his message to beginners in Galatia was "Jesus Christ and that one (τούτον) crucified"; and 1 Cor 2:2 suggests the same message was taught early in Corinth. It hardly seems likely that such a message was

Harding (1993) would agree. He wishes to justify Hemer and Bruce who followed in the tradition of Ramsay in defending the historical accuracy of Luke, but concludes that such a view is too naive and the theological Tendenzen of Luke cannot be ignored. It is also worth remembering that Luke was quite aware that in some places (Ephesus, for example) there were already Christians in the area before Paul arrived on the scene. These Christians were Jews.

Summary

23

exclusively given to gentiles. 33 So Luke's stylised version of Paul going first into the synagogues and then to gentiles may not be far off the historical mark, even if Luke may be driven by a particular theological impetus. Following Lüdemann (1988: 121), four things can be said with a degree of certainty: 1) Acts is an important source for the history of early Christian movements and cannot be dismissed; 2) There is much that is historically reliable in Acts, especially information not available in Paul's letters; 3) Luke does not simply record "what actually happened" but uses his material historically accurate as most episodes probably are - for his own purposes. To fulfill those purposes, Luke uses speeches especially; and 4) because of Luke's bunching of events, Paul is more reliable for a chronology of his life than is Acts.34

3. Summary The aim of this book is twofold: First, to keep New Testament scholarship alert to the significance in Ephesus of Artemis and her cult in particular, and so to set the context into which Paul arrived and then lived and worked; and secondly, to examine the mission of Paul in the city of Ephesus. Two basic points will be demonstrated and emphasised: The first, that Artemis and other cults in Ephesus remained strong and influential in Ephesus and that the Christian community made virtually no impact on the cults or on the city itself. Secondly, that Paul found Ephesus a very difficult city in which to work and that any talk of "success" can only be used guardedly; what success Paul did achieve was more likely to have been among Jews than among gentiles. If this can be shown to be the case, then the common thinking that Paul made Ephesus the centre of the gentile mission and that the city itself became the centre of gentile Pauline Christianity needs revision.

Irenaeus says that the message preached to Jews by the apostles was that of Jesus crucified, the Son of God, the judge, and the One who has received the kingdom of Israel from his Father; that preached to the gentiles was of the one God and Jesus Christ his son (A.H. 3.12.14). On this last point, it is worth noting that Paul's plans and intentions (and promises!) may not have always eventuated as he had hoped. Generally speaking, Luke's movement of Paul fits reasonably well into what can be gleaned from Paul's writings.

Section One Artemis and other cults in Ephesus 1. Aspects of the Artemis Cult in Ephesus 1.1. Introduction It has already been noted that biblical scholarship has concerned itself only marginally with the significance of the various cults - and especially that of Artemis - for the political, economic, social and cultural framework of Ephesus. As Oster remarks generally: There is a dearth of studies by New Testament scholars into the sociological and cultural significance of the pagan religions which the early Christians encountered. Until this significance is better understood, the important questions about the early successes of Christianity cannot be fully answered (1976: 30 η 47).

This chapter aims to demonstrate particularly the vitality and strength of the cult of Artemis in Ephesus and to underline the evidence that the cult maintained its popularity and strength for at least two centuries after the beginnings of Christian communities in Ephesus. This is important in order to put to rest any suggestion that the Christian mission had a dramatic impact in Ephesus and on the Artemis cult. The term cult is used in the sense of those activities motivated by or directed towards a deity and belonging to the community or to groups within the community dedicated to such activities. The Artemis cult was more than ritual, sacrifice and myth. It was also a social institution par excellence; it participated in the financial, legal, educational, family, civic and athletic activities of Ephesian society (Oster 1982: 215).

Rogers represents many scholars in saying that Paul's mission was "specifically to the Gentile population of the city" (1991: 148). But Rogers also goes on to say that this mission took place in "an atmosphere of heightened pagan piety in the city from the middle to the late first century" (1991: 147). The relation between that heightened piety and the "success" of Paul among the gentiles of Ephesus will be viewed more closely in the next chapter.

Introduction

25

The relation between that heightened piety and the "success" of Paul among the gentiles of Ephesus will be viewed more closely in the next chapter. The significance of "religion"1 in cities like Ephesus will be broadly outlined; then the concentration will centre on Artemis and her cult; attitudes to Artemis of some modern biblical scholars will be examined; and other cults will be mentioned briefly. The imperial cult will be considered in another chapter. At many points, this chapter has in mind implications for an understanding of early Christian communities in Ephesus. 1.1.1. The significance of eusebeia2 Understanding a culture other than one's own is fraught with difficulties, not the least being the attempt to divorce one's own experiences and evaluating criteria from that of the examined culture. It is not possible to view another culture except through one's own cultural grid with its explicit and implicit biases. So the modern observer of Ephesian "religion" views it from the perspective of a cultural and historical outsider. The best that can be done is to attempt to "see the joke". It is not possible, of course, to observe Ephesus like a modern anthropologist can observe a society, so scholars rely on cultural "texts" that have survived: literature, inscriptions, art, buildings, and other artefacts. Because these texts are now "dead" and static, it is necessary to remember that they once existed in a living, dynamic, complex, social and cultural environment, constantly subject to that complex variable, the human factor. In a sense, all that is available now are left-overs. There is a tendency to define religion as an attempt to make sense of the world and of experiences within that world. "Making sense" is very important for many Westerners.3 Geertz's oft-cited and well-accepted anthropological definition, with its emphasis away from mere description to symbols, is based on a penchant for meaning and for sense. His definition of religion is: (1) a system of symbols which acts to (2) establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men [jic] by (3) formulating This is a difficult term since for modern Westerners it represents something in contrast, and even opposition, to the secular. For the importance of distinguishing modern views of religion from ancient Mediterranean views, see the article of Malina (1986). Malina rightly believes that the modern reader "must share with the writer [say, of Acts ] a scenario of how the world works (1986: 92), something that is surely easier said than done. For a general comment on the term, see Kern (1963:1. 273-290). So the article of Gould: "Making Sense of Greek Religion" (1986) in which the author himself acknowledges the problems of trying to "make sense" of a cultural system which is foreign to one's own. Even the desire to define may well be a cultural factor not present in all societies.

26

The Artemis Cult

conceptions of a general order of existence and (4) clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that (5) the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic (1966: 4).

While Geertz desires to seek "that which is valuable for all humanity" by entering into a continuing discussion with other cultures, he cannot divorce himself from Western distinctions. So he wants to distinguish "religious symbols" from "common-sense" and talks of the "movement back and forth between the religious perspective and the common-sense perspective" (1966: 36). But did the Ephesians, for example, differentiate between common and religious sense? Were symbols clothed by Ephesians with "an aura of factuality" in order to "seem uniquely realistic" or were they regarded as factual and real? Did the Ephesians primarily attempt to make sense of their world?4 Or were they prepared to live with the ambiguities and complexities and non-sense of the world? Were there other things more essential than "making sense"? What held the cosmos together for the Ephesian was what contributed to the wholeness of relationships - relationships between all things: deities, demons, creatures, "the cosmos", humans. Malina (1986) has argued that kinship (both blood and fictive) and political (factual and fictive) groupings were at the base of urban society and their cultic life. In other words, the integrity of relationships was important and central in the Weltbild of the Ephesians. Honor (τιμή) understandably becomes highly significant in such a worldview. It is now understood by modern scholars of ancient cultures that few, if any, of these cultures made the same distinctions between the sacred and the secular that modern Western cultures have made. As Fears writes: [S]uch dichotomous terms as sacred and secular, are invalid when approaching the theme of ideology in the ancient world. For the ancient, religion permeated every aspect of the state's life, providing the very basis of the socio-political order. Religious imagery defined the ancient's conception of that order, and the cult life of the state mirrored each transformation in the political structure. At Rome, as throughout the ancient world, political mythology was bound inextricably to the collective

Levi Strauss is the anthropological magister in this impulsive desire to make sense where there is non-sense. He writes: Since I was a child, I have been bothered by, let's call it the irrational, and have been trying to find an order behind what is given to us as disorder (1978: 11). Although Levi Strauss denied accusations of ignoring ethnographical data, his theories are always open to that accusation since they are based strongly on the attempt to find "the I in the You" and that because he believed the human mind to be fundamentally ordered in the same way. So myths from various parts of the world and from various cultural environments can be understood in "sets". Levi Strauss built his anthropological theories of myth on the structuralism of French philosophy.

Introduction

27

worship of the community; of necessity, political ideology was formulated in theological terms and expressed through cult and ritual (1980:101).

This is not to create the impression that the ancients were "pious" in the modern Western Christian sense of the word - constant in prayer, constant at worship. The attitude to life was pragmatic and aware of the realities of sickness and death, of disaster and change in one's fortunes. Nor did "religion" have the private, individualized dimension familiar to many modern Western Christians in particular. One belonged to the πόλι? which in turn belonged to the gods who were present in and for the ττόλις·. There was, then, the solid conviction that "the city, with its population, divine and human, was the one essential fact in the life of civilised men" (Warde Fowler 1963: 23). As Sourvinou-Inwood writes, "the polis anchored, legitimated, and mediated all religious activity" (297). She continues by saying that religion was perceived to be incarnated above all in the properly ordered and pious polis ... The polis was the institutional authority that structured the universe and the divine world in a religious system, articulated a pantheon with certain particular configurations of divine personalities, and established a system of cults, particular rituals and sanctuaries, and a sacred calendar ...[PJolis religion embraces, contains, and mediates all religious discourse - with the ambiguous and uncertain exception of some sectarian discourse (1990: 302).

With this in mind, it is not surprising that honoring the gods was of first importance, followed by the honoring of men and women who served the city well. To honor such divine and human benefactors led to greater security (Dio Chrysostom Or. 31.7). Statues of gods, heroes, and distinguished citizens and there were thousands of such statues in Ephesus - were visible reminders of the duty of citizens and of the protection and goodness of their gods and benefactors. While Apollonius writes to the Ephesian grammateis that statues and pictures (λίθοι και γραφαί) ought not be substitutes for vous- καΐ νόμο?, he agrees that honoring the city comes a very close second to honoring the gods: Πρώτον e l ç π ά ν τ α θεών άνθρωποι δέονται καΐ περί παντός·, έ π ε ι τ α πόλεων, τ ι μ η τ έ ο ν γ ά ρ δεύτερον πόλει? μ ε τ ά θεού? (Philostratus Ερ. 11).

28

The Artemis Cult

A key term for understanding the significance and meaning of such integrated relationships is εύσέβεια. 5 Eusebeia was not simply a dimension of life, it was city life. The term fundamentally meant right relationships, including those of marriage, family, and city, but also with the gods. Eusebeia could have been the word used by Epictetus in the first century CE to sum up the principle things to be honored: πολιτβύεσθαι, γαμεΐν, παιδοποιείσθαι, 0eòv oeßetv, γονέων έπιμελεισθαι. (Disc. Arrian 3.7.1. 26-28). 6 By maintaining these right relationships, the city and its inhabitants could expect to share in the abundant and good life; in breaking these relationships, they could expect disaster. According to Aristides (who lived in the second century CE), concord preserves the order of the seasons, and gives profit to farming; allows seasonable offers of marriage to be given and received, children to be raised and educated according to ancestral custom; gives security to women; results in contracts being faithfully kept; allows hospitality to be shown to guests; and enables the gods to be worshipped, processions, choruses and pleasures to be held. In other words, concord, as distinct from factions, allows a city to be everything a city ought to be (Or. 24.42). Burkert defines eusebeia by citing Isocrates: "to change nothing of what our forefathers left behind" (1985: 273). To do things according to ancient custom and according to the νόμοι of the city meant maintaining harmony not just in the present but also with the past. These "laws" were at the heart of eusebeia. Those who were particularly supportive of both city and cult received due honors from the city. This was true in the third century BCE as is evidenced by the case of a certain Euphronius who was euvouç και πρόθυμο? towards Ephesus and used his influence to help maintain the exemption of Artemis and her sanctuary from tax duty. He was honored with citizenship so that all may know that the demos of the Ephesians honors with the proper gifts those who render services to the sanctuary and to the city (cited in Oliver 1975: 53-54). 7

The word is such a key word and yet is difficult to translate and so it will be used it in its transliterated form. Despite understanding the term differently from his GraecoRoman contemporaries, Philo also regarded eusebeia as the highest virtue (Spec. Laws 4.135, 147) as did Josephus (C. Apion. 2.170). Josephus saw eusebeia as the cornerstone of of the Jewish political constitution (Amir 1985/8: 99). The noun is used ten times in the Pastorals (1 Tim 3:16 confesses μ έ γ α ε σ τ ί ν το τ η ? e u o e ß e t a ? μυστήριοι*), four times in 2 Peter, and once in Acts - all late New Testament writings. The word basically implies that what is honored or revered (σέβειν) is good - for the well-being (eu) of the city or group or individual. Cicero offers a similar list (Moral Duties 1.45). Similar wording is found in many citizenship inscriptions. See SEG 39 (1989) 1165, 1167.

Introduction

29

This was still true at the beginning of the second century CE, as the lengthy inscription of Caius Vibius Salutaris indicates. That man is honored because of his μεγαλοψυχία^ πρό? τήν πόλιν [και] εύσέβειαν προς- την θεόν. 8 Apollonius writes of the Ephesians in the same century: "Your whole way of life is that of religion (θρησκεία) and it is honoring the emperor" (Philostratus Ep. 65). Dio Chrysostom succinctly states that άπασα μήν πόλι? έστίν Ιερά (Or. 31.87). In Ephesus, it was primarily the presence, protection and blessing of the goddess, Artemis Ephesia, that gave such sanctity to the polis. The temple, with its image of the deity, symbolised that sanctity. For the Romans, cities 9 had to be regulated. Cicero saw cities marked by "established laws and customs, the equitable definition of rights, and the regulated order of life" (Moral Duties II.4). As Wardman says: "It was at all times necessary to carry out the proper rites so that the divine order, 'the peace of the gods' should be preserved" (1982: 7). Eusebeia tied the city to its past and so kept it in the security of tradition. By performing the ritual, observing the festivals, telling the myths, honoring the gods and the benefactors of the past, the city was in harmony with its history. Those who maintained the wholeness were honored. Past and present were held together and any break between them could only spell disaster.10 As for the future, it could only be looked forward to with confidence if it was in the

This inscription, dated 104 CE, will be referred to a number of times in this chapter. It is one of the longest inscriptions which has been discovered in Ephesus and sheds light on many aspects relevant to this chapter. The complete inscription with translation is given in Oliver 1975: 55-69. Lines 117-118 have been quoted here. A similar thought is found in lines 8-14. The Roman urbs was perceived rather differently to the Greek ττόλι?. Croesus, the Lydian king in the sixth century BCE, was remembered through sculpture on some drums of the pillars of the temple of Artemis. He had been very generous to the temple authorities and was rewarded with honor. Publius Servius Iscaurus, proconsul in Ephesus around 50 BCE was still honored centuries later. Lysimachos was being honored in Ephesus in the fourth century CE. He shaped Ephesus in the third century BCE by moving the site of Ephesus and - like many other conquerors before and after him - by resettling the city with his own people, those from Kolophon and Lebedos (Akurgal 1973: 143). By remembering him, the Ephesians re-membered their past and in doing so were in harmony with the "power" of Lysimachos. The tomb of Heropythes, the liberator of the city, was in the agora, and when Alexander restored democratic freedom to Ephesus, the Ephesians killed those who had dug up Heropythes' tomb (Arrian Anab. 1.17.12). The past was constantly held in remembrance in Ephesus. Bean claims that an effigy of the boar still stood in Ephesus in the fourth century CE. The ancient legend was that Ephesus was founded upon the spot where the wild boar was shot (Bean 1966: 160-161). Philostratus makes the off-hand comment that "it was not like the Ionian to reform his ancient customs" ( Vii. Soph. 1.23).

30

The Artemis Cult

stream of the past. To disturb this wholeness of time by not "remembering" could spell the end of the city. Cicero implies the importance of the status quo in "religion" and its binding communal nature: Let no one have gods on his own or new or foreign gods unless they have been sanctioned by the whole community (Laws 2.19). 11

This is in no way to imply that cities like Ephesus were static and unchanging or that they were hostile to the introduction of new ideas and new cults. That certainly was not the case in Ephesus where changes occurred frequently throughout its long history and foreign cults were admitted. Most foreign cults, however, were accepted through the political power of the occupier, be it Greek, Persian, Egyptian, Syrian or Roman. It was a matter not so much of capitulating to the god of the stronger nation, as of having to reckon with another god alongside the local. If Rome, for example, controlled Ephesus then her gods must be considered alongside Artemis. If the old rituals no longer effected the desired result and life was shaped by new powers with their accompanying rituals then the old was either neglected and abandoned or else absorbed and incorporated into the new. As Gould expresses it, Greek religion remains fundamentally improvisatory ... [T]hough the response to experience crystallizes, on the one hand as ritual, on the other as myth, and both involve repetition and transmission from generation to generation, there is always room for new improvisation ... There are no true gods and false, merely powers known and acknowledged since time immemorial, and new powers, newly experienced (1986: 8).

For all that, new or foreign cults had to maintain eusebeia. Any cult which threatened the stability and the peace of the city was dealt with harshly. Foreigners (that is, those who were not members of the πολιτεία) had to know their place, as Cicero states: The duty of a stranger and an alien is to mind nothing but his own business, not to intermeddle with another, and least of all to be curious about the affairs of a foreign government (Moral Duties 1.34).

For the Greek city, at least, it was more than that: All Greeks were bound to respect each other's cities sanctuaries and cults if they did not wish to offend the gods (Sourvinou-Inwood 1990: 301). Strabo records that the Athenians were well-known for welcoming things foreign including their gods and cults. The comic-writers ridiculed them for it (10.3.18). Acts 17:21 shows Luke was aware of the Athenian practice.

Introduction

31

That respect is indicated in various ways, but it is common to find strangers offering thanks for safe arrival to the local gods on their arrival in a city, even if the god was not known in that person's home polis.12 It is not difficult to imagine the suspicion and anxiety Jews and Christians would have aroused if they did not acknowledge this connection between god and polis. 1.1.2. Citizenship in Ephesus The well-being of the polis was maintained by its citizens; in fact, that was the primary duty of all citizens, especially those of any wealth and substance.13 The citizen honored the gods and so honored the city. Others who brought such honor to the city could themselves be rewarded with citizenship which was granted to many and varied people for many and varied reasons. For example, a man from Rhodes was so rewarded for selling corn at cheaper than marketplace prices (Wood 1975: Inscriptions 1). One could also buy citizenship (/. Eph. 2001; SEG [1989] 1185). It also appears that one could have citizenship in a number of cities - an inscription found in Smyrna honors a man who is Περγαμήνο? καΐ Σμυρναίο? και 'Αθηναίο? καΐ Έφέσιο? (CIG 3208) which obviously cannot refer to his birthplace nor to his place of residence but can only reasonably refer to his citizenship status in the various cities. Citizenship brought with it various rewards - front seats at the Games, access to the harbour, exemption from duty, admission to assemblies and possibly even a crown of gold (Wood 1975: Inscriptions 7, 9). A number of inscriptions in the temple of Artemis indicate that the conferral and reception of citizenship were sacred acts (SEG [1989] 1165, 1167). It was the έσσηναι who assigned the new citizens a place in the organisation of the citizenry (I.Eph. 2005). 14 Apparently, these priests presided at the banquets that followed the

Achilles Tatius offers a good example. He is from Alexandria, but on arrival at Sidon in Phoenicia after a severe storm σώστρα Ιθυον έμαυτοΰ τη των Φοινίκων θε§. He then adds Άστάρτην αύτήν ol Σιδώνιοι καλοΰσιν (2.1). The Temple at Jerusalem was also used for such purposes. Roman official visitors would first offer sacrifices - to the God of Israel (Josephus Wars 2.413-416). For a detailed study of euergetism, see Veyne (1992). Kampen (1986) says the essenai were virtually representatives of the goddess and played the major role in the sacrifices of the cult. They held office for only a limited time; practiced at least in that time sexual abstinence or purity; and conducted ritual washings. Pausanius speaks of Ephesians who are members of a religious association dedicated to Artemis the Ephesian that practice a similar way of life for a year and no more who are called essenas by the citizens (8.13.1).

32

The Artemis Cult

sacrifices offered by the new citizens and, by a process of casting lots, admitted the new citizens into their respective social categories as if they were carrying out the will of the goddess (Chapot 1902/1967: 399). Citizens were allotted to a particular tribe (φυλή) and "thousand" (χιλιάστυε?) and so "fitted in" and belonged. "Membership of tribe and phratry was always a requisite for citizenship and ... for social personality" (Humphreys 1978: 195). There were in the fourth century BCE five tribes (later extended to at least eight) some of whose names suggest they consisted of peoples from particular localities. In his play Κιθαρίστη?, Menander has a character exclaim: "What! Do you have Euonemeoi out there in Ephesus too?" (line 98) which implies that already in the fourth century BCE when Menander wrote, it was known that this particular clan did not have its origins in Ephesus and that it was better known elsewhere. Some of the tribe and clan names are Ionian/Athenian (Nilsson 1951: 144); this aligns with the historical fact that people from Athens and Ionia had emigrated to Ephesus. Herodotus claims that the Ionians combined in twelve cities in Asia because there were originally twelve divisions of the Ionians when they lived in Peloponnesus (1.145). He rejects any suggestion that they were in fact "more truly Ionian or better born than other Ionians" which is probably what some were claiming. Herodotus rejects this because he knows that the Ionians in Asia also consisted of Abantes from Euboea and of many other tribes (IQvea πολλά) and even the Ionians from Athens married women from Caria after slaughtering their parents (1.146). As for Ephesus itself, Herodotus appears to grant that they are Ionians of "pure birth" although they do not observe the feast Apaturia because of "a certain deed of blood" (κατά φόνου τινά σκηψιν). The various groups retained their tribal identity in Ephesus, as did the aboriginal Ephesians and other tribes and clans from Asia Minor and elsewhere. Writing of Greek cities, Warde Fowler states that the citizens, though not always the whole number of inhabitants, were homogeneous and spoke the same language ... It meant not only a binding connection by descent, but one by religion also; for to believe that you and your fellow-citizens were descended from the same stock implied necessarily that you shared the same worship (1963: 13).

While Ephesus was multi-lingual and multi-ethnic, Warde Fowler's comment is accurate also for Ephesus inasmuch as people from the same stock (and so sharing the same "religion" and language) undoubtedly lived and worked together in that city and continued their own religious customs and

The "similar way of life" is that led by the Mantineans who practiced purity in sex, ritual washings and held no private property.

Introduction

33

"owned" particular festivals. There were Lydians and Ionians and Aeolians and Greeks and Jews, to mention just a few, each mindful of their ancestral origins and customs, and each wanting to be allowed to continue them. Some of them, such as the Ionians, dominated and became part of the essential cultic and cultural fabric of Ephesus; others, like the Jews, remained on the fringes. So social and political groupings were determined by kin and blood relations on the one hand, and by place of birth on the other. "Who is your father and what deme do you belong to?" were significant questions determining membership in a particular grouping. A glance at many Ephesian inscriptions will illustrate the way in which individuals were identified through their father and acted in society with their father. 15 Ephesus honored families and gave high offices to members of esteemed families in the city. 16 Aristio is a good example. Pliny the Younger refers to him as the leading citizen of Ephesus (Ep. 6.31). During the last decade of the first century CE and into the next, Aristio, his wife, and family held very high offices within the city. Malina rightly claims: "In Paul's day, wealth tended to follow power and kinship rather than the other way around" (1986: 93). Priesthood in the cult of Artemis Ephesia also belonged to families, with the title of Megabyzus given to that priesthood in recognition of the Persian origin of the family which held the priesthood from the fourth century BCE. From a Burdur Museum stele, Horsley is able to construct five generations of a priestly family (1992b: 123). It is not surprising that the Christian bishop of Ephesus late in the second century CE, Polycrates, can claim that the position of bishop had been in his family for some eight generations (Eusebius Η.E. 5.24.8). For citizenship and other group-membership, place of birth was often more significant than place of residence. That means that a person could claim association in a particular social grouping simply because s/he was born in that area, even though s/he resided elsewhere (Nilsson 1980: 246). As suggested above, these clan and tribal groupings were responsible for various myths and rituals and "owned" them. That is not to say that others did not participate in them, but that a particular clan managed and supervised them. Consideration needs to be given to the possibility that the expression "Αρτβμι? Έφεσί,ων as used in Acts 19:28, may refer to that goddess whose particular cultic rituals were owned and supervised by the tribe ΈφεσΙει?. So the Ephesian tribe, as Hicks suggests, "takes precedence of all the others because it claims the greatest antiquity and the purest Ephesian blood" (1890:403). Strabo says that

As just one example, see the fishing cartel of Ephesus (Horsley [1992] 127-129). It is impossible to overestimate the importance, status and influence of Roman families. Seneca records that many families displayed ancestral busts in the halls of their houses and at the entrance to the house put the names of their family "arranged in a long row and entwined in the multiple ramifications of a genealogical tree". Seneca was not impressed: Unus omnium parens mundus est (On Benefits 3.28.2).

34

The Artemis Cult

the descendants of Androcles of Athens claimed him as the founder of Ephesus and still in Strabo's time (the second century CE) had certain privileges in Ephesus including the supervision of the sacrifices in honor of the Eleusinian Demeter (14.1.3). 17 Citizenship was one way of binding the polis together, of creating and maintaining harmony within the city. Non-citizens (who might have made up at least 80% of the population) 18 with little say in the decision-making of a polis could be an irritating and occasionally disturbing factor.

1.1.3. Political and social groupings in Ephesus Ephesus was a vibrant, multilingual, multicultural city, "thickly populated and richly spread with dwellings" (Seneca Ep. 102.21). While Ephesian citizens could talk of the law of the nation (νόμο? τη? πατρία?), of the clan, and of the family, there were others who were allowed to follow other laws or customs. Some Jews demanded to be allowed to follow the laws of their ancestors. 19 Generally, if these demands conflicted with Ephesian laws, they sorted themselves out without too much disturbance, although it appears that conflict simmered below the surface and occasionally broke out into the open, particularly where Jewish groups were of some size and wealth. Christians who claimed a πολίτευμα kv ουρανοί? (Phil 3:20) were likely to be open to the accusation of άσέβεια - the breakdown or ignoring of those right relationships which were all socially prescribed.20 On the other hand, they may Aristides says that according to the Lacedaemonian constitution, the gods drew up the laws, divided the city into tribes and clans, and prescribed for each the proper sacrifices. He says that the same was true for Athens (Or. I. 382). The evidence is enough to suggest that similar mythology and similar practice prevailed at Ephesus. Bagnali and Warden claim Keil mistakenly read an inscription mentioning XeiXCouç τεσσαρακόντα invited by a certain Baranos to a dinner as 40,000 male Ephesian citizens. In fact, that number is 1040 (1988: 221). They conclude: "How many citizens Ephesus had in the late second century, or at any other period, we do not know" (223). See, for example, Josephus Ant. 14.262-264. Ramsay even suggests that the Jews formed one of the tribes of Ephesus (1904: 235-236). While this is not likely, Ramsay apparently suspects a deep involvement of Jews in the city's structures. On the other hand, Christians spoke of eusebeia and asebeia in their own terms. Oster regards the use of the words in 1 Timothy as "noteworthy" since they are also used in the cults at Ephesus (1987b: 82) but the word was so common that little should be made of the fact other than that the Christians "borrowed" or at least used the terms. According to Burkert, asebeia was the active violation of cult or sanctuary, priests or consecrated persons, hence in cases of temple robbery, breaking of oaths, or infringement of asylum or of the truce of god ... [and that] brings the wrath of the gods on the whole community and is hence a public crime (1985: 274). The grammateus in Acts 19 says that Christians are in no way guilty of such a crime.

Introduction

35

have been ignored, since a political grouping èv ουρανοί? was not a threat to any po/is-bound groupings. That Jews were occasionally under suspicion of ασέβεια is illustrated in the decree of Nerva, in reaction to the practice of Domitian, which stated that "no persons were permitted to accuse anybody of maiestas or of adopting the Jewish mode of life" (Dio 68.1.2). The implication is that maiestas (ασέβεια) and the Jewish way of life had something in common.21 But it was not only the Jews who lived with, and sought to maintain, some form of autonomy within the city. Many an inscription begins: ή βουλή καΐ ό δήμο? καΐ ol κατοικοΰντε? 'Ρωμαίοι, which would suggest that Roman residents were also a grouping distinct from both the boule and the demos.22 A fishing cartel of Neronian times set up a stele dedicated to the emperor, his mother and his wife, and τω δήμω τω Ρωμαίων καΐ τω δήμω Έφεσίων. This again implies a distinction between the demos of Romans and that of the Ephesians ( I . E p h . Ia.20). Broughton refers to Roman residents (κάτοικουντε?) who were traders, bankers or in business, forming conventi at Ephesus without sharing in civic life as citizens (1938: 546 n 64; 1935: 23). The "Greeks of Asia" (ol έπΐ τη? 'Ασία? Έλληνε?) also appear to have had a political and social structure of their own (OGIS 458.11.1; 470.II.9). The temple records of those granted citizenship indicate that the Έλληνα were a distinct grouping (Wood 1975: 7.11). Presumably, these were Greeks from the mainland in the recent past who set themselves up in communities (κατοικίαι) in Ephesus. Xenophon could distinguish ol Έλληνε? ol έν τη Άσίςι έποικοΟντε? from Ionians and Aeolians (Cyropaedia 6.2.10). In addition, a few inscriptions confirm that there was a Σικλιανών κατοικία in Ephesus (Merkelbach/Sahin 1978), and a fragmentary inscription refers to κατοικία [...] ρενών which Horsley suggests may have been the katoikia of the Almourenoi, a community which is found in other Ephesian inscriptions [I.Eph. ΥΠ. 1.3250-3264] (New Docs 4 [1987] 142).

Jews at least had the advantage of a presence for hundreds of years in cities like Ephesus. That Christians had to experience very similar attacks and threats that Jews had before them is clear from the evidence of the famous correspondence between Pliny and Trajan concerning Christians. Christians were being betrayed by other members of the community and charged with what was fundamentally άσέβεια. Later in that second century, Christians, charged with atheism which is never far short of being the equivalent of treason against the city, appealed to Marcus Aurelius who wrote to the koinon of Asia at Ephesus reinforcing Trajan's policy and taking it a short step further in the favor of Christians (Eusebius Η. E. 4.13). Ramsay (1895/7: 461-467) gives many examples from Apameia, a town some eight days' journey from Ephesus (Polybius 21.40) and a place with whom Ephesus formed alliances (Ramsay 1897: 11.429). Wood's citizenship inscriptions in the temple of Artemis sugggest that a distinction was made between the Έφεσίοι and the κατοΐκοι (1975: 8.15).

36

The Artemis Cult

So there were many groupings of a political and social nature, probably ethnically and linguistically based. This made Ephesus a very dynamic and volatile place. The original Ephesians had to struggle for power with many wealthy and influential Roman families who could claim power through the proconsuls of Asia and ultimately through the emperor. In addition, the Greeks had a culture (and a long history in Ephesus) which appealed to many, including the Romans, and so had some weight. There were also Jews who in number and history were a significant presence. And there were local groupings from elsewhere in and near Asia Minor (Lydians, Phrygians, Cretans, for example) who either historically or cultically could lay claim to a voice. 23

1.1.4. Civic disorder [Στάσι.?] was to the Greeks a terrifying phenomenon incompatible with the possibility of civic life, a nosos ... Once factions arise, the polis has no defence (Murray 1990: 21).

According to Philo, "every city, even the best governed, is full of turmoil and disturbances innumerable" (γέμει θορύβων καΐ ταραχών, Contemp. Life 19). Still a century later, Aristides called faction, strife and disturbance "the diseases of wild beasts" {Or. 27.44). Not surprisingly, any infringment of cultic rules meant severe punishment, and that included banishment from the city. In the fourth century BCE, 45 Sardians who τά lepà ήσέβησαν in a temple of Artemis - which had been founded by Ephesians in Sardis - and insulted the Ephesian ambassadors, were dealt with in the harshest way - they received the death sentence (I.Eph. la.2; Sokolowski 1965: 427-31). About the same period, when Alexander established a democratic Ephesus, the Ephesians killed those who had plundered the temple and had thrown down the image of Philip in the temple (Arrian Anab. 1.17.10-12). Heraclitus, an Ephesian philosopher, earlier had been banished from Ephesus for daring to speak against the cultic practices of those with power, and against the common will of the people (Attridge 1976: 67). Those who in some way threatened the power of the local religious authorities, or those who dealt not with the past but with predicting the future something outside the control of those who believed the future must only be determined through adherence to the νόμοι of the past - often fared badly at the hands of those who felt themselves to be under threat. So, for example, astrologers were banished from Rome by Vitellius in 69 CE and by Vespasian The Lydians in particular had a long and strong influence in Ephesus. According to Herodotus, the Ephesians were Lydian speakers (1.142) and centuries later Pausanius concurs that most Ephesians were Lydians (7.2.8).

Introduction

37

in 70 (Dio 60.6.6 and 65.9.2). Any prophet, particularly one foretelling the future and pretending to be inspired by a god, was susceptible to banishment (Cramer 1954/90: 278). Apollonius was held in the highest respect, even awe, for his ability to know the assassination of Domitian before the news even reached Ephesus where he was speaking; but his prediction of a plague in that city led to his trial as a γόη? (Philostratus Vit. Apoll. 7.17). Christian prophets, especially the itinerant and those proclaiming the kingdom of God, were most likely to come under suspicion inasmuch as their message was made public beyond the setting of Jewish and Christian communities. 1.1.5. The strength of local cults in Ephesus Arnold claims that "the influx and expansion of Christianity eventually wrought the demise of the cult of the Ephesian Artemis" (1989: 28). But this is only the case if "eventually" means a period of well over two centuries. That Arnold intends a more immediate decline is clear from his claim that Artemis' "reputation as a supreme deity certainly did falter after her encounter with Christianity" (1989: 35). A similar claim is made by Lily Taylor (1933) although she is aware of fluctuations in the health of the cult. Oster correctly says that it was the aggression of the Goths in the third century and the malaise that overtook Ephesus then, combined with the violence of the Christians,24 rather than any inherent weakness in the Artemis cult which brought about her decline in influence (1976: 29). It can be unequivocally stated that many of the "pagan cults" in Ephesus were unaffected by Christians and remained strong and flourishing forces till at least the middle of the third century and probably much later.25 But there were variations and idiosyncracies in local Ephesian cults just as there were in Jewish and Christian communities. It is impossible to talk about the "ancient world" or the "Graeco-Roman world" as if it were a monolithic structure which could be observed then or now. Nor can one speak easily about "religion" as if it were static and uniform in theory or in practice. Mellor correctly says that "the core of ancient religion is not a coherent system of belief ... but ritual. To ignore specific local ritual is to eviscerate ancient religious experience" (1992: 387). And even within local cults, movements and changes occurred. So the cults of Ephesus were never static, but went through periods of decline and of strength. They were not in decline at the time of Paul; Oster has little evidence for such acts of violence by Christians. The inscription which sets up the cross over against the "demon" Artemis (Horsley 1992a: 108) is probably one example of such an act but the date of this is later than mid-third century. The Acts of John (ch 42) possibly refer to such violence in that John causes the temple to collapse and converts complete the detsruction (43). See Fox (1986), especially Part One.

38

The Artemis Cult

to the contrary, it can be shown that Christians encountered strong and thriving cults. As Sloyan says, the Roman world was "not a vacuum waiting to be filled by the gospel or anything else" (1985: 765). Ephesus lived like most of the Roman empire did in "genuine Augustan peace" at least between 31-68 CE (Carr 1981: 10) and "Paul moved about an Asia that was characterised by religious quiet and acceptance of the past" (12). 26 The time of Paul was not one of great religious awakening but a determined revival of old ways (21). The 104 CE inscription on the wall near the theatre reveals no sign of a decline in the honoring of Artemis, but rather indicates that her cult received even greater stimulus by the generosity of C. Vibius Salutaris. Some scholars like to describe the times as depressed in spirit: "The individual felt, in his deepest soul, that he was miserable and in chains" (Lietzmann 1953: 70; compare also Nock 1928: 129; Flusser 1976: 1098 and Green 1970: 57). But Epictetus, writing at the end of the first century CE, expresses happiness and confidence in the gods and especially in God (ό θεό?). Occasionally sounding much like Paul (Col 3:16-17), Epictetus says: If we had sense, ought we to be doing anything else, publicly and privately (κοιι/η καΐ Ιδίςι) than hymning and praising the deity and rehearsing his benefits? (ύμυεΐν τό θειου καΐ εΰφημεΐν καΐ έπεξέρχεσθαι τ ά ς χάριτα?;). In everything we do, we ought to be praising God ... This is my task (τό ί-ργον); I do it, and I will not desert this post as long as it may be given me to fill it; and I exhort you to join me in the same song (I. 16. 15-21).

Plutarch, also at the end of the first century CE, held that the most pleasant things (ήδιστα) for humans to experience are έορταΐ καΐ είλαπί,ναι πρό? Ιεροί? καΐ μνήσει? καΐ όργιασμοί καΐ κατευχαΐ θεών καΐ προσκυνήσει? (De superstitione 169.9). He also claimed that husband and wife should have gods in common as their first and most important friends (Coniugalia praecepta 140.19). 27 In the second century similar sentiments are expressed. Marcus Aurelius (approximately 121-180 CE) writes with a contentment and peace which he found through reverence of the gods (θεού? σέβειν, 5.33.l). 28 Aristides, in

See Tacitus Dial. 38.7. Given that advice, one can imagine the problems besetting those marriages where one spouse was Christian and the other not (1 Cor 7:10-16; the Acts of Paul·, see M. MacDonald 1990). MacMullen says with some justification that Marcus Aurelius may not have been typical of his age, and that we need to bear in mind the more common folk of the time who maintained life through magic and ritual rather than through contemplation and reflection of the gods as Marcus Aurelius could afford (1981: 66). Both found security and had confidence in their respective worldviews. The point still stands that such

Introduction

39

the mid- to late second century and, significantly, from Asia Minor, is an impressive witness to the well-being of traditional cults in areas around Ephesus. He acknowledged, rather begrudgingly, that Ephesus was a great city politically and "a refuge in time of need ... [I]t is capable of providing all that a city needs and of satisfying every way of life that men can live and choose to live". He also noted that Artemis was held in very high esteem especially because of her temple there (Or. 23.24-25). But what is remarkable about Aristides in terms of Christianity is that a man in such a pathetic and neurotic condition could visit many cities of Asia Minor and beyond in his constant search for healing, and find his peace and salvation not with Jesus nor with the God of the Jews and Christians but with Aesclepius, his healer and savior (Or. 29.3). Aristides writes this at a time when one of the greatest attractions of the god of the Christians is thought to have been the powers of healing in the name of Jesus. 29 But he says not a word about Christians or Jesus. This suggests that the Christian movement was not as widely known as has been claimed. Aristides speaks of his gods as Paul does of his: Obedience to the god is not worth comparing to anything else because everything else is foolishness in comparison (Sacred Tales 5.56). He describes his vision of Isis, Serapis and Aesclepius as "marvellous in beauty and magnitude". Despite his health, his confidence in his gods remains: Even if I possessed the mouths of all men and the sum of human vocal power, it would certainly be impossible for me to recount the deeds of the greatest of the gods and his gifts which are ever being given to mankind, unless some god would truly direct my speech (Or. 14.16).

As for the Romans of the period, if Seneca is representative then it must be said that the Stoics, and the Romans generally, were not living in dread or fear 30 but were rational and pragmatic in their world-views and quite sceptical worldviews and the security they offered were still regarded as sufficient by both classes of people. MacMullen (1984: 41) and before him Nock (1972: 44) both claim that it was the healing miracles which particularly attracted pagans to Christianity and forced them to acknowledge Jesus as the greater god. According to Seneca, the gods cannot do harm. It is the nature of the gods do to good. It is God who possesses all, allots all, bestows all and that gratis (Ep. 95.49). Lane Fox claims that any account of pagan religions which does not acknowledge the fear is not an accurate account (1986: 38). While the unpredictability of the gods aroused fear, it was the lesser beings which more intimately affected the lives of people. Seneca distinguishes the nether gods (inferí), the household deities (lares), the protecting spirits (genii) and other numina (Ep. 90.28). The gods were protectors against these (often) malevolent beings; but the gods needed assistance, hence the use of amulets and charms and magic generally.

40

The Artemis Cult

about many things in all "religious" traditions. Yet Seneca's search for the beata vita was not a vain one for him. He found it in securitas et perpetua tranquillìtas (Ep. 92.3). True worship is to believe the gods, to acknowledge their majesty and goodness and to imitate them (Ep. 95.50) and there is little necessity for temples and for sacrifices: Non quaeret ministros deus (Ep. 95.48). There is also no need for the lighting of sabbath lights, for morning salutations and thronging to temple doors because "god is worshipped by all who truly know him" (Ep. 95.48). Ethically, Seneca was opposed to wealth and luxury, and stringently abhorred adultery (for example, see Eps. 97 and 110). It is not surprising that he had little time for the emotional hype of the emasculated Phrygian priests who were aroused into mad frenzy by the flutes (Ep. 98.7). 31 As for Ephesus, it will be seen that the stability and strength of the local cults were maintained if not increased in the second century.

Many Greek and Roman writers knew of happiness in their association with the gods. Strabo, for example, believed that while some thought humans are closest to the gods when they do good, he himself held that it is when humans are happy that they are closest to the gods (10.3.9). Such happiness, he thought, comes through performing the festivals (έορτάζειυ), pursuing philosophy (φιλοσοφείν), and engaging in music (μουσική? ¿ίπτεσθαι). Asiatic and especially Phrygian cults were notorious to those from further west for their flutes and cymbals which were associated with orgiastic and effeminate dances, music and customs. One wonders what Prisca and Aquila (ex-Pontus) and Paul thought of Ephesus and Asia generally. They possibly felt more akin with the Stoicism of Seneca than they did with the exuberance and luxury of Asia. (Not by chance did some later Christians compose correspondence between Paul and Seneca). Even the account of the riot in Acts 19 and the calming influence of the asiarchs and grammateus may illustrate Luke's wish to side the Christian movement more with the restrained religion of Rome than with exuberant and occasionally ecstatic Asiatic cults. Cicero, who spent some time in Asia, while regarding Asia as "the noblest of our provinces" and the position of magistrate there as a great honor, found the theatre "noisy" and thought the Greeks generally to be "deceitful and treacherous" and hateful of the Romans and even of their own (Moral Duties, 1884: 309-326). It is important to recognise that so many of the literary sources dealing with Ephesus or Asia are external and carry biases with them.

Artemis

41

1.2. Artemis32 1.2.1. Background and history Ephesus was a very ancient city and acknowledged as such already by ancient historians. 33 Antiquity intrigued Greek historians as it indicated to them genuineness, credibility, and authority. Strabo was impressed that the temples of Ephesus in his time still had ancient images (άρχάία ξόανα). 34 But Ephesus' long history was not smooth and uninterrupted. Located between the powers of east and west,35 the city experienced numerous political and cultural changes and influences - Greek, Persian, Egyptian, Phoenician,36 Syrian and Roman, not to mention local Asian internal changes. Conquered peoples tend to assimilate or at least imitate the customs and culture of the conquerors: Clothing, hairstyles and language are probably the three most obvious features which are adopted. 37 Very often the gods also were Two of the more recent works on Artemis are by Oster (1990) and Fleischer (1973, 1978). For Artemis in general, see especially Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines d'après les textes et les monuments (1877); Farnell, Cult of Greek States II (1896); Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae (1984) 2.1 618-855, and (1984) 2.2. 442-628; and Wernicke (/WII.1 [1905] 1336-1440). Herodotus writes of the Ionian migration into Asia and to Ephesus which already stood as an important centre (Books 1-3). Pliny writes of the statues of Amazons which stood in the Artemisium in the fifth century BCE (N.H. 34.53). Pausanius records that Ephesian history is older than the Ionic immigration and the Artemisium is older than the oracular Apollo at Didymi, which means the eighth century BCE (7.2.6-8). These Ionic Greeks were the ones with whom the Amazons came into initial conflict about that eighth century BCE (Bennett 1967: 5). For the early history of Ephesus, see Biirchner (1905), Bennett (1967), Karwiese (1970), Elliger (1985), and Mussies (1990). Strabo 14.1.20. The antiquity of Artemis and her association with Ephesus was a major strength of Ephesus according to a 44 CE decree (I.Eph. Ia. 17-19) and it also impressed Pausanius (7.4). Antiquity was not something the first few generations of Christians could claim but by the end of the second century, they were claiming more credible antiquity than others (Clement Alex. Exhortation 1). The Jews could and did make such claims, and so established some credibility in the Graeco-Roman world. Augustus respected non-Roman cults if they could claim antiquity but despised those that had none (Suetonius: Augustus 93). Polybius believed Ephesus was a favored site as a citadel (άκρόπολι?) both by land and sea against attack (18.40a). Bammer (1985) believes there is evidence that not only were the Phoenicians involved in trade with Ephesus, but they were present at some stage in Ephesus enough to participate in the ritual and cultic acts. Strabo refers to the behavior of the Armenians who adopted Persian ways on conquest (11.13.9). Athenaeus gives a good description of Ephesian dress adopted from the Persians. It appears the Ephesians loved dyed clothing, especially purple robes and sarapes which others, even Greeks, found to be ostentatious. Athenaeus refers to

42

The Artemis Cult

accommodated into the life of the city, and local gods took on the form and characteristics of foreign deities. There is, for example, evidence of Persian influence (Anaïtis being the Persian name for Artemis).38 Diodorus Siculus writes that the Cretans claimed that nearly all the gods, including Artemis, had their origins with them, but because Artemis revealed herself (φανηναι) for the longest time in Ephesus, Pontus, Persis and Crete, and because she performed so many deeds in these areas, she then became known as Ephesian, Cretan, Tauropolian and Persian. Then he adds: this goddess [Artemis] is held in special honor among the Persians, and the barbarians hold mysteries (μυστήρια) which are performed among other peoples even down to this day [mid-first century BCE] in honor of the Persian Artemis (5.77.7-8).

Tierney claims that Persian influence was greater in Ephesus than in any other Greek city (1929: 457) 39 and their influence may be seen in the highly honored Persian family of priests of the Artemis cult called Megabyzoi. The Persian respect for Artemis is shown in the action of Xerxes who plundered all the Ionian temples except that of Artemis at Ephesus (Strabo 14.1.5). Aristides noted that the Persians accorded the Ephesian Artemis "such great reverence"(Or. 23. 25). The Oriental impact on Asia and on Ephesian cults remained well into the imperial period.40 The impact of the various political powers on Ephesus cannot be marked clearly and sharply along a chronological line. Nor can it be assumed that there was a smooth transition from one power to another. Changes are more fluid "Persian calasires [long robes] which are the most beautiful of all" and to actaea which "is the most costly of all the Persian articles of dress" (Deipno. 3.12.29). For an account of the widespread nature of the Diana cult and also some sketches which illustrate the variations, see under "Diana" in Daremberg and Saglio's Dictionnaire 2.130-157. The Persian Diana is included. Strabo refers to Anaitus as being exceptionally honored by the Medes and Armenians who dedicated slaves of both sexes to the goddess (11.14.16). Thompson (1909: 299) records an ivory plaque found at Ephesus which depicts a winged Artemis - a feature of the Persian variety. He dates it in the eighth century BCE, which may suggest Anatolian influence. A second century CE votive tablet found about 115 kilometres east of Smyrna addresses Artemis Anaïtis (Wright 1895). According to Pausanius, the Lydians had an old image of Artemis which they worshipped as Anaïtis (3.17). An inscription refers to a priest τ η ? έπιφανεστάτη Άυαΐτιδο? 'Αρτέμιδος- (OGIS 470.20). More recently, Sherwin-White refers to "the steadily growing evidence of the existence and assimilation of Persian cults in Greek and hellenized places of Western Asia Minor" (1982: 30). Plutarch writes of "the low state of prosperity ... [Ephesus] in danger of becoming utterly barbarised (έκβαρβαρωθηναι) by the admixture of Persian customs" (Lysander 3). It is worth noting that many Anatolian Jews came from Mesopotamia and Babylon (S.E. Johnson 1972: 185).

Artemis

43

and complex. For example, not everyone accepts foreign ways - older people especially tend to resist them and decry their adoption by their children. Nor is it uncommon for the younger who have at first adopted the oppressors' ways to later turn again to pride in traditional and local ways and even oppose the conqueror.41 In all the very fluid movement which took place in Ephesus in its long known history spanning a millenium before the Christian movement began, the religious and cultic practices were not unmarked. In addition to the people whom conquerors settled in Ephesus from their own regions, the city was inhabited by people from surrounding regions like Phrygia, by Cretans, and by those from more distant areas like Egypt and Rome. They brought with them their own understanding of "Artemis" as well as bringing their own gods and so added to the conceptions and practices of the aboriginal Ephesians. For centuries, Ephesus was regarded as "the most famous (άοιδοτάτη) of all Ionian cities" (Greek Anthology 3.9.424). But by the mid-first century CE, the city was almost at the height of its illustrious history in a period which began with Augustus and lasted well into the third century. Thompson demonstrates that the urban setting of Christians in Asia Minor in the first century of their existence was stable and settled and generally beneficial to all (1990: 167). During this time, the population of Ephesus is estimated by most scholars to have been about 200,000 (Hanfmann 1975: 43; Magie 1950: 585). It was a period of extensive building, both of a public and private nature, which reflects the prosperity of the times.42 On a public scale, the gymnasia, baths, library, medical centre, theatre and the many temples made Ephesus a prolific educational, social and religious centre, well-known for its philosophers, its architects and sculptors, its doctors, musicians, poets and athletes. Many of these received public honors from the city. In such prosperous times, it was not difficult for its citizens to maintain that it was the Great Artemis of the Ephesians who protected them, gave them their well-being, and offered them continuity between past and future. Nor is it surprising that the citizens would

Modern Islamic countries such as Iran are good examples of this. The Jews in preChristian times, at least, also went through similar patterns of change and response. It is also possible for reaction to go the other way - that is, for the oppressor to avoid the customs of the oppressed. Note a Persian ruling apparently to prevent the influence of local cults on the Persians (Sokolowski, ZPE 34 [1979] 65-69). Some private housing in Ephesus was storeyed up to five levels, many being quite palatial and containing excellent art work (Hanfmann 1975: 50). The wealth of Ephesus was well-known and many buildings illustrate that wealth. Individual Ephesians were apparently not unknown for their ostentatious display of wealth: Parrhasius the painter wore purple, and a gold crown on his head (Athenaeus Deipno. 12. 543).

44

The Artemis Cult

want to defend this goddess who had brought them such wealth and prosperity. 43 It can be noted, in passing, that Ephesus was not immune from natural disasters and that these left their mark on the psyche of the city. Asia Minor was earthquake-prone (Seneca Ep. 91.9) and Ephesus suffered from one such in the year 17 CE; in about 44 CE, fire gutted many houses in the city putting the Artemis temple funds under severe strain (Lewis 1974: 130); and there is at least one report of severe flooding in the city (Greek Anthology 3.9.424). There was also a severe famine in Asia Minor between 91-94 CE (Levick 1982: 57); and Aelian writes in the third century CE of such a great pestilence in the city that the youths of the city died, women became barren and the fourfooted beasts perished {Frag.49; compare also Philostratus Vit. Apoll. 4.4 ). Modern-day travellers comment on the heavy rains and the hot unbearable summers (Chandler 1971: 78-79; Biirchner 1905: 27S4). 44 It is well-known that the goddess "Αρτεμις 45 (Latin: Diana) dominated the city not only in the first century CE but for centuries before, and her presence can be traced at least as far back as the 11th century BCE. 4 6 Very early, "Artemis" 47 belonged to the Amazons, but it is the Ionian Greeks who identified her with their Artemis. Cretan identification is vaguely suggested by an inscription found in France which speaks of Artemis as άνασσαν ' Εφέσου Κρησίαν (C/G 6797). Scholars rightly point out that the original Asian and Greek Artemis had very little in common apart from the name. 48 Ramsay So Artemidorus led a deputation to Rome to regain the lakes and the accompanying revenue through tolls for Artemis (Strabo 14.1.26). This time of prosperity also coincided with the growing presence of Rome in Ephesus and some may have acknowledged Rome's blessings while others still wanted to attribute the good conditions to Artemis. The relations between Artemis and Rome are worth further study (see Rogers 1991). For details of Ephesus' climactic and geographical environment, see Biirchner 1905: 2778-2784. Ancient writers, like Strabo (14.1.6) and Artemidorus (2.35), attempted to find the etymology of the name of Artemis through characteristics such as happy, safe, healthy, well-ordered, and a lover of virginity. It may have been poor etymology but "it does reflect what was thought about the goddess then" (Oster 1990: 1723). The equating of Artemis with Diana in Rome was made at least as early as 398 BCE (Fowler 1933: 200). The Aventine shrine there was believed to have been an imitation of the Artemis Ephesia shrine (Palmer 1974: 72, 75; Dionysus Halicarnassus 4:2526). So Mussies (1990: 181) and Tierney (1929: 453). Willetts claims Artemis can be dated back to at least 1300 BCE (1962: 185). Known by other names such as "Yms- and Δεσποίνη. See Bennett (1967: 33), for example. Tierney believes that Artemis really had her origins in Crete and was related with the Minoan Mistress of Animals (1929: 454). The Greek Artemis was the young virgin huntress; the Asian tended to be perceived as a nature goddess (Seltman 1952: 129).

Artemis

45

suggests there was tension between oriental and hellene, and that the Lydian tribes remained strong, especially in cultic matters, so that Ephesus was "the most Lydian of all the Ionian cities" (1927: 265. Likewise, Pausanius 7.2.8).« On the other hand, this distinctiveness of the Asian Artemis from the Greek must not be overdrawn. Greek presence in Ephesus was very old indeed close to a millenium by the time of Paul - and it is most likely that in most cultic practices, it was the Greek-influenced Artemis who dominated the minds of people, even if some of the symbolic forms of Artemis (such as images) remained traditionally Asiatic.50 The Greek Artemis and the Ephesian both celebrated Thargelion 6 as their birthday, and Oster claims it is incontestable that by the time of the early Empire the nativity of the Ephesian Artemis had been closely aligned, at least in the minds of the Ephesians, with that of the Artemis of Greek heritage (1990: 1708).

While Minucius Felix (Octavian 21.225) may be right that Artemis Ephesia is not the same as the huntress in the short tunic, that latter Artemis is regularly depicted on the coins of Ephesus from at least the third century BCE and in the subsequent half millenium (Head 1964: 53-55).51 Undoubtedly, there was a deal of politicization of the the cult and images of Artemis with occasional tension between the aboriginal Ephesians who wanted to maintain their traditional Asian symbols in traditional forms vis-à-vis the claims of those Greeks in Ephesus who saw Artemis as their own and so preferred their traditional forms of the goddess. The use of a particular symbol (such as an image) of Artemis made a political statement with the aboriginal Ephesians more likely to adopt Asian forms of Artemis to maintain their culture and their historical claims to rights in Ephesus, while the Greeks adopted the Grecan Artemis forms to symbolise their claims to political power in the city. The Lydian connection appears to have been strong. Pausanius says Artemis was a pre-Graecan local deity of the Lydians (7.2.6-8. Compare Aristophanes in the fifth century BCE: ή τ " Εφέσου μακαίρα ιτάγχρυσον έχει? οίκου έν φ κόραι σε Λυδώυ μεγάλω? σέβουσιυ (The Clouds 598-601). Herodotus says that when Croesus, the Lydian, attacked the Greeks at Ephesus (about 560 BCE) the latter dedicated the city to Artemis by attaching a rope from the temple of Artemis to the city wall (1.26). Macrobius cites Alexander of Aetolia as referring to Opis (an early name for Artemis) whose home was on the Cenchreius, a river of Ephesus, and describes her as being "a shooter of swift arrows" (Greek Lyric 5: 84). It seems from Head's Catalogue (1964) that the deer and the bee predominate on the earlier coins of Ephesus. In the imperial period, the temple of Artemis and her cultic statue appear more often. The bee seems to disappear, while the stag remains, often in the company of Artemis. The coins indicate the shifts in political power and in the significance of Artemis and later of the Roman emperor.

46

The Artemis Cult

Just as the cult of Artemis was variously affected by the cultural and political changes, so also her history as a significant and important deity in Ephesus was not static or smooth, as Oster rightly warns (1990: 1699), and her cult went through periods of decline and of growth, as Strabo inferred (14.1.23). That there were such changes is also reflected in the images of Artemis: The Polymastie image was by no means the only one familiar to the people of Ephesus52 although it probably was in use by the time of Paul's visit to Ephesus. Despite the changes, Ephesus and Artemis were inseparable: "There existed a distinctive and unique bond between the city of Ephesus, its denizens, and the goddess Artemis" (Oster 1990: 1700).53 When Artemis is honored the prestige and prosperity of the city increases - that is clearly the thinking of the 162-4 CE decree increasing the holy days of Artemis to the whole month (I.Eph. Ia.24). She was called ή προεστώσα τήν πολέων θεό? and ή πατριό? ήμίν θεό? (Xenophon 1.11.5). But this bond is epitomised in the epithet Έφεσία. 54 Epithets did more than describe the gods - they indicated their very essence or nature. For the Ephesians, their Artemis was not merely the god whose cult happened to be at Ephesus. Their Artemis was Έφεσία. Her name is "Αρτεμις Έφεσία as the inscription mentioning the asylum of 'Αρτέμιδος- Έφεσία? έστίν kv Έφέσω indicates (OGIS 455). In most cases, a distinction should be made between Artemis Ephesia and other forms of Artemis at Ephesus or elsewhere. 55 Artemis Ephesia is homologous to a personification of the city - in many inscriptions she is simply known as ή θεώ (θεό?). 56 An example of the need for such distinctions is found in the interesting oracle of Apollo which belonged probably to Sardis.57 The oracle tells the suppliant to look to Artemis for help, and to bring her golden form (μορφήν χρυσοφαεννον) from Ephesus and place it joyfully in the temple. "She will provide deliverance from your affliction" and will negate the poisonous and magical forces that have caused the problem, by burning with her flamebearing torches the signs of the evil art of the μάγο?. 52 53

54 55 56

57

See the many variations in Fleischer (1973) and on the coins in Head's Catalogue (1964). While accentuating the closeness of the Artemis-Ephesus links and the longevity of such, it must be said that such links were not unique. The Athena-Athens links were also very strong, for example (LiDonnici 1992: 394). Commonly also "Αρτεμι? Έφεσίων and ή μεγίστη θεά Έφεσία "Αρτεμις·. There was also an "Αρτεμις· Σαρδιαυή, for example (CIG 3459). See Baugh (1990b). See also, for example, the inscription recorded by Alföldy (ZPE 87 [1991] 157-162) which is given in both Latin and Greek. The Latin text speaks of Diana; the Greek simply: θεά. Xenophon can refer to her similarly (ή θεό?) without prior reference to her (1.8.1). For the full text, see Graf (1992).

Artemis

47

Interesting is the form of the 'Artemis from Ephesus' in this text. She is not polymastoid nor the huntress but the torch-bearing one (λαμπάσι πυρφόροι?) and the shooter with arrows (Ιοχέαιραν). It would seem that this Artemis is "Αρτεμις· Σωτείρα, and yet she is to be taken from Ephesus. But simply because the suppliant is to go to Ephesus and bring the image of Artemis from there, it cannot therefore be assumed that she is to be identified with "ΑρτεμιςΈφέσια, although distinctions may well have been blurred even by Ephesians themselves. After all, Head describes a coin from Ephesus which he dates between 159 and 133 BCE as having a small figure of Artemis Ephesia in the centre on the reverse of the coin, and in each hand Artemis holds a torch (1881: 21). Presumably, different forms of Artemis were called upon for different purposes or by different groups of people. Among a number of Artemis forms known to have been acknowledged at Ephesus are Artemis Protothronia (Pausanius 10.38.3) and Artemis Kourotrophos (Hadzisteliou Price 1978: 157). The Ephesians had the honor of being ή τρόφος της· Ιδίαι? θεοϋ Έφεσία? (CIG 2954). Oster notes the term τρόφο? was often used in antiquity as a terminus technicus to "illustrate the relationship between the divinities and devotees" (1990: 1701). Ephesus was also the νεοκόρο? of Artemis - the protector and keeper of the goddess and her cult and the recipient therefore of her blessings and privileges. 58 As such, the citizens would brook no serious threat to the dignity and cult of Artemis, as the Sardis ambassador story illustrates (Sokolowski 1965: 427-31). At the same time, the cult of Artemis Ephesia was also spread far and wide through the Roman world, 59 and was used as a criterion in 39 CE for sanctuary privileges and asylum rights for the temple of Aphrodite in Aphrodisias. 60 Certain representatives (θεωροί) were commissioned (άποστέλλειν) at Ephesus to conduct the sacred rituals of Artemis Ephesia at Sardis; and a group of neopoioi was stationed at nearby Phygela to oversee the sacrifices to the goddess there (Oster 1987: 81). This indicates that the mysteries of Artemis Ephesia belonged to Ephesus and could not be performed without the sanction - and probably also without the participation - of official "managers" from Ephesus. Occasionally, Artemis is referred to as being πρό πόλεως· (CIG 2963c) - a phrase indicating that either the goddess protects the city or that her shrine stood outside the city and processions in festivals linked the city with her 58 59

60

See S1G 867. For further on Ephesus as neokoros see Kearsley (1992). See Pausanius 4.31.8; S1G 867.29-34; Acts 19:27. The Sibyllines predict gloomily that "Smyrna too shall come bemoaning her minstrels to the gates of Ephesus" (5.306). The links between these two cities were cemented per Artemis. The same book is aware of the Artemis-Ephesus identification as it predicts that the shrine of Artemis will be swallowed by earthquake and Ephesus shall seek her temple which is desolate (5.449). See New Docs 4 ( 1987) 76.

48

The Artemis Cult

shrine (Merkelbach 1979). This underlines further the significance and status of the goddess. But Artemis not only protects the city; the city derives its being from her presence in the natural environment of Ephesus. Ramsay, to his credit, understood this concept of the divine character and personality of the landscape in Anatolian thought, claiming that the rocks, the hills, the streams, the lakes around sites like Ephesus were all part of a "divine map" (1927: 216). Even though the surface of the land might change or be changed by human action, the spirit, presence, and power of the goddess remained.

1.2.2. The attributes of Artemis Transitions and boundaries are commonly regarded as "dangerous" and requiring extra-human assistance and protection. For the individual, Artemis was first and foremost the one who helped in times of transition. For young women, she was παρθένο? with eternal παρθενεία. And it is parthenoi in particular whom Artemis protects, as the novel of Achilles Tatius makes clear.61 She herself does not bleed but she causes the bleeding of other women as she directs the progress from παρθένη to γύι>η (King 1983: 120). According to Callimachus' Hymn, Artemis asked Zeus to be allowed to remain an eternal virgin, roaming the mountains, and visiting towns only to help women in childbirth. She is sometimes called Lysizones, the releaser of the girdle. That girdle was first put on at puberty and later dedicated to Artemis at the time of first sexual intercourse (Suda 3.302: 859); there was a special girdle tied with a ritual knot worn on the wedding day and untied by the spouse; and there was also a girdle a woman untied in labor. So Artemis was "the eternal parthenos who presides over the creation of new gynaikes" (King 1983: 125), and her cult provided resolution of family concerns involving children and the consolation of those who had none, as well as the determination of a woman's relation with her husband and her kin (Zeitlin 1982: 130).

The novel tells the adventures of Leucippe and Clitophon who are from Tyre but find themselves for an important section of the story at Ephesus and in the temple of Artemis. Leucippe, the heroine, maintains her virginity with the help of Artemis and in honor of that goddess. This novel, as well as those of Apollonius of Tyre and Xenophon of Ephesus, is a rich source of information regarding social and cultural life in the early centuries of the Common Era. Some scholars have been blinded by the entertainment purpose of these novels and have not taken them seriously as such sources. Achilles Tatius' novel probably dates from the mid-third century CE, and its very high respect for Artemis of Ephesus and the significance of her role in the story is an indication that Artemis was still highly regarded in that city as late as that date.

Artemis

49

The virginity of Artemis was not a matter of morality in the modern sense. To be virginal meant not to be constrained by a male consort. According to the Ephesian medic, Soranus, even sexual virginity was regarded as healthy since it prevents the excretion of seed. He paralleled the health of virginal women with the condition of animals which had been de-sexed: They were faster, fatter and bigger. Soranus thought pregnancy and parturition waste the body (1.7.30) although he acknowledges it was a debatable matter among doctors (1.7.31). Among the many items 62 dedicated to Artemis were articles of clothing (Greek Anthology 1.6.270-274). When Ephesian ambassadors visited the Artemis shrine at Sardis they offered tunics to Artemis κατά τόν νόμον του πατρίου (Sokolowski 1965: 427). Clothing appears to have been important to Artemis, so Seltmann can write of her "wardrobe" (1952b) and certain people had the responsibility of making her wardrobe, caring for it, clothing her image, and carrying her cosmos in processions. In the story of Apollonius of Tyre, the hero finds his wife in the temple of Artemis at Ephesus, richly dressed in the fashion of the goddess (ch. 47). 63 Related to the protection by Artemis of the parthenoi as they made the transition from maiden to womanhood are the references to women running to the temple and clinging to the image of Artemis. Suda records αί καταφεύγουσα έπΐ τήν "Αρτεμιν θεοκλυτοδσαι καΐ του αγάλματος έκκρεμαμέναι (2.697.162). Achilles Tatius says Artemis alone is the one for whom it is permitted ( έ ξ ε σ τ ι ) to save those who flee to her ( τ ο υ ? καταφεύγοντα?, 8.8). Was this fleeing part of a ritual? Sourvinou-Inwood claims that running/fleeing is associated with male and female initiation and that there is also a strong connection between initiation and hunting (1987: 137138; 1991: 65). Women, especially parthenoi, were regarded as "wild" and so having animal traits and needing to be captured and tamed through marriage ( 1991: 66). The women ran to the image but the men wrenched them from it all in symbolical action - and married them. The action symbolises the trauma of removal for the female into the world of the male. Her fleeing from her father's house to Artemis helps the transition (1987: 145). It is possible that those fleeing to Artemis were in fact participating in a Dionysian ritual since in the myth Dionysos chased the Amazons, some of whom found safety in the temple of Artemis "where their descendants are still living" (Pausanius 7.2.4). In the fourth century BCE, Agesilaus of Sparta gathered his forces at Ephesus for training. On completion of their course in the gymnasium, they all dedicated their garlands to Artemis (Xenophon Scripta Minora 1.27). Mills says Greek clothing was symbolic rather than ornamental, symbolising the occasion, one's class, age, and status (1984: 257, 261-263). The clothing of the goddess Artemis certainly indicated her superiority. Interestingly, the letter First Timothy, possibly addressed to Ephesus, has a word to say about women's dress in worship (2:9).

50

The Artemis Cult

But Artemis was also the protector and goddess of young men - the curetes, who, according to Strabo, formed a college (συν^δριον) and took responsibility for the ceremony to remember and celebrate the birth of Artemis in the Ortygian grove below the mountains outside the city. It was on the mountains that the curetes ritually danced and chanted to scare away Hera from Leto and so to conceal the birth of Artemis (and Apollo, her brother). Strabo says that annually people gathered for the festival and the curetes vied in the magnificence of their contribution. At the same time, these young men held "συμπόσια and perform certain μυστικαΐ θυσίαι" (Strabo 14.1.20). Harrison describes the role of the curetes: They are Young men who have been initiated themselves and will initiate others, will instruct them in tribal duties and tribal dances, will steal them away from their mothers, conceal them, make away with them by some pretended death, and finally bring them back as new-born, grown youths, full members of their tribe (1962: 19-20).

She is writing about the curetes at the birth of Zeus, in particular, but also of Dionysos. A careful reading of Strabo indicates that the curetes of Ephesus danced and held their festival on the mountain and not in the grove of Ortygia at the foot of the mountain, where Leto actually gave birth to Artemis, and where, possibly, the women performed their own mysteries. The curetes, then, were not "born of Artemis" but were her protectors. While Artemis gave birth to daughters (κόραι) and sons (έφηβοι), the curetes kept the jealous Hera away. It is possible that they then, or at another time, took the boys away from Artemis and from the girls/women, and on to the mountain where they were initiated into the college and cult of the curetes, and, as Harrison suggests, thus became "men", having rid themselves of the "female" in them.64 The numerous theophonic and theophoric names of both sexes is indicative of the high esteem in which Artemis was held as parents dedicated their children to her, and by doing so believed her protection and blessing would follow them (Horsley 1992a: 42).65 She was saviour and helper66 and an oath sworn on her carried the weight of the tradition: όρκί£ειν τήν πατριόν θεόν "Αρτεμιν (Xenophon 3.5.5). Artemis hears prayers; she is έπηκοό?, and

For further on the curetes at Ephesus, see Knibbe (1981: 70-73); for their close link with the temple of Artemis, see Kearsley (1992: 196-200). So Horsley claims that the name Artemidorus was one theophonic name (among others) which may indicate devotion to Artemis (1992a: 142). While not disputing this, relevant is Varro's statement that Artemidorus was a slave's name given to a slave by the seller or previous owner, Artemas (On the Latin Language 8.21). Σωτήρ and βοήθη?. The term σωτήρ applied to both gods and humans as it also did in the Septuagint and in Christianity at least into the fourth century; it never implied divinity per se but referred to a function.

Artemis

51

inscribed records of prayers to her for safety/salvation and for healing have come to light (Oster 1987: 80-81) as have prayers expressing εύχαριστία given in return for such salvation {I.Eph. III.940, 943, 957, 960). Other inscriptions express thanks on the completion of a term of office (Hicks 1890: 405). These inscriptions invariably begin: Ευχαριστώ σοι, κυρία "Αρτεμι ...67 Thanks of this kind to Artemis recorded in inscriptions are nearly always made by the νεοποιοί who were especially devoted to her. Artemis, like many other gods, was known to appear in dreams. Xenophon was guided by her via revelation to establish the cult in his home area, so that the Ephesian cult was duplicated there (Oster 1990: 1704-5). Strabo reports that the Phocaeans established the cult in their homeland because Artemis appeared in a dream to Aristarcha instructing her to sail with the Phocaeans and establish the cult among them "precisely the same as is customary in the mother-city" [Ephesus](4.1.3-4), which, by the way, demonstrates the authority of Ephesus in the cult. In the novel of Achilles Tatius, Artemis appears in a dream and tells Sostratus that his daughter, Leucippe, is in Ephesus (7.12.14). The goddess also appears to Leucippe in a dream to comfort her and to encourage her to maintain her virginity until she be reunited with her lover, Clitophon, whom Artemis promises as spouse to Leucippe (4.1.4). She was known as a goddess of epiphany. An edict of about 160 CE speaks of temples being founded and altars being dedicated to her among both Greek and barbarian because of her visible manifestations (έπιφανεί,αι).68 Caracalla, early in the third century, declined Ephesus the right to be neokoros of the imperial cult and instead granted it for the goddess "most powerful in her appearances" (I.Eph. 11.212). It is claimed that the windows of the temple were for her epiphany and that her followers would assemble in the court waiting for her epiphany or a symbol of her divinity from the window (Price and Trell 1977: 130). In some artifacts and coins, Artemis appears to be standing in a doorway which would suggest that she was the one who helped people across thresholds - especially from womb to birth, from childhood to adulthood, virginity to marriage. On coins which portray the cult niche, the doorway appears to be especially significant. Oster sees it as the "door of heaven", an opening to an epiphany of the goddess (1982: 217). The novel of Achilles Tatius claims: ή 8è "Αρτεμις- ή μεγάλη θεό?.... έσωσε (8.9) and if she cannot save then no one can (8.2) and αύτή μόνη του? έπ' αυτήν καταφεύγοντα? έξεστι σώ£ειν (8.8). "Artemis does not lie" (ή "Αρτεμις1 ού ψεύδεται) is said in the context of offering assurance and comfort in the precincts of the temple (7.14). She is a very sympathetic See New Docs 4 (1987) 127-129 for examples; and SEG 34 (1984) 1125. The text of this edict is given in full and in translation in New Docs 4 (1987) 75-6.

52

The Artemis Cult

goddess but also one of the highest rank: She is known as πρωτοθρονία (Pausanius 10.38.6), βασιληΐς· κόσμου, κυρία, σώτειρα, ουράνιο? θεό?; she is μεγίστη, άγιωτάτη, έπιφανεστάτη - the use of superlatives indicates the high esteem with which she was held. 69 Finally, while Pausanius indicates the widespread nature of the cult of Artemis Ephesia and gives reasons for that phenomenon, he also indicates that there was a personal and individual aspect of the cult at least in his time: Έφεσίαν δέ "Αρτεμιν πόλει? τε υομίζουσι αϊ dvSpes- IStç θεών μάλιστα ¿¡γουσινευ τιμή (4.31.8).

ττάσαι

καΐ

It is interesting to note that Pausanius speaks of men (άνδρε?) honoring Artemis in private. Hanfmann says domestic shrines of Artemis have been found, which indicates the private dimension of the cult (1975: 50). In a third century BCE play of Plautus, The Braggart Warrior, which is set in Ephesus, Philocomasium says: Put fire upon the altar that I may give glad praise and thanks to Ephesian Diana and offer her the grateful odour of Arabian incense, since she saved me in Neptune's realm (411-414).

This is illuminating because the thanks are rendered not in the temple but in her house. Philocomasium is a girl who comes from Athens. Her sacrifice is typical of those who come from another region but acknowledge the protection of the local deity on their safe arrival. Finally, her demand also gives an idea as to the kind of offering made - Arabian incense, in this case. In summary, the main function and role of Artemis was that of protectress and savior. Artemis provides safety - for the city, for those who flee to her for sanctuary, for young men and women in particular. She was equally important as the goddess who helped and protected those in transition. At a political level, Artemis was the symbol of Ephesus, ancient, respected and honored even by political opponents in the city, and enduring in power and status.

69

So Oster (1990: 1724). On the other hand, superlatives were used so frequently and of so many deities that one wonders whether they really carried much significance. For further comment on the epithet πρωτοθρουία, see the next chapter.

Artemis

53

1.2.3. Ephesian myths of Artemis70 Biblical scholars have generally ignored the significance of myths and rituals when discussing the state of the Artemis cult in Ephesus. But to do so is to ignore a very complex mythical system which gave Ephesus its "soul" and gave the majority of its inhabitants a strong sense of belonging and ownership. In acknowledging the myths and rituals of Ephesus, biblical scholars today are faced with understanding the reality of what Paul and others met in Ephesus. Paul faced not only a building in the form of the temple of Artemis, and not only an image of great antiquity housed in that temple, but also a complex system of myths and rituals which created and sustained the life of Ephesus even more so than the physical temple and its image. Myth is a term used here not in the sense of "only a story" but in the sense of those traditions, which, in story-form, tell the truth of what Artemis (and Ephesus) was in the beginning, is now, and what she shall be for evermore. In many cases, myths (the spoken symbols) were not isolated from dance, nor from ritual or festival - they were the spoken (or probably chanted/sung)71 version of what was done in the ritual (the enacted symbol). One inscription refers to τό προσφιλέστατοι; τη άγιωτάτη θεω Άρτέμιδι συνέδρων των υμνωδών και θεολόγων καΐ θεσμωδών (Bull. épig. 1956: 161). It can be inferred that such a συνέδριον knew the traditional myths and so was responsible for the songs, the accompaniment, and the myths themselves, to see that they were performed "properly" in the festival of Artemis. It could be said that they were the "managers" of the myth, its performance, and its significance. But there were myths and myths. Some were secret in that they belonged only to a particular festival and a particular time of performance and telling. Others could be told almost as entertainment or had aetiological value. 72 Merkelbach rightly observes that the Ephesians used the form of a Dionysian procession to welcome Antony into their city. He concludes: "Ein solches Dionysosfest zu Ehren eines Generals zu improvisieren, fiel den Ephesern nicht schwer, sie waren an solche Feste gewöhnt" (1988: 74). But using the same form of the procession did not mean that the ritual had the same content Of course, the Ephesians knew of many other myths besides those related to Artemis. For example, Apollodorus mentions the myth of Hercules binding the Cercopes at Ephesus (2.6.3). Plutarch writes of Philammon of Delphi, for example, who gave an account in music of the birth of Artemis and Apollo, and set up choruses in the Delphic shrine (Moralia 1132 A). Plutarch, in his Roman Questions and Greek Questions, explains nearly all the customs and situations discussed by referring to the myths. Some of these are myths telling the actions of the gods in ilio tempore, others are stories of people in the more recent past.

54

The Artemis Cult

or meaning as the same procession did in other ceremonial rituals. The myths of the ceremonies were "secret", that is, they belonged to the tribe and were taught only by the initiated to the uninitiated on their initiation, as seen earlier with the curetes. These myths were chanted or sung and danced in the ceremony, and their performance was believed to re-present the powers of creation and of transition, as boys became men, girls became women. While the form may have been the same as in the public demonstration of welcome for Antony, for example, the myth's meaning was different in the more private tribal cult. Myths serve to hold those living in the present in some kind of relationship with their past. They are part of the "art" of living. Myths also are means of coping with ambiguity and contradictions in nature and in cultural experiences. They are passed on from generation to generation often through initiation rituals, a process which may include the learning of the songs, the dances, the paintings and the stories. The chanting and telling of the myth gives salvation (σωτηρία) and meaning through the continuity it offers with the past and with those who have gone before. 73 As Rogers says, "the past, in certain ways, was the present" (1991: 2). And not only was it the present, but the past was also the model for the future. This is not to suggest that myths are beyond alterability. To the contrary, myths are dynamic and elastic and open to adaptation. 74 So the myths of Artemis at Ephesus were not untouched in their transmission but were open to the influence of myths from other peoples who settled in the city during the millenium before Christians arrived. It also needs to be said that not every one at any given time understood the myths and their accompanying rituals. Myths and rituals are not to be so much understood as to be performed. They are so closely tied with tradition that it is possible for people to retell the myths and perform the rituals without knowing their origins and to some degree without even knowing their literal meaning. The form may remain comparatively Many an anthropologist, when asking the typical Western question: "Why do you do this?" is frustrated by the reply: "We have always done it that way. It is the way of our ancestors. It is our custom". While comparing myths and their significance across time and place (as in the structuralist approach of Lévi-Strauss, for example) has its weaknesses, the importance of myth in Papua New Guinea may be very similar to that of ancient Ephesus. Strelan writes in the context of the former: the myth is regarded as the dynamic for introducing radical changes in the social structures. The validity, integrity, and power of a myth is not dependent upon the success or failure of the movement which has drawn its life from the myth. Even when the myth has been the enabling force behind a movement which apparently fails to meet its objectives, confidence in the myth is not shaken. The myth is constantly updated, revised, modernized, and made relevant to the existential situation. It may even be reinterpreted. But ... the essential core and character of the myth remains (1977: 60).

Artemis

55

unchanged, the language archaic (and possibly in transmission must remain so), but the content is reinterpreted from generation to generation and even from circumstance to circumstance. The myths tell of the relation between Ephesus and the gods and heroes. Artemis, of course, was born there. One myth claims that at the very altar of the goddess the Amazons begged for mercy from the Greek heroes Theseus and Heracles (Hanfmann 1975: 31) and so the place was called Ephesus and the goddess called Artemis Ephesia (Etym. Magri. 402.18). Pausanius was also aware of the Amazon connection, citing Pindar as his authority, but he disagrees with Pindar claiming he was ignorant of the facts, namely that Ephesus was founded by Koresos, the child of the soil, and Ephesos, believed to be the son of the river Cayster (7.4). Pindar may not have been ignorant of "the facts" but merely aware of a myth different to that known to Pausanius. Myths of Ephesus' origin vary, most likely dependent on the clan or tribe from whom they derived. Apollonius states that Ephesus had her beginnings with Attis (8.7). Strabo thinks Ephesus was once called Smyrna because Smyrna was an Amazon who took possession of Ephesus (14.1.4). Athenaeus cites a myth in which an oracle said a fish and a boar would lead the way. As fishermen ate their meal, a fish jumped out of the fire with a coal and set alight the nearby thicket which in turn caused a wild boar to run away. The boar was speared to death and at that spot, where now stands a temple of Athena, the people decided to settle, having previously lived on a neighboring island. They proceeded then to build the temple to Artemis έπΐ τη άγορςί and the temple to Apollo on the shore (Deipno. 8.361). Myths "belonged" to a group of people and may have differed from or even contradicted similar myths "belonging" to other groups who also inhabited Ephesus.75 Nearly all the extant sources are writings of non-Ephesian historians and so they, like their ilk today, often carry with them their own scepticism and cultural biases. 76 Mythology reinforced the relation between Artemis and Ephesus. The city belonged to Artemis and the goddess to the city. Because she was προ πόλεως·, Ephesus could rely on her protection, and the maintenance of her presence through myth and ritual meant her power remained in the site no matter what was built on her ground. By remembering the myths, her creative Diodonis Siculus illustrates well the variation in myths of the gods (Books 3 and 4). So, for example, the Latin Lucretius in describing the Phrygian Great Mother cult and the role of the curetes, believes that the Phrygian beliefs are "nevertheless far removed from the truth" since the Great Mother acts contrary to what in Roman terms "is essential to the very nature of deity" (On the Nature 2.79). Lefkowitz illustrates such bias in the case of Greeks writing about the Amazons who were treated "as negative illustrations of what might happen if warrior women were in control". In fact, Lefkowitz maintains, that situation did not exist among the Amazons (1987: 19). Greek writers often wished to show up the strangeness of others.

56

The Artemis Cult

and sustaining power was being called upon. She looked after the city, protected it and in turn was to be protected and defended. When in 409 BCE, the Athenian Thrasyllus intended invading Ephesus, Tissaphernes (actually a Persian) called upon everyone to rally together at Ephesus and to βοηθειν τη Άρτέμιδι (Xenophon Anab. 1.2.6). Timotheus in his song of the fourth century BCE expresses confidence in Artemis' ability to protect: "Αρτεμις-, έμό? μέγα? θεό? παρ' "Εφεσον φυλάξει (170-173). It is difficult for modern Westerners to understand the significance of myths in societies for whom they give definition and identity. Very often, myths are identified with the very ground or environment - they are not just stories told in a vacuum or about the past. So also the Ephesian myths were not cosmogonical in character; rather they interpreted the cosmos and the "being" of Ephesus. They were the environment of Ephesus. Tacitus gives an inkling of their significance for the Ephesians. Because of abuse, Tiberius required Greek cities to justify the continuation of the practice of offering temple asylum. The Ephesians justified their claim by telling their myths: Apollo and Artemis were born not in Delos but at Ortygia in Ephesus;77 Apollo, having slain the Cyclops, avoided the anger of Jove at Ortygia; the Amazons were pardoned by Father Liber there; and the sanctity of the temple was encouraged by Heracles, the Persians, the Macedonians and by the Ephesians up to Tiberius' own time (Tacitus Annals 3.61.1).78 This significant passage reveals how important and essential myths were. They marked out the identity of Ephesus; they were "maps"; they expressed the "life-power" of Ephesus. In adopting this approach to Tiberius, the Ephesians were not appealing simply to "history" 79 but to their very foundations and their very essence as a city. "Myths are who we are", they were saying. The episode also illustrates the political power of myth. That same power is discussed by Rogers in his work on the 104 CE gift of Salutaris to Ephesus. Rogers says:

Strabo describes Ortygia as "a magnificent grove of all kinds of trees, of the cypress most of all". It was traversed by the river Cenchrius where Leto is said to have bathed after the birth of her twins, Artemis and Apollo (14.1.20). This is similar to Australian Aboriginal land rights claims. When white Australian judges in court asked Aborigines to draw lines on a map to prove claims for land, the Aborigines in fact sang their sacred songs which "marked" the land as their own. Rather interestingly, it appears that although the Ephesians' appeal was successful, some of their claims and those of others were rejected by the pragmatic and linedrawing Romans as being too far removed in the hazy and distant past. "No Greek doubted that the heroic myths were the early history of his (sic) people" (Nilsson 1951: 14).

Artemis

57

The story of the birth of Artemis at Ortygia ... was very much alive in AD 104, and provided the members of the boule and the demos with a tangible source of power, to be wielded over the youth of the city, over new founders, and, at last, over new gods (1992: 2).

In their claim that Paul was damaging the reputation not only of the guilds but also of Artemis and thereby of Ephesus itself, the guild's cry: Μεγάλη ή "Αρτεμις· Έφεσίων (Acts 19:28, 34), was shorthand for the whole mythology In their claim that Paul was damaging the reputation not only of the guilds but also of Artemis and thereby of Ephesus itself, the guilds cry: Μεγάλη ή "Αρτεμις· Έφεσίων (Acts 19:28, 34) was shorthand for the whole mythology of Ephesus and her goddess. The cry is not of any Artemis, but the 'Artemis of Ephesians' - it is possibly a case of the guilds "borrowing" the mythical hymn which strictly speaking belonged to the aboriginal tribe of Ephesians. It is not likely that they simply repeated those same words over and over again, but rather that these words were the "name" of the myth. 80 It was partly to mythology that the grammateus appealed by referring to the διοπετέ? (Acts 19:35) and so finally could dismiss the meeting peacefully. The mythological origin of the Artemis image, says the grammateus, would survive the new myth of the one God of the Jew and foreigner, Paul. It was a claim that was justified over at least the next two or three centuries.81 1.2.4. Ephesian cultic festivals Myths were not only "in the heads of people" but were also part of the cultic celebration of the citizens - in their festivals and holy days. While these festivals had their particular solemn and sacred rituals which linked the participants to the powers of the past, they also had wider significance for the city as opportunities for the cementing of traditional ties and for the creation of new alliances. In addition to the strengthening of such relations, festivals were very important occasions for the economy of Ephesus. The festivals of Ephesus are not well-documented - Oster calls it a "lamentable dearth" (1990: 1708). But there is evidence of at least two major ones: The Artemision (March-April) and the Thargelion (May-June). The Artemisia included athletic and theatrical competitions, as well as offerings to the gods (Oster 1990: 1708-9), but their social and economic importance Not unlike a national anthem or a Christian hymn may be called by its first line, but, of course, includes much more. It is possible that the grammateus was not only saying that Artemis could survive against the god of Paul but also that Artemis and Paul's god could exist together. It is testimony to the strength of the Artemis mythology that it did survive, since fundamentally what was at stake was the power of the mythology of place when confronted with a mythology of change.

58

The Artemis Cult

cannot be overestimated. Their economic significance is well illustrated in the edict of 162 CE which acknowledges the tradition of celebrating the festival during the month because of Artemis' very wide popularity and the benefits she brings to Ephesus, but now rules that the whole month shall be declared holy. The express purpose of such a decree was to bring even more honor to both Artemis and the city.82 While some have suggested this may have been an attempt to combat the success of Christianity (Hicks 1890, Taylor 1933a), there is nothing in the decree itself to suggest such a motivation. It is possible that about this time Ephesus was going through tough economic times and so may be it was believed that by adding to the honor of Artemis further honor would be brought to Ephesus and with that honor would come more travellers and so more trade for the city. It makes sense that if one wished to rejuvenate the (economic) life of the city and of the cult, one would rejuvenate that very festival which was held to celebrate the goddess who was its foundation and protectress. By doing so, one would get as much "out of' the festival as possible, especially since "we can be sure that this was one of the largest and most magnificent religious celebrations in Ephesus' liturgical calendar" (Oster 1990: 1711). It is an example of pragmatic religion which was wise politically, socially and economically.83 In social terms, the Artemisia allowed times for fun and celebration84 but more importantly, they provided opportunities for young women to meet their selected fiances and young men their brides, all to the accompaniment of music and dancing. In other words, these festivals served a strong social function as families arranged marriages or - to use the language of myth and religion - allowed the gods of love to do their work during such festivals. In the tale of Habrocomes and Anthia, people came from surrounding districts and wider afield (πολύ μέν έγχώριον, πολύ δε ξενικόυ) to participate in such a festival which Xenophon calls έορτή τη? 'Αρτέμιδος· έπιχώριος· (Eph. 1.2.1) and to arrange marriages which cemented families and which were

For text, translation and Oster's comments, see New Docs 4 (1987) 74-82. The new terms of the decree may have been politically motivated rather than driven by economics. The Roman proconsul had given offence by conducting public business in Ephesus on some of the Artemision holy-days. The Ephesians had protested and the proconsul owned his mistake. The Ephesians took the opportunity to increase the holy days to the whole month. Clever politics meant an increased economy. It is yet another example of the hold Artemis had in Ephesus even over against its Roman representatives and even one hundred years after Paul had been in the city. According to Aristides, Smyrna (of which he was a native) was at this time by far the most favored of Asian cities among the Romans (Or. 19.13). Could the edict of Ephesus have been an attempt to seize some prestige for Ephesus in her long-standing rivalry with Smyrna? Achilles Tatius' story tells of revellers being drunk and boisterous during the ΙερομενΙα of Artemis (6.3).

Artemis

59

then confirmed by sacrifices in the temple to Artemis. As part of this festival, at least according to this novel, young men and women - prospective brides and grooms - elaborately and beautifully decorated, joined the solemn procession (πομπαί) which led from the city to the lepóv. All along the way were statues, monuments, inscriptions, gates and buildings reminding them of their history and mythology. During the procession, hymns were sung to Artemis (Lyra Graeca 3. 489) 85 probably under the direction of the υμνωδοί. Coins from very early in the third century depict an lepà απήνη - a covered four-wheeled wagon drawn by two mules and its sides hung with wreaths - which was probably used in such festivals (Head, 1964: 82, 84, 86). In the van of the procession would have been sacred objects, torches, baskets and incense; then came horses and dogs and hunting gear as well as military equipment. These objects and this procession was a reenactment of Artemis on the hunt. 86 In fact, Xenophon depicts Anthia, the heroine, as "dressed to kill" in two senses. She is fourteen years old - the age of puberty, the age of making the transition from maidenhood to matronage via marriage. 87 She is also identified as the daughter of Megamedes and Euhippe, implying the significance of the family in the marriage arrangements. It was a highly significant social festival 88 and one which had Artemis at its very centre. Anthia wears fawn skin and a quiver; she carries a bow and javelins, and has dogs at her heel (1.2.6). It is not surprising that some spectators call out that she is Artemis 89 and bow before her in worship. Dancing played a vital role in nearly all rituals and festivals. Lucían says: "I forbear to say that not a single ancient mystery-cult can be found that is without dancing" (On the Dance, 15). The cycle of life and death was something to be

85 86

87

88

89

See the article of I. Arnold (1972). Athenaeus quotes Hegesander of Delphi who said that a red-mullet (τρ[γλη) was carried in procession during the Artemision because that fish hunts sea-hares relentlessly and devours them. "This huntress fish is dedicated to the huntress goddess (κυνηγέτι?)" (Deipno. 7. 325). Artemis as huntress appears to have been the major understanding of Artemis in the city's public cult at least by the third century CE. Soranus the Ephesian physician who lived around 80-140 CE recommends fourteen as the age for women to begin to bear children (Gyn. 1.8.33). It is not possible to emphasise enough that Ephesians did not differentiate between the social and the religious as many present-day Western Christians do. To the modern Western "religious" person, the festivals would appear to have been more social occasions than "religious" ones. It is interesting to read Aristides address to his fellow-Smymeans on the matter of proper behavior at the cultic festivals: It is slander (a social sin) that disturbs the pious Aristides the most. While Xenophon gives the impression this happened just in the case of Anthia, the suspicion is that it was all part of the drama. Each festival a young woman would dress as Artemis and each time someone in the crowd would yell this out. Artemis was re-presented.

60

The Artemis Cult

danced, very often by women, who were believed to hold the powers of life and death, while the men provided the musical and singing accompaniment. Lucian is one of many who saw dance originating either in Phrygia or Crete, and he - again like many - refers to the flute and lute that accompanies Asian dancing. The flute is seen as having its origins in the east, in Phrygia, and epitomised for many Greeks and Romans the wild and orgiastic nature of oriental festivals. 90 The function of σπονδαύλη? is listed in numerous Ephesian inscriptions (for example, FiE IX. Β1-47). In mythology, it is not uncommon for the flute to be originally an instrument of the female and so to symbolise what is female.91 Philo speaks very disparagingly of spectacles with their flute-players and harpists "and the whole range of unmanly and effeminate music" and dancers (On Husbandry 35). And the Christian Justin was not impressed either by the public assemblies with their excessive banqueting and "subtle flutes which provoke to lustful movements", the useless and luxurious anointings and crowning with garlands (Discourse A). Lucian has Lycinus defend dancing and the dancer, and gives details as to what constitutes a good dancer. A good dancer must know the myths Lycinus gives over one hundred of them - and so dance them. Dances were integral to the mythology of the cities in which they were danced, but myths and their corresponding dances could be performed at different levels, from the mystery of the ritual to entertainment. In another writing, Lucian claims that the Bacchic dances of Ionia and Pontus are a satyr-show which enthralls people so much that when appointed times come around, they forget everything else and sit the whole day looking at titans, corybantes, satyrs and rustics. Men of status and rank "in everyone of their cities" participated with great pride (On the Dance, 79). Aelian cites Autocrates who describes a dance that took place within the temple of Artemis. It was performed by

On The Dance 8, 34. While not excluding the drinking of wine as an explanation for Phrygian dance behavior, the ecstasy factor - possession by Dionysos and the gods cannot be ruled out. For the Phrygian origin of the flute and dance, see also Athenaeus Deipno. 14.616Í; 14.625e. In the Achilles Tatius novel, the pipes of Pan are said to have been originally a beautiful woman. Pan chased and caught her and she turned into flutes. When Pan kissed them, groaning with love, they produced beautiful music. So Pan put them in the cave and later gave them to Artemis and to the whole region agreeing with Artemis that no non-virgin would be allowed there (8.6). This myth told in a popular third century or later novel indicates again the strength of mythology in Ephesus. The reversal of sex in relation to flutes is also indicated in Plutarch's reference to the custom of flute-players being allowed to walk around the city dressed as women on the Ides of January (Roman Questions 277.55). Athenaeus connects the flute and castanet-like instruments with Artemis and suggests Persian links (Deipno. 14.636).

Artemis

61

sweet maidens, daughters of Lydia, [who] sport and lightly leap and clap their hands ... now sinking down upon their haunches and again springing up like the hopping wagtail (Nature of Animals 12.9).

While Aelian is more interested in the characteristics of animals, it is quite likely that he is referring to a sacred dance of that Artemis who was known to both befriend and hunt animals. The dance takes place within the temple, and the reference to the "sweet maidens, daughters of Lydia" also suggests this is a sacred dance since the κόραι were sacred to Artemis. Their bird-like movements are in imitation of the animals Artemis protected. It is very common for dancers to mimic animals and to represent their whole group or tribe through animal symbols. 92 The reference to Lydia could imply that the dance belonged to the Lydians of Ephesus; it is at least a reminder of Ephesus' ancient past - there were very close links with the Lydians already in the seventh century BCE. Ephesus was deeply affected by that association both in population and in cultic practices (Emlyn-Jones 1980: 19). Autocrates was seeing myth in dance, and by its performance the maidens shared in the "lifepower" of Artemis or possibly of the birds that Artemis befriended in the myth. The other major festival, Thargelion (May-June), celebrated the birthday of Artemis and Apollo. 9 3 This festival featured especially the curetes.

Ortygia was the place of quails (Nilsson 1951: 117). Maybe the dancers were imitating quails. Just as Artemis protects quails, so by dancing as quails, the girls will have Artemis' protection. The word άκροβάται may mean "dancers on tiptoes". The verb άκροβάτειν is used by Diodorus to describe the movement of ostrich-like birds (2.50). The άκροβάται were temple-related and of some status (FiE IX. B.22; I.Mag. 119, 237; Bull. épig. 1952.168). Possibly, such officers performed some kind of dance which featured ostrich-like movements. The bee and the deer were very common and ancient symbols of Artemis. Barnett thinks the bee may have been an important symbol already for the Hittites of Anatolia (1948: 21). Many of the known images of Artemis have these two animals either in her company or engraved on her body (Fleischer 1973). Democritus, the Ephesian, describes the Ephesians who wore on their heads caps "embroidered with figures of animals" (Athenaeus Deipno. 3.12.29). Athenaeus also refers to young men who poured out wine at the Poseidon festival in Ephesus who were called τ α ύ ρ ο ι (10.425). Harrison claims that the men dressed up as bulls in order to gain the mana of the animal (1963: 30). The link between the human world and that of the animals was far closer for the Asian than for modern Westerners. Philostratus' account of Apollonius' actions at Ephesus is a healthy reminder of this fact. Ephesus was experiencing a plague which Apollonius said was due to the presence of a beggar in the city. The beggar should be stoned because he was in fact a demon. The man was duly stoned, but when the stones were later removed, a huge dead dog was seen instead. This action purged Ephesus of the plague (Vit. Apoll. 4.10). According to Suda, it was a harvest celebration at which pots which had been smelted by a priest were filled with seeds and cooked and then offered as first-fruits to the god.

62

The Artemis Cult

Callimachus is possibly referring to that festival when he writes of the Amazons dancing around the image of Artemis in war uniform, stamping their feet loudly and shaking their quivers to the accompaniment of loud pipes (240247). 94 The noisiness of the Amazons was imitated by the curetes in order to scare off Hera. By annually dramatising the myth, the creating and formative actions of the past were harnessed in the present and for the future. The presence and power of Artemis was available for women giving birth, and for any other kind of "birth" or transition in both the social and natural worlds. Since the birth of Artemis at Ortygia marked the birth of her presence in the area, this ritual was highly important and essential in the life of the city. While others may dispute the claims for her origins there, for the Ephesians it was unshakeable. They belonged to Artemis; they could be addressed as being kv Άρτέμιδι (Philostratus Ep. 65). 95

The name Thargelion derives from the heating ability of the sun (2.684.50). According to Orloff, the feast of pots was dedicated to the dead whose souls rose from the underworld to right justice in the community. The feast celebrated the marriage of Dionysus and Ariadne (1981: 24). This may be an example of the fusion of cults. Quite similar is the reference of Lucretius to the Great Mother who in ancient Greek lore was pictured riding a chariot drawn by lions. She is accompanied by a Phrygian retinue with eunuchs in immediate attendance. A thunder of drums attends her, tight-stretched and pounded by palms, and a clash of hollow cymbals; hoarse-throated horns bray their deep warning, and the pierced flute thrills every heart with Phrygian strains. Weapons are carried before her, symbolic of rabid frenzy, to chasten the thankless and profane hearts of the rabble with dread of her divinity ... [A]n armed band, whom the Greeks call Phrygian Curetes, joust together and join in rhythmic dances, merry with blood and nodding their heads to set their terrifying crests aflutter. They call to mind those Curetes of Dicte, who once on a time in Crete, as the story goes, drowned the wailing of the infant Jove by dancing with swift feet, an armed band of boys around a boy, and rhythmically clashing bronze, lest Saturn should seize and crush him in his jaws and deal his mother's heart a wound that would not heal. Lucretius suggests some reasons for all this, but dismisses them in typical Epicurean fashion. The gods are - in his opinion - removed from our affairs, free from all pain and peril, exempt from any need of humans and immune from anger (On the Nature 2. 674). Mussies cites this passage and then states that the expression "in Artemis" (έν Άρτέμιδι) possibly "imitates" the Johannine expression "in the father" or "in God" (1990: 180). This seems like a case of Christian elitism. Could it not be that the Johannine language imitated Artemis-language? Older scholars attempted to link the visit of Paul to Ephesus and the ensuing riot with the Artemision festival. The argument is that Paul says he wanted to stay in Ephesus until Pentecost (1 Cor 16:8). Since Pentecost falls in early June, Paul must have been in Ephesus in March-April when the Artemision festival was held (Stokes 1892: 362; Hicks 1890: 414). This suggestion, of course, rests on the harmonious understanding of Acts and Paul's letters which is shaky ground. Besides, there is very little in the Acts account which suggests it was festival time apart from the activity of Demetrius

Artemis

63

Artemis' birthday, like all festivals, also gave citizens opportunity to increase their honor 96 by donating food, money and other benefits to be distributed among the citizens. C. Vibius Salutaris chose the day before Artemis' birthday to donate 31 gold and silver statues of Artemis as well as images of Trajan and his wife and others. The procession for the festival began at Artemis' temple and ended there; her statue was carried by chariot and her light or flame was at the procession's head. 97 Salutaris was obviously aware that he would attract greater honor to himself from the citizens of Ephesus by making these generous donations at the time of the Artemis birthday celebrations. He knew that in honoring Artemis he was "on a good thing" and that he would duly be accorded honor for himself. By giving honor to the goddess, he was honoring the city which in turn would honor him by referring to him, as they did to other benefactors of Artemis, as φιλάρτεμι?. Rogers argues that Salutaris (and the Ephesians generally) wanted to make a clear statement to Rome and against Rome (and Romans in Ephesus?) that Ephesus in 104 CE still belonged very much to Artemis and not to Rome (1991: 140-142). There are indications of other regular festivals. In one such festival, Artemis' image was carried to the port on the day of the official opening for navigation after the winter closure. The priests would throw the image into the sea so that Artemis would protect navigators. Artemis was not only star of the sea but queen of commercial affairs and her effigy was the mark of wealth and prosperity (Saffrey 1986: 197-98).98 The sea 99 is also the site for the Daitis festival, a celebration of uncertain origin and of uncertain duration. In this festival, the image of the goddess was which would have been higher at this time than otherwise, and possibly, the mention of the asiarchs whose job it was to supervise religious festivals. If there was any festival Paul wanted to stay in Ephesus for it was Pentecost. Elliott claims that Christians lived in a society obsessed with philotimia (1981: 122). Dio Chrysostom asks: τΐ γάρ έστιν Ιερώτερον τιμή? ή χάριτος·; (Or. 31). For the importance of τιμή in the Graeco-Roman world, see Malina (1981: 25-50). See Rogers (1991) for a full description of this celebration and its significance for the city and for Salutaris himself. Not surprisingly, fishing was important in Ephesian trade and commerce, and some species of fish were Ephesian specialties (Athenaeus Deipno. 7.320a; 328b). The sea may have had special significance for Ephesians. Apparently, the Artemis temple was designed to be open to the sea, and was built originally on the shore (Finegan 1981: 156; Scully 1979: 90-91); a number of Jewish synagogues in Asia Minor likewise were open to the sea. The Acts of Paul have Eubula and Artemilla baptised in the sea at Ephesus (chapter 8); and it is by the sea that Justin meets the Christian philosopher. In Ephesus, the sea opened the city to the west, the setting sun. In some Jewish traditions it represented the chaotic and demonic. In the Revelation's vision of the new creation, the sea is no more (21: 1). Possibly it also represented the source of foreigners and dominant powers, since Egyptians and Greeks and Romans gained access to Ephesus from the sea.

64

The Artemis Cult

washed, anointed and clothed. Various sacred officials such as σελεινοφόροι, σπειροφόροι and κοσμοφόροι featured in the celebration (Fleischer 1973: 125). The festival was based on the story of Klymene, daughter of the king, who went with the young women and young men, carrying the image of Artemis to a field by the seashore. There they decided to make a banquet for the goddess. The maidens gathered parsley/celery and other herbs; the ephebes collected salt and set it before the goddess as a meal. This sharing of salt was highly symbolical of the communion and bond between the participants. As a result of not doing this the following year, the goddess was angry and inflicted the youths with a pestilence. Through an oracle, the goddess saw to it that the feast was conducted properly by the young and so the pestilence ceased. This is a good indication that failure to perform the proper ceremonies could result in disaster for the city in one form or another; or, that disasters were explained as resulting from the failure to perform ceremonies.100 The Daitis festival indicates that there was a link between Artemis and τό σέλινον - celery, or possibly garlic. In an eccentric article, Rendel-Harris tries to establish that the cult of the Greek Artemis was in its original form associated with some such herb (1916/17). While his suggestion is highly speculative, his connection of Artemis with herbs and healing magic is not to be taken lightly. It is tempting to speak of the gods only in a philosophical and theological framework, but it is likely that for the common folk it was not that which attracted them to seek the gods but the very practical matters of life and health and love. According to MacMullen, "the chief business of religion ... was to make the sick well" (1981: 49). Artemis made people well; she saved them. It is possible that she did so through herbs and potions, and the Daitis festival celebrated and stimulated that power. The κοσμοφόρο? is an interesting participant in this festival and in others. An inscription dated 123/4 CE refers to priests bearing in procession τόν χρύσεον κόσμον ... τ η ? μεγάλη? θεά? 'Αρτέμιδος- πρό πόλεω? (CIG 2963c). What was this κόσμο?? An adornment of Artemis; but of what kind? Was it "the crown jewels" of Artemis? Whatever is meant, it was clearly a great honor to carry this paraphernalia. The synedrion of χρυσοφόροι (SEG 31 [1981] 957) performed this function, as did the synedrion of sacred victors (Ιερονΐκαι) of the Ephesian Olympics (West 1990: 84-89). This latter group was dedicated to Artemis and at times received allowances from the temple (Pleket 1973: 204). It would seem that to carry the cosmos of the image of the goddess was as important as bearing the image itself. In fact, it may well be the "original" image itself was rarely, if ever, publicly paraded (LiDonnici 1992: Artemis avenged injustice. Aelian records a woman suffering a lawless marriage who prayed the goddess for vengeance and then killed herself. A severe pestilence befell Ephesus so that the youth of the city died untimely deaths, the women were barren and the four-footed herds likewise (Frag. 49).

Artemis

65

404 η 63) but remained comparatively secluded in the temple shrine. Another possibility is that the "wardrobe" (Seltman 1952b) of Artemis was paraded in procession through the streets to the temple and there the image bedecked and then in turn paraded openly. 101 This "wardrobe" of Artemis was important in the festivals and in the cult, and a second century CE inscription shows that it was the young males and females who held important positions in this regard: κουρατορευόντων τ ω ν γναφέων καΐ λειικαντών τ ή ? θεού 'Αρτέμιδος- προσήνενκαν τ η θει? τ ό ν κόσμον παίδες- καΐ παρθένοι ... (SEG 34 [1984] 1124).

The Daitis festival was probably a very ancient festival and one which had disappeared as Ephesus became more and more urbanised and Romanised. Bammer believes that the Thargelion absorbed the Daitis, but that the two "wohl ursprünglich Feste unterschiedlicher Stammesverbände waren" (1982: 83). 1 0 2 The festivals seem to have concentrated on the youth, both male and female, and on the times of transition. Artemis was the goddess especially of the young, and offered protection to them from the moment of conception through birth and into maturity. Not surprisingly, ten terracotta statues of seated and veiled Κουροτρόφοι have been found in the Artemision.103 Finally, "the references to τά μυστήρια τη? 'Αρτέμιδος- are scant" (Oster 1990: 1711). 104 Horsley goes so far to suggest that mystery activities were not a major part of Artemis' cultic ritual (1992b: 144). Kearsley records just a few inscriptions of the first two centuries CE referring to priestesses honored by

The images donated by Salutaris in 104 CE were used in the Artemis celebrations and processions. They were obviously of recent manufacture and therefore imitations. An Ephesian altar inscription of the third century CE is to Aphrodite Daitis ([I.Eph. IV. 1202). It is a reminder to carefully guard against drawing sharp and distinct lines between cults. The evidence suggests the lines were blurred. Hadzisteliou Price (1978: 157). She says they date from the fourth century BCE and are of Ionian-Rhodian type. She also identifies them with Artemis. This indicates what is a common problem in trying to identify Greek gods. They often do not sit in clearly defined categories and roles. Is Artemis Kourotrophos the same as Artemis Ephesia? Almost defintely not. Both may exist within the temple of Artemis without being identical. There is confusion as to what is meant by the term μυστήριοι/. Burkert claims they were forbidden (άπόρρητα) and unspeakable (άρρητα) and secret "that aimed at a change of mind through the experience of the sacred" (1987: 9,11). There is nothing to suggest that Artemis mysteries were of this kind. MacMullen says mysteries were not so much secret, but lessons in a cult to be learned by possibly large numbers at a time, with singing, dancing and acting involved. They were quite public (1981: 2324). Artemis mysteries were probably more along these lines. A third possibility is that they were public to a certain group of people, but not to everybody.

66

The Artemis Cult

the city for their performing of the mysteries (1992: 201). An inscription of at least the third century CE, if not later, praises a priestess of Artemis for having restored all the mysteries of the goddess (άυανεοσαμένην πάντα τα μυστήρια τη? θεού), and rendered them in accord with ancient custom (I.Eph. VII. 1.3059)

but there is nothing to indicate just what those mysteries were which she restored. It is more than likely that the term μυστήρια means little more than the performance of the proper rituals. That the mysteries of Artemis Ephesia were performed outside of Ephesus is illustrated by Horsley's examination of an inscription held in the Archaeological Museum at Burdur (Horsley, 1992b). Horsley dates the inscription from between 150 and 210 CE and holds the mysteries (μυστήρια τη? θεοί)) were performed in that period - and probably earlier - at Cremna in Pisidia. Festivals and their rituals demanded supervision, funding, and organisational skills. It cannot be assumed that every year those responsible had such skills, or even that the mysteries were performed every year without fail. There may have been gaps of any number of years between performances of the mysteries. Guilt was not a driving motive for their happening! The pragmatics of money, food, space, weather, personnel and organisational skills (which may have included contacting people who did not reside in Ephesus but who had the right and even the obligation to attend such occasions) were probably greater factors. The priestesses so honored in the inscriptions received that status because they were the ones who took responsibility for the funding, planning, and organisation, and did it well.105 They brought honor not just to themselves but to Ephesus in the eyes of visitors and especially in the eyes of tribes or other such groups of people who came from elsewhere but who participated in the rituals and so expected certain people in Ephesus (like the priestess) to make sure the performance of those rituals went well. There is some suggestion that the Artemisia rituals were not always conducted in their completeness, and that the lack of the skills mentioned above was a factor determining to what degree they were completed. The decree of

It is quite likely that the most significant aspect of rituals and festivals was the provision of food. The "completion" (TëXeiov) of rituals was often driven by less than "religious" motives! Food was to be provided not just for the sacrifices and rituals themselves, but also for the visitors. There may well have been a competitive edge to such provision so that the local group responsible for the performance of a particular ritual could boast of their generosity and that generosity would be acknowledged by the participants - hence the "honor". Strabo explicitly states that the curetes tried to outdo each other in the magnificence of their contribution (14.1.20).

Artemis

67

162-4 CE, for example, honors Titus Aelius Marcianus Priscus106 (who was άγωνόθετη? καΐ πανηγυριάρχη?) because "he was the first to conduct the festival κατά τέλειοι/' (l.Eph. Ia.24). The priestess honored because she "restored all the mysteries of the goddess" may - like Priscus - also have been honored because she restored all the rituals, whereas in previous years only some of the mysteries had been performed. Another inscription honors an Ιεροκήρυξ who began 107 to γυμνασιαρχείν τάς yeveoÎovç Ζκτας τη? 'Αρτέμιδος- κατά μήνα δρακτω έκ των 181ων καΐ τά λοιπά 8è μυστήρια της- θεού [άξίως· έπιτελέσαντα] (L'année Épig. 1990: 910). What are τα λοιπά μυστήρια? Possibly rituals which had not always been performed in the festivals. The stele in the Burdur Museum examined by Horsley (1992b) also hints at the mysteries of Artemis Ephesia not always been known or fully performed in Cremna in Pisidia. In the second century CE inscription on that stele, the priestess of Artemis Ephesia is said to have "found" the mysteries (ευρεθέντα ... μυστήρια). This could imply that the mysteries had fallen into disuse or that the priestess now learned the fuller version of them. Horsley suggests that she discovered them not through a dream or vision (as in some other cases) but through some tangible medium such as a written text (1992b: 142). So little is known about the mysteries generally; but as Horsley acknowledges one reason for that is that details of mysteries were not transmitted in written form (1992b: 145). This is not surprising since mysteries were of things άρρητα and άπόρρητα (Burkert 1987: 9). Some, if not all, festivals in Ephesus involved the participation of others from other cities and regions. Thucydides writes of the Ionians coming with their wives and children (that is, in their kinship groups) for festivals which involved music, gymnastics, and dancing competitions (History 3.104.3-5). It is possible that only those who were Ionians (that is, had their origins in the clan ancestor Ion of Athens) attended these festivals, or at least controlled and "owned" them. These and other festivals with their games and competitions and celebrations dominated city life and brought dignity to the city and to those who brought honor by their successes. Of course, people attended such πανηγύρεις - for various reasons: The contests, the displays of arts and crafts, the trade opportunities, the theatrical performances, the holiday (Dio Chrysostom Or. 27. 5-6). In addition to the trading opportunities, the city benefited from the Interestingly, he is identified as being of the Claudian tribe (l.Eph. Ia.24). Was that tribe, in that year, responsible for the festival? The verb used here (άρξάμενον) cannot imply he began them for the first time, but rather that he started them up again after some delay. Robert understands the expression ή άτέλεια τώι> Άρτεμεισίων to mean "l'exemption d'impôts sur les transactions de la panégyrie" (1989: 5.364).

68

The Artemis Cult

distribution of money and food through the beneficence of benefactors who in turn received honor (τιμή) from the citizens. Civic festivals had the ability to bind people together, to enhance political leaders' status and popularity, and to create or invigorate civic pride. Festivals were times for families to form relationships, and for the settlement of disputes between cities and the cementing of common bonds against foreigners (Dion. Halic. 4:25, 3-5). The myths and rituals, the festivals and games all helped Ephesus to define itself as a city, for herself and in relation with others. They shaped reality for the inhabitants. Since Artemis had such a long record of being ή θεά/θεό? in Ephesus, it is to her that the city could ultimately turn for its energy and identity. "To be outside all this was to be effectively outside the city" (Rajak 1985b: 252). The comment of Plutarch may well be typical: It is not the abundance of wine or the roasting of meat that makes the joy of the festivals, but the good hope and the belief that the god is present in his kindness and graciously accepts what is offered (Moralia 1102A).

1.2.5. The Temple of Artemis at Ephesus The cult of Artemis functioned with a substantial variety of officers and functionaries who maintained the cult.108 This structure was compatible with the understanding of the importance of ritual: The secrets of religion consisted of a knowledge of the ritual proper to each occasion; the knowledge, that is, of the art of keeping the human inhabitants of the city on good terms with its divine members. Every public act was accompanied by a sacrifice, and all sacrifices must be performed in exactly the right way. The sacrificial hymns must be rightly sung; the omens must be taken, the purificatory processions conducted, exactly in the received manner, or the gods would not answer and bless. The whole life and happiness of the State depended on the proper performance of these necessary duties (Warde Fowler 1963: 116).

The inscriptions evidence the numerous functionaries surrounding the cult: The Ιεροκήρυξ, έπιθυμίατρο?, σπονδαύλη?, Ιεροσαλπίκτη? (C/G 2983); the συνέδριον των χρυσοφόρων (SEG 31 [1981] 957); the γεραιόν άκροβατών τη? 'Αρτέμιδος- (Bull. épig. 1952.168); and, among many others, two rather rare mentionings of the άρχιστόλο? (SEG 15 [1958] 71) who presumably kept the sacred garments, and the άρχιτέκτων τη? 6eoû (SEG 31 [1981] 950) whose function is not certain. All

108

For the hierarchy of priesthood, see Chapot (1902/1967: 398-399); for the numerous officers, see the list in Jessen (1905: 2760).

Artemis

69

of these participated in the festivals of the goddess and many of them in the day-to-day cult centred in the temple. The temple stood as the symbol indicating that the religion of the goddess permeated almost every facet and stratum of urban life during almost all the first three centuries of the Roman Empire (Oster 1990: 1713).

The temple was symbolic of Ephesus itself. It was a cultural icon in much the same way as the Taj Mahal, the Statue of Liberty, Big Ben, and the Sydney Harbor Bridge are icons of some modern cities and countries. As such, it served as a political statement as well as a religious and cultural icon. The temple was the symbol chosen by the Ephesians to appear on coins minted to express and seal harmony between themselves and other cities (Head 1964). Outsiders also were aware of its cultural and political symbolism. In forecasting the calamities of the pagans, the Sibylline Oracles (which possibly date from the first century CE), predict the temple will be swallowed up by an earthquake and so Ephesus shall "seek her temple which is desolate" (5.293296). Although the temple stood outside of the city, 109 occasionally its temenos included some of the city limits. Bennett rightly notes that the Ephesians themselves "looked upon their Artemision as one of the most sacred spots in the whole world" (1967: 30).' 1 0 In a pact between Sardis and Ephesus, it is stated that the sacred stone stele with the inscription of the pact was to be set up èv τω έπισηματάτω τόπω, that is, in the temple of Artemis (OGIS 437.88). Philo Byzantius could say

The expression πρό πόλεω? is quite common for temples. As the goddess, so also the temple. Artemis is called ή ττροεστώσα τ η ? πόλε ω? ήμών θεό? (Xenophon 1.11.5). The presence of the temple was a symbol of security and safety for the inhabitants of the city. A resolution of 19-23 CE refers to devotees of Demeter at Ephesus as ol irpò ττόλεω? Δημητρι,ασταί while in Hadrian's time another group are called ol πρό πόλεω? μύσται (Oster 1990: 1672, 1676). See also Annals 3.61 in which Tacitus records the Ephesian claim that Latoma supported herself by the olive tree which still stood in his day and that there she gave birth to the heavenly twins Apollo and Diana; and Pausanius 4.31.8. Pliny the Elder also speaks with respect for the ancient and enduring tradition of the temple (N.H. 14.2.9; 16.79.213). It is probably the site that was regarded as sacred rather than the temple building itself. Trajan reminds Pliny that the site of a "temple" to Claudius remained consecrated even if the building itself was in ruins (Pliny Ep. 71). Ramsay, who rightly believed in the importance of topographical studies for an understanding of the ancients (1890: 52), understood the "sacred site" concept. There was divine power in the site, which made it Ιερόν (1890: 84).

70

The Artemis Cult The temple of Artemis in Ephesus is the only house of the gods. For whoever examines it will believe that the gods exchanged the heavenly

regions of immortality to have a place upon the earth (cited in Oster 1990: 1714). 111 The temple stood in or near "a magnificent grove of all kinds of trees, of the cypress most of all" (Strabo 14.1.20) and it was beneath a tree (which could still be seen in Strabo's time) that in mythology Leto gave birth to the twins Artemis and Apollo. 112 Strabo says the grove was traversed by the river Cenchrius which was where Leto was supposed to have bathed after giving birth. So it was a sacred site indeed.113 The temple was an asylum as the inscription probably from the turn of the period indicates:

Antipater, who had been to Babylon and elsewhere, said "when I saw the house of Artemis that mounted to the clouds, those other marvels lost their brilliancy". Only Mt. Olympus could compare (9.58; 9.790). Xerxes is said to have burnt all the temples of Asia in his conquest of the region except that of Artemis at Ephesus (Strabo 14.1.20). Merkelbach posits an interesting theory that Artemis was in fact perceived as a treegoddess in Asia Minor generally and in Ephesus particularly. Naturally, a bird was her sacred animal. In some images, he claims, Artemis is perceived as having legs bound together like a tree-trunk and above her head the trunk continued. "The goddess lived in her statue as in a tree" (1978: 3). He also holds that Artemis was one of a number of gods who were "bound" or chained, and that she appears in that form in her images and on coins. Merkelbach relates a modern Turkish tale from the region which carries similar motifs and he interprets the tale as having its roots in ancient ritual. Fleischer dismisses this suggestion (1973: 77 η 1). But he does so rather too easily. Callimachus speaks of an image set up beneath an oak-tree (237-239), and archaeologists have demonstrated that the later temples were erected on the more original site of a primitive tree-shrine (Hemer 1986: 45). Leto, Artemis' mother, was represented by a wooden image, as was that of Artemis herself in ancient times. Leto's image was hung on a sacred tree (Willetts 1962: 185); Artemis had her birth under a tree; her ancient image was thought to have been made of wood; she wore an acorn chain (as Fleischer himself notes [1973: 64]); her image's legs clearly do resemble a tree trunk; and Aelian records girls dancing in her temple precincts like birds. Hemer also points out the significance of a tree as an emblem of the city or its goddess in various contexts, particularly the date-palm which "was the characteristic symbol of Artemis" on the Anatolian coinage of Ephesus and on imperial coinage (1986: 45-46). Knibbe also believes a sacred tree was fundamental to the ancient Artemis cult (1981: 73). Merkelbach may well be correct. For a suggestion that the siting of the temple was significant for other nonmythological reasons and not chance, see Scully 1979: 90-91.

Artemis

71

TÒ τέμενος· τη?Ά[ρτέμιδο?"ασυλον] πάν δσον ?σω περιβόλου' Άς 8'áv] παραβαίι/ηι, αυτός [αύτόν αΐτιάσεται] (I.Eph. V.1520)

For women in particular, to cling to the image of the goddess in the temple was to expect and demand safety and protection. For one Ephesian, at least, not even the political power of a Roman could override the sanctity of asylum in the temple. Cicero writes of a Roman quaestor of his time who was forcibly prevented, by a high-ranking Ephesian named Pericles, from removing from the temple his own slave who had taken sanctuary there (in illud asylum confugisset). Pericles was summoned to Rome for trial because of his actions of injustice (Against Verres Π. 1.33.85). Later, Plutarch says that "the goddess Artemis of Ephesus grants to debtors when they take refuge in her sanctuary protection and safety from their debts" (Moralia 828 D). Such asylum held as late as the third century CE as is demonstrated in the tale of Achilles Tatius, whose heroine finds sanctuary there. In the same novel, it is said that any slave with a complaint against her master could find refuge in the temple (7.13.3). 114 To abuse that asylum and to act violently in the temple was seen as violence against Artemis herself (Achilles Tatius 8.2.2). But there were occasions in Ephesian history when that asylum was abused even by the Ephesians themselves. With the freedom granted by Alexander in the fourth century BCE, the Ephesians took the opportunity to punish those who had taken advantage of them, and so pulled Syrphax, Pelagon and others from the temple and stoned them (Appian Anab. 1.17.12). In the Mithridatic wars, they tore away those Ί ταλίώτα? who fled to the temple for refuge and clasped onto the image of the goddess, and killed them (Appian 4.23). Ptolemy and his courtesan Eirene also fled to the temple for refuge when pursued by the Thracians. Ptolemy was killed while Eirene clung to the knockers of the temple doors, but her blood too splattered the altar (Athenaeus Deipno. 13.593). Tiberius was one Roman emperor who saw himself with the authority to alter the asylum privileges of the temple - something he threatened to do because of the abuse of the sanctuary's rights in providing aid to criminals (Tacitus Annals 3.60-61). The temple was a place of sacrifice. Evidence suggests that in its early history at least sheep, goats, and oxen comprised by far the bulk of the animals offered and most of them appear to have been young and female. The finding of lamps and water vessels in the altar area indicates the significance of water

Asylum was granted also to foreigners like Cleopatra and Ptolemy (Dio 48.24.3 and 39.16.3). Antiochus the Great, when defeated, fled with his bride to Ephesus, and presumably to the temple, for protection and asylum (Polybius 20.8).

72

The Artemis Cult

in the ritual of sacrifice and also that sacrifices were performed at night. 115 Like most things performed in the temple, sacrifices were accompanied by ritual. The sacrificial animal was decorated and led in procession up to the altar. Leading the procession were young maidens (carrying baskets which contained the sacrificial knives, axes, other utensils and incense) and the musicians, followed by the animal, then the sacrificer (normally the priest, who was not a professional but probably stood in some special relation to those sacrificing), the flute-players and the participants (Bammer, Brein and Wolff 1978: 144). 116 Outsiders could sacrifice to Artemis there, for example in thanks for protection during travel and a safe arrival, or as sacred embassies to the goddess to make the necessary sacrifices. Apparently the arrival of such sacred ambassadors (ol θεωροί) meant the cessation of judicial procedures (Achilles Tatius 7.12.3). The temple was especially sacred for virgins and maidens. In the fifth century BCE, Aristophanes wrote: ή τ ' Εφέσου μακαΐρα ττάγχρυσον ί χ α ς οίκον, έν ω κόραι σε Λυδών μεγάλω? σέβουσιν (Clouds, 598-601).

And centuries later, the novel of Xenophon indicates that the temple was the place for prayer and sacrifice to Artemis on a daily basis for maidens before marriage. Anthia, the heroine, daily carries out τήν θρησκείαν τ η ? 6eo0 (Ephesiaca 1.5.1).117 Married women were excluded from the sacred shrine under penalty of death - while men and parthenoi were permitted access (Achilles Tatius 7.13.3; Artemidorus Oneiro. 4.4). There were no sexual acts associated with Artemis in her temple. Artemidorus draws attention to "a local custom" at Ephesus which concerns the admission or otherwise of certain women into the temple. A prostitute dreamt that she entered the holy place. The result of her dream was that she was set It is easily forgotten that most ceremonies took place at night (Bremmer 1984: 278). As an example, see the description of the festival of Zeus/Serapis in Alexandria in Achilles Tatius (5.2.2); and the Kalends of December festival in Statius' Silvae 1.6.85-95. While there is no doubt that at times there were blood sacrifices in the temple of Artemis, there is some room to question whether such sacrifices were offered to Artemis. Jessen claims that none were - she received only plants and drink libations (1905: 2761). Menander's fourth century BCE brief reference to παρθένοι έλευθέροι participating in a δειπνοφορία τ ι ? of Artemis of Ephesus suggests these women took part in some kind of meat-offerings to Artemis (Κιθαριστής 93-95). But the use of τότε in the reference and its general tone imply that Menander is talking of a time before his. On the return of the lovers to Ephesus, they immediately go to the temple to offer their prayers and sacrifices to Artemis and set up an inscription dedicated to her.

Artemis

73

free and gave up her profession "for she would not enter the temple unless she were to abandon her profession" (Oneiro. 4.4). The same writer mentions a married woman (and therefore one in sexual relations) who dreamt she entered the temple and ate there. She subsequently died, since death was the penalty for such a transgression (2.12). In Achilles Tatius' novel, one of the main points of the story is to demonstrate how those devoted to Artemis - both male and female - will find her a protectress and will retain their virginity despite immense pressures to do otherwise. Melitte, the rich Ephesian heroine, implies that being kv Ιερω means there is no sex (5.21.4). Later, it is said that the temple of Artemis is not like that of Aphrodite, meaning there is no sex associated with the cult (8.10.6). In Xenophon's tale, while Anthia and Habrocomes surround their marriage preparations with sacrifices and prayers in the temple of Artemis, when they actually come to their marriage bed it is Aphrodite and Ares who appear in carvings on the bed (1.8.1). The temple was also sacred because it housed the image of the goddess. 118 There was a variety of image types, but the standard image depicted Artemis with legs tightly together, the upper arms against her body with the lower arms reaching forward. The older images were made of wood, much less than lifesize, and were comparatively simple in form and design119; later images appear to have added to the adornment of the goddess, including the "breasts" which Fleischer says were known on images at least from the fourth century BCE (1973: 123). Of interest is the Burdur stele discussed by Horsley (1992b) belonging to Pisidia. The female figure on the stele is either Artemis or the priestess of her cult. The curious point is that she is seated, which is unlike the archetypical image which depicts a standing Artemis. Horsley gives evidence for a sitting Cybele - the goddess who had close affinities with Artemis in the region - but finally rejects the possibility that it is Artemis who is represented on the stele. If the figure in the Burdur relief is in fact Artemis Ephesia, then it would highlight the necessity of understanding each cult of Artemis in its own local and setting. It also would illustrate the possibility that there were variations in the posture of Artemis. The image was central to the identity of Ephesus and remained so at least well into the third century. LiDonnici thinks the image so central that "its fortunes, appearances, and modifications paralleled those of the polis itself (1992: 395-6). Her claim would seem to be supported both by the anxiety of Demetrius (Acts 19:27) and by the calming influence of the grammateus (Acts 19:35). Miltner reports the discovery of two images which apparently had been For photographs and comments on the images of Artemis Ephesia and others, see Fleischer (1973; 1978). See Plate CXI in Fleischer (1978). See also Seltman (1952b) who believes that the sixth century BCE image of Endoios was simple and that later generations added more and more "clothing" onto the goddess.

74

The Artemis Cult

carefully buried, and even asks (somewhat romantically, but at least aware of the enduring nature of Artemis' presence in Ephesus) whether some Christians may have so buried her image "um ihm jegliche weitere Wirksamkeit auf flehende Menschenherzen zu nehmen" (1958: 104). In many festivals, statues of Artemis were cleaned, washed, oiled, crowned, dressed, and carried at the head of processions. Such actions were performed on images in order to renew the life and power of the image (Bonner 1950: 17). Not only were these images a "presence" and a reminder, but they carried the power of the being they represented. Power may also have resided in the crowns with which the Greeks adorned the heads of Artemis images (Dion. Halic. 2.22.2) since Aelian reports that a young boy touched a golden leaf which had fallen from the crown on an image of Artemis and, as a result, was punished with death as a θβοσύλη (V.H. 5.16). Access to the power of gods and benefactors was through the image. There is, however, a suggestion that this "power" was not accessible through each and every image of the divinity but only through the "official" image. This appears to be partly inferred by the grammateus in Acts 19. The images made by the guilds do not have the same "power" as that of the original image that fell down from heaven. Paul may be affecting the sale of images but the power of Artemis per se as represented in her official image, is not disturbed. Similarly, Apollonius mocks those who carry images of Demeter or Dionysos around on their bodies, thinking that they were somehow nurtured by them (Philostratus, Vit. Apoll. 5.20). The temple was the place of safety and for prayer and sacrifice to Artemis, but also in it were told the myths of Ephesus sculptured in stone, and painted on walls and ceilings. The temple was able to be "read" like a book by the common people. What MacMullen says about temples in general is true of the temple of Artemis in Ephesus: [They] must be imagined, first, as drawing the eye with a very rich display of color throughout, and second, as rewarding it with scenes and symbols full of meaning for even a stranger (1981: 31).

Myth, ritual, festival and temple were intimately related and integrated. There were at least four statues of Amazons in the temple (Pliny N.H. 34.19.53). The sculptured drums of the columns, twenty feet in circumference and six feet high, told the myths of Heracles, of Artemis, Apollo and Leto, of Theseus and Sinis, Thanatos and Hermes, Alkestis, the Nereids, of Pluto, and of Persephone (Letharby 1914, 1916). The temple also preserved Ephesus' more recent history. Pliny records that the famous artist Apelles painted Alexander the Great holding a thunderbolt, as well as a procession of the megabyzus, and an averted face of Heracles (N.H. 35.36.92-94). He also says women artists

Artemis

75

contributed to the temple images, with Timarete painting the antiquissima pictura of Artemis (35.40.147). According to Pliny, the temple was surrounded by two streams called Selinus (5.31.115). Water was necessary for rituals and sacrifices in the temple and for the ritual obligatory washings, and these streams may well have provided such, but they had other significance in the popular mind. Achilles Tatius tells the story of Rhodopis and Euthynicus who shunned marriage and were celibate out of devotion to Artemis. Aphrodite, an opponent of Artemis, caused them to fall in love and so Artemis changed Rhodopis into a waterspring and that spot became a testing place for any query about a woman's affair of love (8.12). It would appear, in fact, that the temple and its surrounds, were often the place for "cases" of love to be heard. The same novel has an lepeús hearing the case of Thersander against Clitophon, Melitte and Leucippe παρά τήν θεόν (8.9.1). In the woods that surrounded the temple was a cave which housed the Panpipes. This cave had been handed over by Pan to Artemis on the condition that no matron should enter (8.6.12). If a woman's virginity was questioned, as Leucippe's was, she was to stand in the cave. If the flutes gave out beautiful notes, the woman was indeed virginal; if there was silence or a groan, she was a liar and had lost her virginity.120 The temple was regarded as being open to all: Ικέται? Έλλεσι βαρβάρου? ελευθέροι? δούλοι? (Philostratus Ερ. 67).121 Not only did guilds associated with the temple cult work in its vicinity, but many others were occupied in its precincts either on the level of priest/priestess or as guests and visitors or as the poor who were fed and even housed there. Philostratus reports that Damianus, at the turn of the first century, generously donated a huge building - the έστιατήριον - for the poor and homeless (Vit. Soph. 2.23.2). Dining in the temple was not uncommon, in fact it had connotations of dining with the god. All festivals featured the distribution of the sacrificed food and the sharing of that food by the participants. Not to share in the eating of the sacrificial meats was a rejection of the fundamentum in the ritual and the myth. "Das gemeinsame Mahl ist im Denken der früheren Menschen schon in sich eine sakrale Zeremonie" (Merkelbach 1979: 155). Strangers and foreigners were welcome to join in the sharing of the food because this communion removed their strangeness and bonded them with the citizens of the city. These are yet further examples of the significance that mythology played, at least in the popular imagination. The novel dates from at least the third century CE. It is tempting to see parallels with Gal 3:28. It is not impossible Paul was aware of the inclusive invitation to the temple of Artemis at Ephesus. On the other hand, it needs to be remembered that all temples were expected to be open to all visitors for prayers and/or sacrifices. This was also the case with the temple of Jerusalem, although there was a time when some Jews threatened to remove this right from foreigners (Josephus Wars 2.414).

76

The Artemis Cult

Anyone who refused to join in remained ξένο? and suspect. The question of Christians' participation in such sacred meals was a burning one (1 Cor 8-10) not only for its theological repercussions but also and probably more importantly, its social implications. Finally, the temple served in some ways as the offices of "the Public Service" of Ephesus, although the political influence of the temple vis-a-vis that of the forum of the city proper was never constant. It has already been mentioned that citizenship was awarded and inscribed by priests of the temple and in the temple's precincts. But books and other works of art were deposited in the temple. So the writings of Heraclitus were placed there (Diog. Laert. 9.6) as was the novel of Apollonius of Tyre (ch 50), and Alexander of Cythera perfected the ψαλτήριοι/ χόρδαι? in Ephesus and dedicated it in the temple (Athenaeus Deipno. 4.183c). Gothic armies destroyed the temple in about 265 CE and it never recovered its past glory. Not surprisingly, in the Acts of John it is the temple that stands for everything "pagan" in Ephesus, and it is that building which John dramatically destroys.

1.2.6. The wealth of Artemis Ovid wrote that Asia was a "land than which none other has more wealth ... Unnumbered cities and golden dwellings you will see, and temples you would say fit well their gods" (Heroides 16.177-180). Asia, and Ephesus in particular, was famed and even notorious for its wealth 122 and the temple of Artemis was "intricately tied to the economic structures of Asia" (Oster 1990: 1717) as the financial and banking pillar. Plautus in his play of the third century BCE, Baccydes, has a character from Athens who stored his gold with the priest of Artemis at Ephesus "in the very temple of Diana". That priest, Theotinus by name, was himself very wealthy - "a man who has his slippers soled with gold" (Baccydes 306-313). When Xenophon received his tithe from the booty which was meant for the gods Apollo and Artemis, he left the share for Artemis Ephesia with [the?] Megabyzus, the neokoros of Artemis at Ephesus. If anything were to happen to Xenophon, Megabyzus was to make and dedicate a suitable offering to Artemis with the money (Anab. 5.3.6). 4 Ezra 15:46-63 and the Sibylline Oracles 5 condemn the luxury and wealth of Ephesus and Asia. Heraclitus and others were also not slow to criticise its opulence and the accompanying lack of morals. Cicero often refers to Asia's lavish wealth (for example, Ep. ad Quintum Fratrem 1.1.6-9). On the other hand, a century or so later, Dio Chrysostom {Or. 31) saw the Rhodians as being far wealthier and the Ephesians less prosperous than many. This comment of Dio indicates that the wealth and prosperity of cities like Ephesus were not constant but fluctuated even quite dramatically.

Artemis

77

Caesar on two occasions prevented Romans of senatorial ranking from removing the ancient deposits (depositas antiquitus pecunias) from the temple 0Civil Wars ΠΙ.33, 105) which suggests the temple funds were susceptible to Roman claims to access. Apparently Nero at some stage plundered the temple of its wealth (Cramer 1971: 373). Aristides called it the temple ταμείον KOLVÒV 'Ασία? (Or. 42.522). According to Dio Chrysostom (Or. 31.54) large deposits of money and other valuables were placed there not only by Asians but also by other kings and people of wealth. Diogenes Laertes says that it was the responsibility of the megabyzus, the priest of Artemis, to protect the money deposited in the temple (2.51). Artemis controlled large financial estates.123 Property up the Cayster valley belonged to her, including vineyards producing sacred wine (SEG 35 [1985] 1109; 32 [1982] 1129), and she possessed quarries, pastures and salt-pans (Broughton 1938: 645). Artemis also won the right to the fisheries' tolls in the lagoons near Ephesus (Strabo 14.1.26; Broughton 1938: 535). She owned sacred deer (Strabo 14.1.29) and other sacred herds. Money was loaned on interest and Artemis took mortgages on others' property. Her temple employed money keepers and δεκαπρώτοι των προσόδων τη? κυρία? Άρτέμιδο? - those responsible for the farming out of the revenues (SEG 34 (1984) 1107); and there was a gerousia of about four hundred members (Broughton 1938: 814) who had overall control of the funds and supervised repayments on schedule (Oliver 1974; Magie 1950: 142). Inscriptions on some tombs indicate that anyone guilty of trespassing against the tombs were liable to a fine to be paid to the goddess (Oster 1990: 1719). According to Konon, the Ephesians avenged a wrong by dividing the gold, half to the wronged person and half to Artemis and Apollo (FGH Ia.26 [25].5). A first century CE inscription speaks of τό τε τη? 'Αρτέμιδος· αύτη? lepóv, ο τη? επαρχεία? όλη? εστίν κόσμο? (Oster 1990: 1720). There were those who used the temple and the cult of Artemis for their own manipulative purposes. This despite Dio Chrysostom's rhetorical question: Well, then, you don't suppose they [the Ephesians] dip into those moneys when some need arises, or even take a loan, which wouldn't appear to be such a terrible thing? I think they would sooner strip off the ornaments of the goddess before touching those moneys (Or. 31.54-55).

A decree dated 44 CE - a time very close to the time of Paul's stay in Ephesus - is concerned with the loss of revenue to the temple due to fire which gutted many houses, and to the unscrupulous practice of some officers of the

The discovery of boundary markers has given a clearer picture of the extent of Artemis' estates. See l.Eph. VII.2.3501-12 and Knibbe, Merkelbach & Meric (1979). The latter rightly state: "Artemis war eine reiche Göttin" (1979: 139).

78

The Artemis Cult

municipality who misused temple funds to celebrate any good news that came from Rome and who also sold priesthoods at public auction. It was decreed that priests were to be paid no more than one per cent of the price they paid for the priesthood at auction. Some public slaves also were reported to buy infants on the cheap and then dedicate them to the service of Artemis so that they were raised at temple expense. This implies that those dedicated to Artemis were paid from the temple revenue even though they were in private or more general employ (SEG 4 [1929] 516). Likewise all victors at games were no longer to be supported by Artemis. These and other limitations imposed on the use of temple funds indicate a considerable shake up. So, there were reforms from time to time. Possibly, the riot of Demetrius (Acts 19:25-41) took place at a time when the cult was under financial pressure and was in the process of operating under more scrupulous conditions. In the second century, Apollonius of Tyana, who gave a public oration άπό τη? κρηπίδο? του νεώ (Philostratus Vit. Apoll. 4.2), wrote to the Ephesians complimenting them on their devotion to the holy ceremonies but I do condemn the people who by night and by day share the home of the goddess, otherwise, I should not see issuing thence thieves and robbers and kidnappers and every sort of wretch or sacrilegious rascal; for your temple is just a den of robbers (Philostratus Ep. 65).

Such a comment further illustrates the close links between the cult and money as well as the fact of corruption in the temple system. The importance of money for the maintenance of the city and of the cults has been noted by MacMullen (1981: 129). In the light of the attitude of the canonical Acts towards wealth, this is not an insignificant matter. Numerous inscriptions bear testimony to the many men and women who made donations to the city and the cult. 124 Aqueducts, fountains, water canals, buildings, images, statues all meant enormous amounts of money being donated.125 It is quite understandable that at certain times, such funds and such generosity were not available and so there were fluctuations in the fortunes of the city and its cults. Cicero says that in 51 BCE the cities of Asia were under great strain and So, for example, the city honored Leucios Antonios Marcos ιτατρώι/α καΐ εύεργέτην τη? Άρτέμιδο? καΐ τη? πόλεω? (SEG 28 [1978] 856). One example among many possible is the donation in 92/3 CE of T.C1. Aristio, an asiarch. He gave money for the construction of a canal from the Cayster River into the city (I.Eph. VII.l.3217a, 3217b) and for a street fountain and a nymphaeum Cl.Eph. 11.424,424a). That can only have been a substantial donation. The donation of C.V. Salutaris in 104 which included dozens of images of silver and gold likewise was very substantial in terms of the cost involved. For the cost of statues, see Friedländer 1979: 287-296. The colossal statues cost around 2-3 talents; smaller ones about 500-3,000 drachmae. A skilled workman was paid about one drachma per day (Tomlinson 1976: 52).

Artemis

79

could not pay the poll tax (έπικεφώλια). Everyone was tired of life, he says (Letters to Atticus 5.16). Trimalchio in Petronius's Satyricon complains that the food prices are high (44). That was in Nero's time. It is possible that Paul was in Ephesus at a time when conditions were economically difficult. Festivals, the temple and its cult partly existed to attract business. 126 Marriages meant sacrifices in the temple and they brought income; the temple estates were rented out; festivals meant sacrifices. Since an ox for sacrifice could cost anything up to five months labor (MacMullen 1981: 129), it is not surprising that from time to time, depending on the finances of the city, the cultic sacrifices experienced a decline. An inscription of the second or third century CE in Smyrna, but referring to "ancestral law" states that the 365 animals required for sacrifices on customary days were to be provided by the prytanis at his (in this case) own expense. 127 Oliver claims that from about 200 Β CE till about 100 CE the sanctuary declined in wealth and also lost some of its independence over against the city. An inscription of 180-192 CE is a decree of the gerousia stating that in the time of Lysimachos the gerousia was to give to each member of the synedrion money from common funds for the feasts and sacrifices to Artemis but the custom had been neglected due to shortage of funds. It was seen as time to revive the custom (Oliver 1975: 97-99).

1.2.7. The survival and decline of Artemis Oster maintains that despite all the changes in the political and social culture of Ephesus, Artemis adapted and maintained her status and power in Ephesus for at least a millennium: There was no other Graeco-Roman metropolis in the Empire whose 'body, soul and spirit' could so belong to a particular deity as did Ephesus to her patron goddess Artemis (1990: 1728).

The Artemis cult was an attractive and satisfying form of religion: It offered stability, with a goddess whose credibility had stood the test of time and whose fame reached well beyond the city of Ephesus itself and into remarkably far flung places. 128 Pausanius writes in the late second century: Demetrius the silverworker of Acts 19 is concerned by the loss of business brought about by the message of Paul. This inscription is given in full in New Docs 4 (1987) 106. It illustrates the laws which applied to the sacrifices; the authority and rights of the various participants; and the penalties for malpractice. For the widespread nature of the cult of Artemis Ephesia (Acts 19:27) see New Docs 4 (1987) 79-80 which includes Rome, southern France, north-east Spain, Caesarea

80

The Artemis Cult But all cities worship Artemis of Ephesus and individuals hold her in honor above all the gods. The reason, in my view, is the renown of the Amazons who traditionally dedicated the image, also the extreme antiquity of this sanctuary. Three other points as well have contributed to her renown, the size of the temple, surpassing all buildings among men, the eminence of

the city of the Ephesians, and the renown of the goddess who dwells

there (4.31.8). The edict of 162-64 farther indicates the widespread nature of the cult: Since the goddess Artemis, leader of our city, is honored not only in her own homeland (èv τ η έαυτη? ττατρίδι) which she has made the most illustrious of all cities through her divine nature (διά τ η ? Ιδία? θειότητο?) but also among Greeks and also barbarians, the result is that everywhere (πανταχού) her shrines and sanctuaries have been established, and temples have been founded for her and altars dedicated to her because of the visible manifestations (έπιφανεΐα?) effected by her.

Artemis had stood supremely not only over against the introduction of others gods into the city but also above the introduction of the imperial cult. At best, the imperial cult stood along side Artemis - it certainly never replaced her, a fact which the Roman emperors knew only too well. Strabo relates that it was an Ephesian who told Alexander tactfully that it was inappropriate for a god to dedicate offerings to a god when Alexander wished to have a statue of himself dedicated in Ephesus (14.1.22). In 40 CE, Gaius wished to establish a temenos for the worship of himself as emperor in Asia Minor. He decided on Miletus, and, according to Dio, he chose that city because Augustus was already honored at Pergamum, Smyrna honored Tiberius, and Ephesus was ruled out because Artemis was already honored there (Dio 59.28.1). The significant point is, of course, that Pergamum and Smyrna both honored Roman emperors and so Gaius cannot move in there, but Ephesus is denied him not because of any Roman emperor already being worshipped there, but because of Artemis. Tacitus reports similarly concerning the wish of Tiberius to erect a temple for himself at Ephesus but could not because of the Artemis cult there (Annals 4.15.5). Early in the third century Caracalla agreed to grant Ephesus its third neokoros title, not in his name but in that of Artemis the goddess most powerful in her appearances, so that it may not be from me that you enjoy the honor of a temple but from your respect to the goddess (Price 1984: 73). 1 2 9

Maritima. Fleischer (1973) indicates over fifty Anatolian cities which had Artemis Ephesia minted on their coins. Note also that in Syria there has been found an inscription: μεγάλη τύχη "Ρώμη? καΙ Εφέσου (Mellor 1975: 59) - an indication of the high status of Ephesus.

Artemis

81

So strong was Artemis' claim on Ephesus and vice-versa. The evidence is consistent that in the period 50-150 CE the cult did well without periods of significant decline. At the end of the first century, Hemer acknowledges, "the power of paganism in this city was certainly great" (1986: 41). Fox records a certain Dionysodorus early in the second century spending large sums of his own money repairing altars through Ephesus and honoring the cults of the gods (1986: 201). The inscriptions of 104 CE honoring Salutaris; the honoring of Hadrian in 129 "for his unsurpassed gifts to Artemis: he granted the goddess rights over inheritances and deposits and her own laws" (Lewis 1974: 17); and the decree of the proconsul in 162-4 declaring the whole month of Artemis to be holy, indicate that in the second century Artemis' support went from strength to strength and she was known throughout the world for her goodness and for the success she had brought to Ephesus, her neokoros. When the literary evidence of Pausanius and Aristides, and probably the novel of Xenophon, is added with the inscriptions, the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of Artemis' health in that century. The evidence of the Acts of John indicates that Artemis was still the major obstacle for Christians in Ephesus and that she dominated the city. So John prays: "O God ... until this day hast been set at nought in the city of the Ephesians" (A.J. 41) and the Acts can be dated no earlier than mid second century, and probably later. Schäferdieck sees "no compelling reasons" for dating them before the third century (1974: 215). The third century (its earliest possible dating) inscription praising a priestess of Artemis for "having restored all the mysteries of the goddess and rendered them in accordance with ancient custom" in Ephesus (l.Eph. VII. 1.3059) may suggest some decline had occurred, but the possibility that the priestess so acted after three to five years decline is just as real as that of her acting after a far longer period. The third century CE novel of Achilles Tatius depicts an Artemis who alone can save and is trustworthy; and on alliance coins it is still Artemis in this century who symbolises Ephesus (Head 1964: 72,73). Other coins of the same period have the Roman emperor on one side and Artemis on the reverse. Saffrey claims rightly that Christianity had still brought no changes in the third century, and it seems as though the state of pagan worship remained unchanged until near the end of the fourth century (1986: 199).

Friedländer also emphasises the "indestructible" vitality of the gods and their ability to withstand any challenge from Christians until the fourth century (1979: 110, 120, 145). Fourth or fifth century inscriptions suggest Artemis was still seen as a rival cult even if Christians were claiming victory. The conversion of the apostate

82

The Artemis Cult

Julian to paganism in the mid fourth century was partly due to the influence of Maximilian of Ephesus, which suggests that Ephesus was still actively pagan, even though Julian's attempts to restore the old religions against Christianity generally failed (Foss 1979: 32). In 348 CE, Prudentius claims "the huntress maid resigned Ephesus to thee [Christ]" (11.495). Very early in the fifth century, Chrysostom claims to have removed the power of Diana (reading Chrysostomos in Epheso Artemida enudavit, instead of Chrysostomos in Epheso artem Midae nudavit. PG 65.832; Tierney 1929: 452). In the same century, Paulinus of Nola claims victory for the Christians over Artemis: "Diana, too, has fled from Ephesus, for John has thrust her out" (Poem 19). But Isidore of Pelusium wrote to Hierax in the same century regarding certain relics which the pagans had exhumed in the temple of Artemis of Ephesus and worshipped (PG 78.217c Ep.1.55). Then even as late as the sixth century, John of Ephesus claims he converted thousands and overcame the power of idols (et cum milia multa in territorio huius urbis ab errore idolorum cultus conversa essent. Historiae 3.125; Trombley 1985: 329). Bowersock puts it clearly: "John appeared to bear witness to a surprisingly vigorous paganism in Asia Minor over three centuries after Constantine" (1990: 2). The evidence is quite conclusive that for at least three centuries of the Christian era, Artemis remained a dominant feature of Ephesian life. Gainsaying the older view of Lily Taylor based on a misreading of an inscription, Oster maintains the pagan sources make clear that the religion of Artemis at Ephesus was still a strong and vital force in the city of Ephesus long after Christianity arrived (1976: 29).

He gives two reasons for her survival: she was a personal god; and she served as a culturally integrative force (29).130 The Ephesians themselves would have added: her antiquity and her power to protect, to save, and to bless.

1

M i l t n e r notes that archaeologists have found a statue of Artemis broken into three pieces but still lying within the temple. He asks why the statue had not been carried out and burnt for useful chalk or smashed into smaller pieces: Diese drei Stücke waren einst ein Götterbild, und zwar nicht irgendeines der vielen in der Antike verehrten Gottheiten, sondern das Bild der grossen, die Stadt der Ephesier seit Anbeginn schützenden und schirmenden Artemis selbst (1958: 100). In the neighboring room of Hestia, carefully embedded in the ground was another statue of Artemis. Why so carefully buried? Miltner says that even when Christianity was firmly established, the image of Artemis remained significant. He concludes, rather romatically, Die Stadt der grossen Artemis was christlich geworden, obgleich die Göttin, immer noch als Schutzgeist geachtet, über die Gemeinde wachte (107).

The Thesis of Arnold

83

1.3. The Thesis of Arnold 1.3.1. Artemis as evil and demonic Recently, some biblical scholars have seen Artemis as a threat to and opponent of Christianity and have (therefore?) depicted her in "evil" terms. For example, Arnold creates a picture of Artemis as dangerous, threatening, and of the underworld, equated with Hecate (1989: 22-24, 168-169).131 He refers to her as demonic and evil (67, 69) and says "Artemis and the other so-called gods are animated by evil spiritual 'powers"' (68) and Artemis was "a goddess of the underworld and intimately linked with magical practices" (168). Arnold relies heavily on magical papyri from Egypt for his identification of Artemis with Hecate, Selene and Ereschigal as goddess of the underworld. A basic and major difficulty with Arnold's understanding of Artemis is a lack of evidence. He claims that Paul - and Christians converted from their pagan past - thought of Artemis as 'evil' and 'demonic'. There is no evidence that any Ephesians portrayed Artemis in those terms. The question as to whether "Paul" did (in the letter, Ephesians) will be examined later. Arnold implies that because Artemis was of the underworld, she evoked fear and dread and was therefore "evil". In Greek and presumably also Ephesian thought, a goddess of the underworld or of the dead did not evoke such emotions. To the contrary, such goddesses, by their association with the mystery of death - which is part of the cycle of life - were honored and highly regarded. For people who lived constantly on the narrow line between life and death, and who did not hide disease or sickness away in institutions, death and burial was a planting. As Slater says: Tombs were ... not only final resting places but also sources of a kind of life, and were provided with attributes reminiscent of impregnation, pregnancy, and birth (1968: 77).

The honorable dead were to be remembered and so their "power" maintained among the living. The deities of the dead were also to be evoked and honored for their power - a power not just of death but of life. Not surprisingly, such powers were frequently associated with the feminine. Slater observes that death and birth share an element of mystery, and it is the woman's power over the latter that causes her to be associated with the former (1968: 78).

Artemis was the goddess who came to protect women in childbirth - she had the power of life. Childbirth was "dangerous" in many senses, not the least Wernicke claims that Hecate originally was nothing more than a Beiname of Artemis, but he gives no example of such linkage at any time in Ephesus (1895: 1356).

84

The Artemis Cult

being the real danger of death for either mother or child, or both. Even if Artemis were associated with the underworld, in Ephesian eyes that did not make her "evil" or to be feared. She was a goddess, and the calling on her presence at childbirth was because death was always close at hand. Death and birth - the mysteries of the female - were understandably the mystery of Artemis. She was present in dangerous and life-threatening circumstances to help and to save. According to Seltman, Artemis "was said to make death easy for them [women]" (1952: 131). Ramsay reasonably suggests that the shrines placed in graves were indicators that the dead had returned to the mother who bore them (1900: 126).132 The linkage of Artemis with Hecate is found in some magic chants of Egypt, but what is true of Artemis in Egypt is by no means necessarily true of Artemis in Ephesus. 133 At Ephesus itself, there is nothing to indicate any identification of Artemis and Hecate. The evidence claimed by Arnold in Bonner's work is far from clear and decisive. The single Artemis object is by Bonner's own admission not clearly an amulet (1950: 262) and the others claimed by Arnold as support (1989: 181 η 101) are all of Hecate alone with no Artemis representation on them. Pliny does say Hecate's image was in templo Dianae post aedem (N.H. 36.4.32), as Arnold points out (1989: 23), but its precise location is unclear and the presence of an image does not indicate identification or even association. Other gods, not identifiable with Artemis nor even associated with her, were also represented in one form or another in the temple's precincts. Arnold's thesis rests on the claim that Paul wrote Ephesians (a debatable claim in itself) because he knew that the Christians there "lived in genuine dread of the demonic realm" (1989: 171). But his evidence is weak. The inscriptional and literary evidence certainly suggests no "dread" of Artemis among the non-Christian "believers" in Artemis - the contrary, she is savior, helper, protector, and hearer of prayers, claims which seem to be made out of experience and with confidence in her. This Arnold acknowledges. And yet he insists that Artemis is demonic, a term which he understands to be equated There is only slight evidence from Ephesus that Artemis had any thing to do with death and with the underworld. One inscription tells of someone establishing Άρτέμιδι συνπόσιόν τε βροτοί? καΐ χάριν è? θάνατον ώστε ΐ ν α ι θείων καΐ νόμων Ιίστορα? ήδομένου? (Bull. épig. 1951: 606). This is a true if painful and frustrating fact! Minucius Felix was already aware of the distinctions in Artemis from region to region. He says that the Ephesian Artemis was distinguished from the huntress Artemis in the short chiton and also from the Artemis who was multi-headed and frightened people at crossroads (Octavian 21.225). For Artemis in Egyptian magic, see PGM IV. 2721-25. Betz claims that in this passage Artemis is identified with Hecate and Persophone and Selene (1986: 332) but there is room to question that. They are certainly mentioned together, but association need not indicate identification.

The Thesis of Arnold

85

with evil (51). He suggests that Acts 19 shows Artemis' reputation for being "demonic" (30), and claims that "later Christian writers certainly had no problem in linking Artemis with the evil demonic realm" (27). Acts 19 will be discussed later. Suffice it for now to say that there is little to suggest Luke thought of Artemis as demonic in the evil sense of the word. Arnold's evidence from the Acts of Andrew, and the fifth century Ephesian inscription claiming victory of the cross over the "demon" Artemis, is weak. The former do not speak of Ephesus at all, and the latter inscription reads: [Δαίμίονο? 'Αρτέμιδος καθελών άπατήλιου eîfioç Δημέα? άτρεκίη? άνθετο σήμα τόδε, εΙδώλων έλατήρα θεόν σταυρόν τε γερέρων, νι,κοφόρον Χριστού σύνβολον ¿θάνατον.

It is misleading to translate δαίμων as "demonic" (Horsley 1992a: 108) because that word carries for many modern readers, like Arnold, ideas of "evil". It is possible that by the fifth century it did carry such ideas for Christians, but it need not be so and certainly had a far broader meaning in the first or second centuries when demons could be either good or evil. The third century (if not later) novel of Achilles Tatius has a character call out:"Ω θεοί καΐ δαίμονες - (3.10.1). Clement of Alexandria speaks of ol μεγάλοι δαίμονες - and lists what are commonly called "the gods", including Artemis (Exhortation 2.43). Dio Chrysostom gives a discourse on the "demons" and infers that they are guiding or guarding spirits, a "principle" outside of ones' self (Or. 25). It is probably best to leave the word untranslated. The inscription calls Artemis α π α τ ή λ ι ο ν , translated by Horsley as "deceitful". The word may mean "cunning, guileful", but even if taken in the sense that Horsley legitimately understands it, the force of άπατήλιον is not "evil" but rather a goddess who Christians (or at least one of them, Demeas) now see to have misled or deceived them into believing she was what they now believed Christ to be. That this is the sense of the inscription is confirmed by the phrase άτρεκίη? ... σήμα which means "a sign of what is strictly or exactly true". Demeas is saying: "We thought Artemis to be true, but now we know that the real truth (άτρεκία) is in Christ and we have been under a cunning, even deceitful, goddess. We see her as deceitful because of what we know about Christ". This is not the same as saying the Christian Demeas thought Artemis to be satanic or evil. So the above inscription may mean no more than that the victory of the cross over Artemis is that of a greater power, principle, or demon. It is not insignificant that the word "symbol" (σύνβολον) is used. In other words, the The inscription is found in a number of scholarly works. Horsley dates it early in the fifth century (1992a: 108).

86

The Artemis Cult

Cross is a "power", possibly understood by some Ephesians in a similar sense to some Athenians understanding of άνάστασί? (Acts 17:32). Demeas believed the cross was the power of God in Christ which was far greater and stronger than that of Artemis. It was not unknown for Rhodians to erase the name of a god or benefactor and replace it with another (Dio Chrysostom Or. 31.9), a practice (probably also of Christians) known at Ephesus (Horsley 1992a: 108), and by doing so they were saying that the power of the god previously honored had now been replaced by a greater and superior power. The words of the above inscription do not necessarily imply that the Christians regarded Artemis as evil or "demonic".135 Arnold is curiously, but apparently, oblivious to this distinction - for him, demonic means Satanic (1989: 67-68). Arnold also cites the Acts of John, where Artemis is called δαίμων, but again, it need not be understood as "evil". John asks rhetorically που ή δύναμις- τη? δαίμονος·; (A.J. 43). Two chapters earlier, John claims that at the Name of God (a "power"-laden term) every idol, every demon (πα? δαίμων), every power (πάσα δύναμι?) and every unclean nature flees. In these passages, there is no reason to understand the "demon" as evil but rather as "a spirit-power". The same Acts, by the way, acknowledge Artemis' status and authority in Ephesus prior to John's arrival: πάντε? ύμεΐ? θεάν λέγετε 2χειν τήν "Αρτεμιν (Α./. 39.11-12). 1.3.2. Artemis, Ephesus, and magic 136 A profound interest in supernatural power and the demonic realm gripped the inhabitants of the hellenistic world in the first century AD.

So Arnold begins his book (1989: 5) in which he argues that Ephesus was a major centre of magic practices. This is not so easily substantiated; nor can the claim that Artemis was closely linked with magical practices. Little evidence is provided by Arnold, as he acknowledges (1989: 14), but he explains the lack is due to climactic conditions which did not enhance the prospects of papyri surviving as they did in Egypt. Otherwise "we could doubtless have numerous documents of magic from the Asian capital" (1989: 16). Instead, data from Egypt are used on the assumption that they were similar to what would have 135

136

As noted earlier, Miltner suggests that the reason for two Artemis statues being found carefully buried and intact was that Christians did not completely reject the protective power of Artemis over the city (1958: 107). Wood writes of a Christian sarcophagus "of peculiar character" he discovered which had the cross enveloped by a female figure (1879: 332). It is possible that this also was a "Christianizing" of Artemis, since Artemis was not unknown in relation to death. Wood posits a fourth century dating. The term "magic" is problematic, something that Arnold appears not to acknowledge. He uses the term with its modern and popular connotations.

The Thesis of Arnold

87

been at Ephesus. This surely is shaky evidence leading to a risky conclusion. While Ephesus had links with Egypt, there is almost no evidence, even in Acts 19, to support the claim that it was a city "preoccupied with magic" (D. Williams, 1985/90: 332). Apart from the γράμματα, 137 there is little to suggest Ephesus was "notorious for its association with magic" (Massyngberde Ford 1975: 389) or that it was the "headquarters of the magical arts ... a hotbed of cults and superstitions" (Swete 1922: 23; likewise, Beckwith 1922: 447). Ephesus was well known for its Ephesia grommata,138 writings which served as power-giving amulets and charms. The story is told of the Ephesian wrestler who wore these charms around his ankles during a bout and successfully threw his opponent. When it was discovered he was wearing them and they were subsequently removed, the Ephesian was defeated easily (Suda 2.3864). Bonner says the words were sewn into little bags and hung around the neck or the shoulders, and were known in Crete already in the fourth century BCE (1950: 5). Achilles Tatius has his heroine going into the fields to cull certain herbs by moonlight in order to work some love-magic (5.26.12). But in that novel, it is Eros and Aphrodite who are the gods of love, not Artemis. In Achilles Tatius' novel, Melitte, an Ephesian woman, does not have the love-magic required and goes to Thessalian women for it (5.22.2). A Menander play of many centuries earlier does mention a man speaking Ephesian spells for those who marry ( Έ φ έ σ ι α TOL? γ α μ ο ί σ ι ν ... άλεξιφάρμακα [Frag. "The Slave", 37IK]), but there is nothing in the fragment to suggest that the spells come from the magical powers of Artemis. These are clearly all examples of popular practice rather than evidence of "magic" associated with any official cult such as that of Artemis. The evidence suggests Horsley's conclusion concerning Ephesus is correct: We need not doubt that magic flourished there; but to argue partly on the basis of the Ephesia grommata, that its presence at Ephesus was more marked than in other places seems to overstate the case; at best, it is unprovable (1992a: 131).

As for the Artemis-magic links, one could justifiably conclude with McCown that Artemis was "not by nature primarily a goddess of magic" (1923: 130).139 Bonner says Artemis scarcely appears on amulets "except on a 137

138 139

Such grommata were not unique to Ephesus, it appears. There were also Φοινικήια γράμματα which the Lydians and Ionians borrowed - at least so the Cretans claimed (FGH 476, F3. Part 3 B: 436). The Epistle of Aristeas refers to 'Ιουδαϊκά γράμματα (121). See Kuhnert (1905: 2771-2773). Like Arnold, McCown blames Ephesian climate for the lack of evidence for magic. He also thinks that "the might of the Ephesian Artemis lay behind the ancient formula [ΈφεσΙα γράμματα], but more than that, the power also of primitive magic

88

The Artemis Cult

few stones that are thought to represent the Artemis of Ephesus" but even these are very doubtful (1950: 40, 262). The best evidence is that the Έφέσια γράμματα may have been on some images of Artemis. Eustathius says that the words were inscribed on the feet, girdle and crown of Artemis' image (Horn. Od. 1864.20). To that Jessen replies: zweifellos gab es wohl Artemisbildchen mit solchen Inschriften. Aber das Hauptkultbild, für welches die Worte stefavnh and zwvnh kaum passen, trug schwerlich diese Inschrift; dem alten Wesen der Artemis E[phesia] steht dieser Annex von später Zauberei wohl fern (1905: 2761).

Arnold's claim that the love-charm cited in PGM 78 "well illustrateli] the magical power of Artemis" (1989: 22) is mistaken. Artemis' name does not appear in the charm and the "crude drawing of the Ephesian Artemis" (22) under the text is so crude as to be open to other interpretations. The oracle of Apollo (Graf 1992) states that an Artemis from Ephesus has the power to break the power of the μάγο?. Rather than having powers of magic herself, that particular Artemis (probably Soteira) certainly protects against those who have such powers. Arnold shows his colors when he claims "the heathen cults were the instruments of the kingdom of Satan" (1989: 67) and that Artemis and other gods were "animated by evil spirit 'powers'" (1989: 68). This is biased and anachronistic language. Patently, the Ephesians did not view Artemis in this light - the evidence is positive and favorable in her direction.140 It could be reasonably argued on the basis of evidence available that Jews had as great an impact on magic in Ephesus as Artemis. Rather significantly, Acts records Paul confounding the powers of Jewish exorcists in Ephesus (19:13-16) and not, as in the later Acts of John, the magical powers of Artemis. If the Artemis-magic links were as strong as Arnold maintains, and if Ephesus was such a centre of magic (with backing of Artemis implied), then it is curious that Luke should report an incident with Jewish rather than gentile practitioners.

140

and religion" (1923: 128,130). Farrar claims that "one of the titles of Artemis was Magos" (n.d.: 26 η 1) but unfortunately provides no evidence. In any case, the word magos here probably is meant to be understood as "the wise one" rather than "the magician". Arnold wishes to identify Artemis with the "powers" that Paul encourages the Ephesians to fight against, but it is an identificationthat struggles to be maintained by evidence, as will be shown in the fo llowing chapter. What would interest Arnold is a Christian magic-amulet found in Ephesus! It has St. Michael on the one side "als Herr der himmlischen Heerscharen" representing the good, and on the reverse stands "das Böse, der Höllendämon in der Gestalt der Hystera" (Langmann 1978: 60). The reverse pictures many of the powers Arnold is interested in, but does not include Artemis.

The Thesis of Arnold

89

1.3.3. Artemis in other recent biblical scholarship Mussies also wishes to create an understanding of an Artemis who was detested by Jew and Christian alike. He argues (citing Seiterle) that the "breasts" of the goddess are in fact male testicles, on the basis of the hagiographical writing, The Passion of St Symphorianus. This saint was martyred about 180 CE at Autun (France) because he laughed at the statue of the Mother Goddess which was covered with human testicles. Mussies suggests the testicles surrounding Artemis at Ephesus were those of bulls offered to her, all of which must have been "shocking to the more observant Jews and Christians" (1990: 183). The suggestion is ingenious but lacks evidence. Autun is far from Ephesus; Artemis of Ephesus in the second century CE is not as closely related to the Mother Goddess as Mussies believes; the significance of bulls in association with Artemis Ephesia is not evidenced; the "breasts" can be interpreted more reasonably in other ways (see Fleischer, 1973). LiDonnici is right to express concern at "the astonishingly rapid and widespread dissemination of Seiterle's interpretation, despite the small support on which it rests"141 and she has good ground for suspecting that such an interpretation is due to modern and western constructions of gender (1992: 393). Mussies also attempts to create an abhorrent picture of Artemis: This vindictive deity with her offensive exterior and castrated priests cannot but have been one of the more disgusting instances of idolatry both to Jews and to Christians (1990: 185).

The evidence simply does not support his picture. There is no evidence from Jewish or Christian sources remotely suggesting that either group found Artemis offensive or disgusting. As evidence of Artemis' vindictiveness, Mussies refers to Achilles Tatius' novel where Leucippe says to her Ephesian assailant: Aren't you afraid of your own Artemis. Do you mean to molest a virgin in the city of the Virgin? Lady, where are your arrows? (6.21.2.)

The point of this episode is that Artemis protects her virgins (even those from other parts of the world) who are being attacked, and her vengeance is on those men who violate virgins. Vindicator, yes; vindictive, no. The context of Pokorny (1992: 38) refers favorably to Seiterle's suggestion although he acknowledges that it probably was not so in Paul's time. Most recently, Gill claims that the appendages where either breasts or bulls' testicles (1994: 88). There are far more likely options. The trunk of a certain date palm below its fronds looks remarkably like the "breasts" of the Artemis images.

90

The Artemis Cult

the words cited by Mussies make it clear that Artemis is the protector, the savior, the reliable: It is terrible that Thersander should dare attack Achilles in the presence of Artemis and cause blood to flow in her presence. Other places may have blood sacrifices and cover Artemis with blood, but not the Ephesian Artemis (8.1). 142 Gritz is another who paints a picture of a disgusting Artemis, and in doing so betrays her Christian bias. In the first place, she, like Mussies, insists on equating Artemis with the Phrygian and early Anatolian Great Mother Goddess, Cybele (1991: 31). While in the distant past there undoubtedly was a connection, by the time of the first Christian century, such connections are difficult to trace. Bennett is correct in stating that the Ephesian Artemis "is in her cult image neither Cybele ... nor hellenistic Artemis" (1967: 35) and that is true also of the cult itself. Farnell writes: "The direct and clear recognition in the earlier literature of Artemis and Cybele as kindred deities appears but rarely" (1896: 2.473). The cult of Cybele was present in Ephesus for a long period of time (evidence exists of its presence in the fifth century BC and also in the late Hellenistic period, and times in between). But the archaeological evidence clearly depicts a Cybele different from Artemis even if not totally unrelated to her. Cybele's hair is often long and tressed, and in her right hand she invariably holds a patera and in her left a tympanum. The inscriptions refer to her often as "mother" and as "Phrygian" (Vermaseren 1987: 184-203). These features do not appear with Artemis. Gritz refers to "the Ephesian mystery cult of Cybele-Artemis" (1991: 39). This is inaccurate on two counts: There is no evidence of Artemis and Cybele combined or associated in a cult at Ephesus; Artemis is not to be identified with Cybele. She was the daughter of Leto (= Cybele), but, if anything, the daughter replaced the mother (Bammer 1982: 83), but such replacement did not mean a continuation of the Cybele cult under

Tatian refers to gory blood sacrifices to Artemis at Rome (ch 29). But it is obvious that Tatian is not speaking of the Asian let alone Ephesian Artemis. Likewise when he refers to Artemis as "poisoner" (ch 8) this is neither said as an accusation, nor is it said of the oriental or Asian Artemis but the Greek. This distinction between the forms of Artemis in various regions is conveniently ignored by Mussies. This is again demonstrated in his reference to Marcus Minucius Felix who speaking of Diana says "as goddess at Ephesus she is encumbered with many distended breasts". But she is clearly distinguished from the Diana "as goddess of the Crossroads, a terrifying sight with triple head and many hands" (22.5). The ancient writer makes a distinction which Mussies fails to see. Artemis Ephesia is not always to be equated with the Artemis of other areas. Gill suffers from the same problem in claiming that the bulls' testicles were hung on the image of Artemis after the sacrifice (1994: 88). There has to be some doubt that any blood sacrifices were offered to Artemis in Ephesus (Jessen 1905: 2761).

The Thesis of Arnold

91

her daughter's name. Deissmann notes the association of Zeus, Cybele and Attis on the slopes of the Panajir Dagh just outside of Ephesus and says: Although the Artemis cult really had a strong inner relation to the Cybele cult, this rock sanctuary of the "Mountain-Mother" suggests that there was a strong primitive contrast between it and the Artemis cult which was refined under Greek influence (1930: 340).

Horsley, however, has shown there was at some stages and in some areas a close connection between Cybele and Artemis in Asia drawing attention to the following facts: that statues of Cybele are known to have the breast ornamentation familiar with Artemis Ephesia; that identical inscriptions have been found for both Cybele and Artemis; that the Artemision at Ephesus may have been dedicated to Cybele prior to the sixth century CE; that the two goddesses have been associated in the same temple at Sardis; that both are associated on coins with lions instead of stags; that the Mother goddess and Artemis Peergaia are linked in a dedication of 120CE at Perge; and a votive relief, probably from Kula, and of the third century CE, distinctly portrays a seated Cybele, yet the subscription reads ΔΗΜΗΤΡΑ - ΑΡΤΕΜΙΣ - Η NI KH. This evidence allows Horsley to conclude that Cybele and Artemis were associated and assimilated, even if not in identical forms everywhere (1992b: 137-139). In terms of the relief in Burdur, Horsley himself admits the Artemis-Cybele link is not convincing - he ultimately prefers to see the relief as depicting not the goddess at all, but the priest and his daughter/successor (1992b: 141). But that aside, a connection between Artemis and Cybele still needs to be established at Ephesus; and more importantly, the connection in any case does not allow Gritz to use reports of orgiastic, primitive nature-worship associated with Cybele in order to describe the Artemis cult (1991: 38). She is bent on portraying the cult as orgiastic143 although she acknowledges the evidence

Gritz is certainly not the only one to associate Artemis with orgiastic activities. Farnell sees affinities of Artemis with Cybele but is aware of a problem: "Despite orgiastic elements ... [the Artemis cult] is of an austere character" (1896: 481). Farnell gives no evidence for the orgiastic nature of the cult apart from her supposed identification with Cybele. Wernicke maintains that the cult was orgiastic and wild and cites the Hymn of Timothy as evidence (1895: 1373). In that hymn, Artemis is described as μαινάδα θυάδα φοιβάδα λυσσάδα. But these words do not imply or suggest orgiastic behavior. To be enthusiastic, under the influence of the goddess, does not necessarily imply orgiastic or sexual activity. Wernicke acknowledges that the Greek Artemis cult shows no signs of orgiastic behavior (1353). Jessen claims that the Athenian Greeks had a wild and orgiastic Artemis as reflected in the Hymn, but in Ephesus "dachte man anders" (1905: 2770).

92

The Artemis Cult

which suggests many women associated with Artemis practiced strict almost ascetic sexual behavior. Despite the "breasts" which have been an obsession of modern scholars (and which probably are not breasts), 144 Artemis is rarely depicted as a goddess of fertility. Oster points out "the deafening silence from all the primary sources" (1990: 1726) of any fertility association with Artemis, and also states quite pertinently that in the Roman period, the Artemis cult was "not characterized by base sensualism or a focus upon sexuality and fertility" (1992: 548). 1 4 5 She protects youths of both sexes, protects mothers in childbirth, but is not thanked for her gift of fertility nor are there known prayers to her asking for fertility. If the romantic novels are any indication, the third century CE Artemis, far from being a goddess of fertility is the defender of chastity, virginity and faithfulness. In fact, Christians may well have found themselves a kindred spirit in Artemis in their advocacy of ascetic sexual behavior. If there were problems of orgiastic behavior among the Ephesians then such behavior came from the Dionysian festivals and rituals and not from the Artemis cult. Gritz forgets that Artemis did not have total sway in Ephesus. LiDonnici has helped put to rest the orgiastic understanding of Artemis Ephesia by pointing to the distinction that Greeks made between wives and sexuality - a distinction not made by most modern Westerners. Artemis was perceived as the wife/virgin of Ephesus not as the sexual partner, fecund and Howard Marshall says "the festival of Artemis was celebrated with wild orgies and carousing" (1980: 317) but gives no evidence. Fee describes the Artemis cult as "an Oriental fertility rite, with sensuous and orgiastic practices" (1984/88: 40) also with no supporting evidence. The opinion of Ramsay that the image of Artemis is not "human" at all but related to bees (1927: 82) is quite reasonable. He says that Artemis is the queen-bee - "her image makes this plain", and that the "breasts" are in fact ova. The bee features strongly on very many Ephesian coins and on Artemis images. It has been suggested that the very name of the city is from the Lydian language and means "place of many bees" (Elderkin 1939: 206). The symbolic understanding of animals was very strong in ancient religious cults and Artemis is constantly portrayed with animal companionship, stag especially and lions occasionally. Hogarth claimed that the many-breasted Artemis certainly was not original. He went even further to write: So far as the evidence goes there is no proof that this feature (polymastoid) of the cult-type was represented before the Christian era; and it is quite possible that never at any time was it so represented in the Artemision at Ephesus itself (1908: 330). Seltman agrees that the original Artemis at least was not polymastoid, and that the "breasts" are in fact dates (1952: 41-42). For a history of interpretations of the "breasts", see Fleischer (1973: 74-88). It is a point that still needs to be made. While Trebilco says that connections between Artemis and fertility are unfounded because "none of our evidence suggests that fertility was thought to be a prominent characteristic of Artemis at this time" (1994: 320), in the very same volume Gill writes that Artemis was "closer to a fertility goddess" than to a huntress (1994: 88).

The Thesis of Arnold

93

fertile. Artemis is the protector of the family, the provider of political and social stability, and not the goddess of orgiastic behavior or fertility (1992:409-411). Gritz says Artemis' breasts "made her look grotesque" (38) and so she writes of the "hideous Ephesian Artemis" (39). This is surprising language in modern scholarship,146 particularly when no evidence is presented from any sources reflecting that this is how the cult followers thought of Artemis, or even that Christians or Jews thought of Artemis in this way. The evidence instead is that Artemis was thought of as "beautiful" 147 and as one to be approached with confidence and not with fear. The story told in Historia Apollonii Regis Tyri illustrates the beauty of Artemis in the eyes of her followers and of others. In a dream, Apollonius is told to travel to Ephesus and to go into the temple of Diana with his daughter. His wife, unbeknown to Apollonius who presumes her to be dead, has been holding a position of preeminence among the priests of Artemis and she enters the temple clothed in royal clothes and surrounded by servants. Apollonius and his children fall at her feet tantus enint splendor pulchritudinis eius emanabat, ut ipsam esse putarent deam Dianam (Historia 48). Such beauty is not compatible with the "hideous" and "grotesque" Artemis Gritz attempts to portray. Marcus Barth also assumes biased and incomplete notions of Artemis. He sees her as a "symbol of Women's Liberation: fulfillment of womanhood by motherhood without male assistance" and as representing "woman's glory at the price of the castration of males (which indeed was a prerequisite of her priests)" (1984: 16). Apart from the anachronistic language, this view fails to understand that Artemis was not a goddess of females only but also of men, especially young men, and that Artemis was not an anti-male/husband goddess at all but a god who came to protect women in childbirth and to see them safely across the liminal experience of virginity to matronhood. The castration of her priests (whether that requirement persisted is unknown) was more an antisexual demand than an anti-male one. Matrons were not allowed into her sanctuary, men and parthenoi were. Priests were to represent the virginity not

Such a view was not uncommon among Christian scholars who saw Christianity as coming into a dark and evil world, and who had strong evolutionary understandings of cultures and their religions. Christian Europeans (even Englishmen!) were on the top rung of the evolutionary ladder. Farrar describes Artemis as having "monstrous breasts", and her idol as being "awful" and full of "ugliness and uncouthness" (14); her festivals were marked by "detestable dances", "orgiastic worship", the "vilest debaucheries" and performed by "disgraceful fanatics" (15). Anthia is addressed as Artemis when she is dressed in all her beauty, and because she was a beautiful young woman herself. In the novel of Achilles Tatius, Leucippe is obviously a very beautiful woman, but even she is μετά τήν "Αρτεμιν (7.15.2). Aristides calls Apollo and Artemis "extraordinary beauties" (Or, 37.18).

94

Some other cults

only of the goddess but also of those whom she especially protected - the virgins, both male and female. Barth fails to mention that the priestesses of Artemis were also virginal. So in recent years, biblical scholarship may have been misled in its understanding of Artemis. Her cult was certainly not in a state of decline in the first century, nor was it threatened by Paul and other Christians, as will be shown. There is no ground for any claims that Artemis was evil and demonic, nor is there any evidence linking her closely with magical practises. The claims linking Artemis with sexual orgies and such like also cannot be substantiated. In fact, it would appear that the opposite was the case and there was almost a sexual asceticism associated with her, with her temple and with her cult in general.

2. Aspects of some other cults in Ephesus 2.1. The Imperial Cult Any attempt to set the cultic context in which the first Christian communities in Ephesus lived cannot omit the imperial cult. However, a detailed examination of the cult is not possible here. Paul himself and Acts say nothing explicitly about it. In addition, there is little information available concerning the relation between emperor and Ephesus in the time of Claudius and Nero, when Paul would have been in Ephesus. Finally, the much-debated questions as to how the cult is to be understood and how it was structured is detail beyond the scope of this book. 1 4 8 The cult, especially in its provincial form, had quite some significance for the community of Revelation. Once again, the problem of dating is significant. If the book is dated around 69-71 (as some recent scholarship suggests) 149 then it is written at a time of uncertainty and confusion in Roman imperialism. Vitellius was declared emperor in 69 with no support from the east whose allegiance instead was to Vespasian who was declared emperor in the same year. Civil war in Italy, bloodshed and destruction in Rome itself, made the period ripe for apocalyptic messages. How the events of 69-70 affected Ephesus is not possible to determine. However, if Revelation is dated in the Domitianic period, then the circumstances are different. From his time onwards significant development occurred both in terms of Ephesus' role in Asia and in the status of the emperor in that province. That development had serious consequences for some Christian communities. It is a period discussed very 148

149

Price (1984) and Friesen (1993) examine the issues and provide new directions for scholarship. See, for example, Hughes ( 1990: 10).

The Imperial Cult

95

briefly in this section, partly to illustrate that the years between Paul and the John of Revelation might have seen significant changes in a city, and partly to highlight the contrast and variation in Christian approaches to Rome which to some degree may have been dependent on the changes brought about within Ephesus itself. This brief section is not concerned with the cult as cult, that is, in its temples, priesthoods, sacrifices and other ceremonies. It is rather to draw attention to the "presence" or "power" of the emperor in the city, a presence that Paul and Ephesian Christians must have noticed and could not have ignored. 2.2.1. A brief history of Rome-Ephesus relations 150 In the third century BCE, Rome took over from Egypt the control of Asia Minor. In 191-190 BCE a large naval and military contingent from Rome settled in the region (Dörner 1981: 86), and by about 130 BCE there were some 80,000 "Italians" in the Roman province (Broughton 1975: 543) by which time the province was called Asia by the Romans (Strabo 13.4.2). Ionians had the reputation of siding with the strongest (Pausanius 6.3.15; Bean 1966: 163), but things were not always smooth between Ephesus and Rome. Ephesus was involved in the first Mithridatic war of 89-84 BCE - one of those wars which proved disastrous for Asia Minor with the loss of possibly 300,000 lives (Broughton 1975: 516). As an example of the antipathy felt by some Ephesians towards the Italians in their city during these wars, the Ephesians tore away those Italians who fled for refuge to the temple of Artemis (the protector of all who fled to her) and who clasped to her image. They proceeded to slaughter them (Appian 12.4.23). Appian makes it clear that Sulla's time at Ephesus saw an anti-Roman sentiment which was punished by Sulla with heavy taxation (9.61-62). The acquisition by Romans of large properties in both the cities and villages of Asia after these wars and into the Julio-Claudian period made many Romans unpopular (Broughton 1934: 217-218). Cicero reports that collecting grazing dues (scriptum) from the Ephesians was far from a smooth and easy operation (Ep. adfam. 13.65.1), and the publicani generally were greedy and unpopular in the region (Broughton 1934: 209). Under these circumstances, it may not be surprising that the "appearances" in Asia of imposters claiming to be Drusus (son of Tiberius) and later Nero, attracted considerable followings in the province (Dio 58.25; 66.19). Julius Caesar restored Ephesian confidence in Rome by twice saving the Artemis temple boundaries from confiscation by Pompey (Caesar Civil Wars

The important work of Magie (1950) and Chapot (1967) and the articles of Macro and Knibbe & Alzinger in ANRW (1980) and of Broughton (1975) are very helpful on this subject.

96

Some other cults

ΙΠ. 33, 105). Antony made Ephesus his headquarters in 33 BCE, and although he confiscated certain objects and revenues from Ephesus, these were restored to the city and her goddess by Augustus (Broughton 1975: 711) by whose time relations with Rome were based on mutual respect. Rome had much to gain from controlling and remaining benevolent towards Asia since it was so rich in trade and economic resources and "so crammed with wealth and luxury" (Cicero, Pro Muñera 20), as well as strategically being crucial in links to the east and to countries such as Egypt. 151 And since Ephesus was one of the major cities of Asia - if not the capital (it was the place of the consul's residence, having been elevated above Pergamon by Octavian) 152 - good relations with that city were also of strategic importance to Rome. While on the one hand Rome ruled Asia, like other provinces, through its local political structures and representatives, it also left the province and Ephesus in no doubt as to where the power lay. 153 Cicero regarded it a great honor to be magistrate in Asia which was "the noblest of our provinces" (Three Books, 310), even though he had a low opinion of Greeks generally and despised the Asiatic/Greek way of conducting meetings and making decisions (Pro Fiacco 9, 10, 17). Rome regarded Asia highly enough to appoint excellent men as magistrates particularly in the time from about 60 to 100 CE (Magie 1950:1. 577-8). One method of maintaining some form of control was to settle Romans in the lands of the conquered, and that method was also adopted in Asia. Romans settled in Ephesus as bankers, traders and business people. 154 It has already been noted that Romans were often referred to as κάτοικοι. Ramsay records many inscriptions at Apameia (which lay some five hundred kilometres to the east of Ephesus) beginning: ή βουλή καΐ ό δήμο? καΐ ol κάτοικοι)ντε? 'Ρωμαίοι (1897: 461-7). This suggests they were not necessarily Apameian citizens. Broughton maintains they did not share in civic life (1935: 23) but 151

152

153

154

Polybius wrote that Ephesus was regarded as a favorite site as a citadel (άκρόττολι?) both by land and by sea against attack. The kings of Asia, he says, thought of Ephesus as a favorite port of defence against Europe (18.40a). For the economic advantages of Asia in agriculture, industry, vineyards, mining and seafoods, see Broughton 1938/1975: 602-645. Ephesus was also the port at which consuls arrived from Rome en route further eastwards (Cicero Ep.adfam. 13.79.1; 15.3.2). While Rome clearly demonstrated in the provinces that she had the power, of interest is the advice given by Pliny the Younger to a colleague about to begin his consulship in Greece. Included in the advice is to remember that he is to be dealing with free men; that the local gods are to be respected because of their age and ancient glory; that the cities themselves also are to be respected for their past. He is not be hard or domineering because affection (amor) is more effective than fear (timor). Finally, the consul is to maintain order and freedom (Letters 8.24). Cicero at one stage had 2.2 million sesterces "in cistophoro " (local Asiatic coinage) held in Asia, possibly in Ephesus itself (Ep. ad Attic. 11.1).

The Imperial Cult

97

Ramsay gives an Ephesian inscription beginning: ό δήμο? καΐ oi συμπολιτευόμενοι (1927: 200) which may suggest otherwise.155 Kasher states that Romans in Greek cities like Ephesus formed politeumata possibly consisting of veterans carrying out military functions. There were also Roman groups (έποικήσει?) which occupied cities and the chorae. They were not citizens but maintained their own courts, religion and way of life (1985: 183). Dio records that Augustus in 29 BCE allowed the dedication of a shrine to Dea Roma and to Divus Iulius in Ephesus for the use of the resident Romans (51.20.6). So it appears that there were Roman inhabitants of Ephesus and its surrounds who were not Ephesian citizens but had their own communal administration. On the other hand, it can be noted that the names of some of the tribes in the structure of Ephesian citizenship obviously reflect the presence and status of Rome: φυλή Σεβαστή with its chiliastys Νερωνιεί?; and later, the φυλή Άδριανή with a chiliastys called φιλορώμαιοι (Pierart 1985: 175). By about the beginning of the third century CE, Ephesus had been granted for the third time the much-desired and vaunted honor of being νεωκόρο? for the temple(s) of the imperial cult (τρί? νεωκόρο? των Σεβαστών, I.Eph. ΙΙΙ.647). Not surprisingly, the δήμο? of Ephesus is frequently referred to in inscriptions as ό νεωκόρο? δήμο? φιλοσεβαστό? {I.Eph. 27). But the imperial cult was as much a provincial cult of Asia as it was of Ephesus specifically, and it appears that there is little evidence for this provincial cult being central in Ephesian life much before 89 CE, when the first imperial provincial temple was built in Ephesus.156 Important figures in this provincial cult were the asiarchs and archiereis,157 with the grammateis also involved. These figures are important for an understanding of the Demetrius episode in Acts 19:21-45, but there is little evidence that the asiarchs and the grammateus mentioned in that episode had

Bowersock also mentions other inscriptions referring to ' Ρ ω μ α ί ο ι συμπολιτευόμενοι (1965: 64 n 3) from other areas. Of interest in this discussion is the inscription: ή κατοικία των iv Ίεραπόλει κατοικοϋντων 'Ιουδαίων (IGRR 4.834). The terminology suggests Jews in Hierapolis had similar social and political status as Romans had in the provinces. See Friesen (1993). His work is important for this provincial cult which belongs to Flavian times. Pergamon and Smyrna had been granted imperial temples before Ephesus. Ephesian men (and some women) only feature with some predominance as άρχιερει? in the provincial cult in the second century CE. For the relation between these two in past scholarship and a revision or correction of that view see Friesen (1993: 76-113) and Kearsley (1986). It appears that the two offices are not identical. Hort already pointed out that the άρχιερεύ? τη? 'Ασία? was not to be confused with local highpriests or with the Asiarchs (1877: 147).

98

Some other cults

any sacerdotal or imperial cultic responsibility (Friesen 1993: 93; Kearsley 1986: 55). 158 2.1.2. The imperial cult in Ephesus159 Bickerman (1972) rightly warns that there was no such thing as "the imperial cult" in the Roman Empire (in the sense that there was a universal, common, static cult of the emperor), and that one can only study the local phenomenon of the cult. 160 In Ephesus, the period from Augustus to Antoninus Pius, at least, saw the cult maintain a consistency of significance within the city. It was probably at its highest in the period from Domitian to Hadrian, a period in which extensive building dominated Ephesus, and a time renowned for its imperial games and other beneficiaries. However, while there is evidence that Rome certainly had a say in the affairs of Ephesus161 and even in the matters concerning Artemis and the structures around her cult,162 there is little evidence of an interventional imperial "presence" in Ephesus in the period 40-60 CE, the period during which Paul lived in the city. Rome allowed the provincials to think that they had autonomy, and the elite families of cities like Ephesus fell into line and played along with the charade. Honoring of the ruler began in Ephesus already in the time of Alexander who was honored by the city in his own time. Even before Alexander, high honor was given to Philip, his father, since, according to Arrian, his statue stood in the temple of Artemis (AnabAAl.9). Diodorus claims that Philip was a σύνναο? of Artemis and had his likeness carried in procession as σύνθρονο? of 158

159

160

161

162

It is not always clear whether the grammateus holds that office within the boule or the demos, and whether he is also grammateus of Asia. It would seem that the grammateus-asiarch relation was closer and stronger than the grammateus lasiarcharchiereus link. At least for the first century, the asiarch was not a priest (Kearsley 1987: 55). On the other hand, some grammateis are known to have also been archiereis (L'Annee épig. 1971.456,458). For the issues in scholarly discussions on the cult generally see the editions of den Boer (1972), and Wlosok (1978). Botha (1988) provides a good summary and clear position. For the cult in Ephesus more particularly, see Price (1984) and Friesen (1993). Even recently, Mellor can still complain that the local basis for the imperial cult has been neglected. He thinks this aspect important partly because "the core of ancient religion is not a coherent system of belief ... but ritual ... [and] to ignore specific local ritual is to eviscerate ancient religious experience" (1992: 387). For example, Rome revised the customs laws in Ephesus in 62 CE (SEG [1989] 1180.1-7). See I.Eph. Ia.l8a. 5-19, 18b. 1-20. The inscription is dated 44 CE. Millar mentions the influence of Rome on the Artemis asylum and on the fate of her sacred lands and revenues, and concludes that "it is clear that much in the religious life of the cities depended on the emperors and was liable to be referred to them" (1977:449).

The Imperial Cult

99

the Olympian gods (16.92, 95). Honor was still accorded Alexander in Ephesus as late as the time of Trajan (Habicht 1970: 19). Lysimachus was another Macedonian ruler from the past (third century BCE) still honored in Ephesus in 104 CE when C. Vibius Salutaris set up a golden statue of him in the theatre as part of his large gift to Ephesus (Habicht 1970: 41).163 The cult of Roma was established in Ephesus at least by 134 BCE (Mellor 1975: 57; Weinstock 1971: 403) but it had merged into the imperial cult by early in the second century CE. The Ephesians honored Julius Caesar in 48 BCE as TÒV άπό 'Apeo? και Άφροδειτη? θεόν έπιφανη καΐ κοινόν του ανθρωπίνου βιοΰ σωτήρα {I.Eph. 11.251). Octavian, in addressing the Ephesians in about 38 BCE, called himself αυτοκράτωρ καΐσαρ θεού 'Ιουλίου υΙο? (SEG 32 [1982] 1128). Antony was ritually welcomed into Ephesus as the new Dionysus (Plutarch Antony 24.3) - an indication that the line between gods and human leaders was thinly drawn. Augustus was commonly entitled on coins divi j[ilius\ and in bilingual inscriptions as θεοΰ υΙό? {I.Eph. 404; Ehrenberg and Jones 1955: 58, 72). Oster says the designation had been in vogue in Asia for several generations by the time of Trajan who is also so honored, and in fact "it had become a standard part of the vocabularly and rhetoric of the religio-political milieu of primitive Christianity in Roman Asia" (1982b: 144). In 129 CE, Hadrian was honored by the city as its founder and savior (κτίστη? καί σωτήρ) because of the gifts he gave to Artemis - rights over inheritances and deposits, and her own laws (SIG 839).164 Ephesian imperial inscriptions from between 30 and 70 CE rarely hint at any official cult of the emperor in the city. Caligula is addressed in one inscription as θεό? ... επιφανή (CIG 2957) but so was Augustus before him and the divine title, used of many emperors, does not necessarily imply a cult. One inscription of Neronic date honors T. Pedoukaios Kanax as φιλοσεβαστό? πρυτανι? καί ίερεύ? τη? "Ρώμη? (SEG 39 [1989] 1179), which implies his status was in the cult of Roma specifically, although the line between Roma and emperor was thin. It was common for associations to dedicate monuments to the emperor, and so a fishing cartel erects a stele inscribed: "To Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus (Σεβαστώ) Germanicus the Imperator (τω αύτοκράτορι)" but the dedication is not limited to Nero - it includes his mother and wife, the demos of the Romans and that of the Ephesians.165 Rogers (1991) discusses the political signifícance of the whole gift very well. One wonders what the Romans might have made of Ephesians continuing to honor Greek rulers from their past; and what the Ephesians may have been wishing to say to Rome by such honoring. The acknowledgement by nearly all Roman emperors of the status and rights of Artemis has been already noted. It is a clear indication of that goddess' enduring and dominant status in Ephesus. Nero, on providing funds for the repair of an Ephesian aqueduct, dedicated the work to Artemis (SEG 34 [1984] 1122). For the text in translation and discussion see Horsley (1992a).

100

Some other cults

In the imperial period, Augustus brought stability and peace which made Asia Minor free from attack and without a Roman legion in the province (Price 1984: 54). In 9 BCE, Asians adopted the Augustan calendar beginning the year on his birthday (OGIS 458), a day celebrated annually as a "holy day" and on which "the hymnodists of all Asia" sung praises to him and erected monuments in his honor (Magie 1950: 1.543).166 Augustus was honored as savior and benefactor and that honor survived long after his death in 14 CE. A basilica was dedicated to Artemis and to Augustus and Tiberius in the years 4-14 CE. Price notes that priests of Augustus were found in at least 34 different cities of Asia Minor but priests of Tiberius, his successor, in only 11, with diminishing numbers after him (1984: 58). The trend was towards the collective cult of the sebastoi and away from the cult of the individual emperor: "individual rule was still important but it gained legitimation as a part of the collective institution" (58). It would also appear that the significant building of temples as part of the cult reached its peak in the period 100-150 and had virtually died out by the end of the third century (59). It has been a debated question in scholarship as to whether the Auguste urn belonged within the Artemision or within the boundaries of the city itself. Engelmann reasonably suggests that in fact there were two official Augustea (1993: 279). Price observes that although there is no record of any emperor visiting Asia Minor in the whole of the first century CE (1984: 1), "the visual expression of the emperor was incorporated into the regular life of the communities through public celebrations" (3). These celebrations were part of the cult and included sacrifices made several times through the year. There were processions which involved all the citizens who actively participated by wearing garlands and crowns and singing paeans of honor. The procession which bore the images donated by C.Vibius Salutaris in 104 CE included images of Divus Augustus, Roma, and Sebaste (Scott 1931: 104).167 Vespasian showed favoritism to Ephesus in declaring the city's right to άγώνα lepòv άγεΐν in honor of the Ephesian astrologer, Barbillus, hence the Barbilla games celebrated in Ephesus - a right given at first only to that city (Dio 65.9.2). Loyalty to Rome was rewarded. In 138 CE, Antoninus Pius declared a five day spectacle for his birthday as a gift to Ephesus and granted one denarius for every citizen who was invited to the sacrifices (Lewis 1974: 13).

166

The Mishnah forbad Jews to do business with gentiles, especially lending or borrowing money, for three days before festivals celebrating the emperor's birthday,

167

But Rogers argues with some persuasion that this very procession initiated in 104 CE was performed to claim the city for Greek culture against Roman cultural influence and domination (1991: 140-142). The persistence of Artemis' status as depicted on coins and in inscriptions supports this thought. For all that, the imperial cult was strong at the end of the first century and grew stronger in the following century.

anniversary and death (Abod. Zarah 1:1-3).

The Imperial Cult

101

Such imperial festivals, while controlled and led by citizens, provided other residents with opportunities for spectacles, for enjoyment, for celebrations and for hand-outs from citizens who wished to increase their honor within the city. It was not only festivals that kept the emperor before the eyes of the Ephesians: The impact of the emperor on the city is marked not only by temples and altars, but also by the provision of special important space in the porticoes on the main squares of the cities (Price 1984: 140).

Price has convincingly argued that the imperial cult was part of the plan of Augustus to reshape cities. So in Ephesus, an imperial temple was sited between the prytaneum and the council house at the centre of civic affairs (145). By the end of the second century, Ephesus had four imperial temples, a monumental Antonine altar, imperial porticoes, four gymnasia associated with the imperial cult and numerous statues and images in strategic positions throughout the city. The triple-arched gate and the entrance to the public square of Ephesus carried strong impressions of imperial presence and power; and fountains and aqueducts donated by emperors simply added to the beneficiary and grand nature of Roman imperial presence in "the thoroughly Roman city" (Vermeule 1968: 16-24). The Trajan fountain occupied an area of 5.5 χ 12 metres and stood approximately two storeys high. It features a globe resting at the foot of Trajan. Oster rightly interprets that feature as part of the visual propaganda in Ephesus that Rome ruled the world (Oster 1982b). It would appear that such buildings and structures were predominantly second century productions. Again it must be said that so much of Ephesian archaeology and inscriptional data illustrating the overt demonstration of Roman imperial presence and power derive from the time of Domitian onwards and data from Neronic or Claudian times are sparse. The importance and significance of the numismatic evidence must also be noted as a way of creating the "presence" of the emperor in Ephesus. In about 30 BCE, Octavian established a mint at Ephesus with the chief emphasis being on Victoria (= Νίκη) in order to emphasise the pax Romana and its universal power (Sutherland 1978: 29). Oster says the imperial coins "promulgated a civil-religion theology" (1982a: 216)168 and Sutherland states that for Augustus they were an "emphatic and unmistakable statement of the new basis of [his] power" (1978: 43). Augustus was called κτίστη? on his coins, a word Grant The expression could be misleading. All "religion" was "civil" and everything civil could not be divorced from religion. As Fears writes: "... political mythology was bound inextricably to the collective worship of the community; of necessity, political ideology was formulated in theological terms and expressed through cult and ritual" (1980: 101). What the Romans promulgated through coins was the pervasive "power" of Rome and her emperor. Such power was represented in divine terms.

102

Some other cults

understands to be the equivalent of θεό?, as is Σεβαστό? (Grant 1946: 356, 360-61). Grant also sees the propaganda achieved through coins, and believes that the youthful image of emperors was "an appeal made to the emotions by emphasis as the universal and superhuman efficacy of the Sebastos rather than on his individual traits" (358). The attempt of Domitian to be depicted in relation to Zeus Olympios on coins minted in Ephesus also appears to be in line with this propaganda. The Olympian Zeus was an unprecedented figure in Ephesian coinage (Friesen 1993: 119). On that coin, Zeus is seated on a throne with a scepter in his left hand and the temple statue of the Ephesian Artemis in his right. This would appear to be a blatant suggestion that Domitian's power equalled that of Zeus, the father of the gods (including Artemis), and that even Artemis (= Ephesus) was subsumed under his rule. Around the image of Zeus is the inscription: Zeus- 'Ολύμπιο? ΈφεσΙων which was another attempt by Domitian to make the Ephesians understand where the real power in the city lay - not with Artemis, but with Zeus, that is, with Domitian. As Friesen says: "This represents a major reorganization of the city's divine hierarchy" (1993: 119). 169 The significance of the images on coins for Jews (and some Christians, therefore) can be glimpsed from Mark 12:13-17 and parallels, and from the Seer's advice in Revelation to avoid social, political and economic contact with "Babylon" (14:9-11; 18:4-5). Yarbro Collins suggests this advocates an avoidance of Roman coins (1984: 126) but such avoidance would have been impossible if Jews/Christians were to have carried on their daily business. Price is right in insisting that the imperial cult was religious and not merely political, emphasizing that the distinctions are later Christian dichotomies (1984: 15-17). Such insistence needs to be made to counterbalance views such as Ramsay's which sees the cult as a sham religion, a matter of outward show ... almost devoid of power over the heart and will ... utterly unable to satisfy the religious needs and cravings of human nature (1904: 123).

In a similar vein, Scott says it was not a religious cult of the upper classes but of political and practical value (1932: 165). Mellor likewise thinks "[i]t was cult based on political, rather than religious, experience" (1975: 16) and Arnold also: "The establishment of the Imperial cult was essentially political. It enhanced the status of the city and usually its more influential citizens" (1989: 37). Nock regards the cult as an honoring of the emperor but never a

Hadrian also appears in Ephesian inscriptions as Zeus Olympios (SEG 33 [1983] 943).

The Imperial Cult

103

worshipping of him. 170 Bickerman follows Nock: It is not worship in the full sense but homage (1972: 6 η 4). Bickerman maintains that the ruler was worshipped qua benefactor and not qua ruler (26). This may be a valid distinction, but the problem is whether such distinctions were made by the Ephesians themselves. 171 Price's comment "The Greek gods are powers, not persons" (1984b: 94) is helpful. The gods "empower" the ruler. Habicht understands that the emperors were not gods in the Olympian sense (and so not universal or eternal) but they manifested the divine potential in certain situations (1970: 198). Dio Chrysostom seems to have thought along these lines. He saw the king as modelling Zeus, the chief and first of the gods, and refers to Heracles (who in mythology borders between god and hero) as being entrusted by Zeus with the kingship over all humankind. Then, presumably speaking to Trajan, he says: "Even to this day, Heracles continues this work and you have in him a helper and protector of your government" (Disc. I. 84). This would suggest that the emperor qua emperor had access to the "power" of Heracles. Even clearer is Epictetus who wrote that the Caesar and anything that controls wealth, consulships, tribuneships, and praetorships "are our masters" (κύριοι ήμών είναι) and then adds significantly: "For this reason we even worship these persons as gods; for we consider that τό £χον έξουσίαν τη? μεγίστη? ωφελεία? θειόν έστιν" (4.1.60-61). The absence of the person of the emperor in Asia Minor in the first century CE suggests that the honor given to him was not so much personal as due to his status. He was θεό? σεβαστό?. In addition, the "universal" nature of the emperor's beneficence may have helped him to be viewed more like a god than a local ruler or hero. It is hardly likely that emperors as diverse as Augustus and Caligula could both be designated at Ephesus as θεός έπιφανη καΐ κοινό? του άθρωπίνου βιοΰ σωτηρ (the latter, CIG 2957) unless this was understood in the light of their common status as emperor. The fact that emperor-worship was not enforced by Rome but voluntarily taken on by Ephesus 172 would also suggest it was not directed so much at the person of the emperor as to his "power". In cities like Ephesus, this power was "re-presented" by the Roman consul of the province (who was also highly honored). An Athenian hymn to For an interesting collection of essays on this topic and this point in particular, see den Boer (1975). Friesen implies they were not. He believes that the decisive question is not the emperor's "divine nature", but rather their "godlike authority in the context of a specific hierarchical relationship" (1993: 150). "It cannot be argued that the cult of the Sebastoi was a foreign import foisted upon the province of Asia by a tyrant seeking divine glory. The cult depended very little on the individual emperor for its vitality. Rather, the cult was an integral part of developments in Ephesus and in the province of Asia" (Friesen 1993: 166).

104

Some other cults

Demetrius Poliorcetes says that other gods keep to themselves and do not listen, either because they do not exist or because they pay no attention to humans. But the power of Rome is present among the Athenians, not as a statue but as something real, and therefore prayers for peace are directed towards the governor because he has the power (Athenaeus Deipno. 6.253). The Ephesians pragmatically had to come to terms with this power which shaped their life at its basic, daily roots. The graffito in a house at Ephesus: Ρώμα ή παμβασίλαα τό σόν κράτο? οΰποτ' όλειται suggests this (I.Eph. 11.599).173 Momigliano claims the cult was an attempt to make sense of "an otherwise incomprehensible intrusion of authority into their world" (1986: 184). It is not surprising that such a power be honored as "god", regardless of the human being occupying the position. The only way people like the Ephesians knew how to come to terms with outside powers was to adopt them into their own system of powers, that is, of gods. The desire and competition to have an imperial temple may well reflect the desire to have some control of this power, to be able to "locate" it within the city. Temples, altars, massive images, sacrifices (to as well as on behalf of the emperor), festivals, games, and honors all indicate that to all intents and purposes the Ephesians regarded the emperor as a god. Possibly the maxim expresses it best: τ( θεόξ·; τό κρατούν τί βασιλεύ?; Ισόθεο? (Price 1984b: 95).

In this question as to whether or not the emperors were thought of as gods, modern Westerners do not share the "native mentality" of the Graeco-Roman world which handled differently what are seemingly contradictions and logical inconsistencies. As Botha rightly says concerning the divinity or otherwise of the emperor in the cult "the most difficult problems to overcome are our prejudices and modern assumptions" (1988: 88). Finally, the imperial cult at no stage dominated Ephesus to the extent that cults of other gods faded into insignificance or their temples and shrines into disuse. It was not uncommon for a person to hold positions in more than one cult, including that of the Sebastoi. So Juliane was honored in Magnesia about 58 CE as άρχιέρεια τη? 'Ασία?, στεφανηφόρο?, γυμνασιάρχη, ιέρεια τη? 'Αφροδίτη?, and lépeLa τ η ? Δημήτρη? èv Έφέσω δια βίου (I.Mag. 158). Coins often featured both the emperor and Artemis, and in most inscriptions featuring both, the latter is always addressed or referred to first (for example, OGIS 496; CIG 2958). And a funerary foundation at the end of the 173

174

This graffito also points to the private dimension of Rome's power as does the presence of images of the emperor in private homes. Guilds also acknowledged their right to exist from the Roman emperor: in some it would seem that entrance fees included 100 denarii for sacrifices to Roma and the emperor (Lewis 1974: 126). The use of the neuter is interesting.

The Imperial Cult

105

first century CE has payments being made to both Artemis and to the Sebastoi (•SEG 33 [1983] 946). 2.1.3. Christians and the imperial cult in Asia Minor 175 Only a brief examination of Christian responses to the imperial cult can be given here because there are practically no data from the first century CE with which to work. The cult was strong in Asia Minor, especially in the period 80150 CE. While this period goes beyond the chronological limits of this book, it can be assumed that the seeds for Christian responses were planted earlier, just as while the cult may not have been in full bloom before 80 CE, its seeds were germinating years before. Jones claims that from the perspective of early Christianity, the worst abuse in the Roman empire was the imperial cult. Honors which should be reserved for God alone could not be bestowed upon men (1980: 1023).

It is a claim not supported by the evidence. While it is true that Christians were loathe to use the term θεό? for anyone but the One God of Israel - other gods were called δαίμονες - instead - Mellor is right to observe that, in fact, Christians did not seem overly concerned with Roma or with the ruler cult (1975: 111). The literature of the New Testament, with the exception of Revelation, is almost silent on the subject of imperial images and cultic practices. Two points are clear from modern scholarship: First, Christians were more opposed to sacrifices in general than to the imperial sacrifices in particular (Thompson 1990: 164). Secondly, "it was only exceptional that sacrifices to the emperor were demanded" (Price 1984: 221). Millar claims that there is no evidence of any general law or edict against Christians before the time of Decius(1972: 145). Yarbro Collins agrees: It is doubtful that the emperor cult was forced upon Christians at any time during the first and early second centuries, including the reigns of Domitian and Trajan (1981: 398).

Domitian has been seen as the antichrist, the persecutor of Christians and the emperor who demanded dominus et deus status and worship from his realm. More recent scholarship has softened this image and there is evidence suggesting he was more concerned with eusebeia and the honoring of the gods than with claiming for himself the status of dominus et deus. That Domitian 175

See DeSilva (1991).

106

Some other cults

demanded to be acknowledged as such is not supported by any official source or inscription (Viscusi 1973; Thompson 1990: 105). Magie states that in the provinces of Asia Minor, there is "little evidence of cruelty on the part of Domitian or even of exaggerated pretensions to grandeur" and he notes that the provincial governors under Domitian were of excellent character (1950: 1.5778).

While this may be true, DeSilva provides a caveat to this "defence" of Domitian. He believes that Domitian did value "cultic language as an expression of social and political relationships" and "encouraged and even prescribed cultic formulations for political communications to and from those in lower echelons" (1991: 199). While evidence for official imperial persecution is difficult to find, it is more easily verified that Christians encountered opposition from local inhabitants who feared that Christian non-involvement in the cults would endanger the well-being of their society and of nature itself (Thompson 1990: 130; Yarbro Collins 1981: 396).176 The New Testament evidence would support that view. In Acts, it is the locals - either Jewish or gentile -who report Paul and his supporters to the authorities (for example, 13:50; 14:4-5; 14:19). At Ephesus, the officials (asiarchs and the grammateis) are depicted as defending or tolerating Paul, while the crowds feel their economic and cultic resources are under threat (Acts 19:23-41). In the Gospels, Jesus warns his followers that they will be handed over to the authorities (for example, Luke 12:11, Mark 13:11, Matt 10:17-18). Early in the second century, Pliny (who had not yet attended a trial of Christians) has to decide what to do with charges brought against Christians by informers (Ep. 10.69); Polycarp was handed up to the authorities by locals (Martyrdom of Polycarp); Tacitus (himself governor of Asia about 112-113 CE) reports it was the crowds who called "Christians" by that name (Annals 15.44); and Athenagoras writes that "the mob is at enmity with us for our name's sake", and speaks of "lying informers" (Embassy 1; 2). In the Acts of Paul it is Thamyris who brings Paul before the magistrate with three complaints: Paul is a stranger; he teaches strange things like "maidens should not marry"; and he is a Christian (2.16). In this matter of Christian relations with the emperor, it is not insignificant that Paul appealed to Rome; and in the second century, other Christians likewise appealed to the emperor for justice and understanding. It would be strange for Christians to appeal to the very one who was purported to be their greatest and most dreaded oppressor. The charges Christians faced and answered in their second-century apologies are not of being anti-emperor but of being godless, cannibalistic, and sexually immoral (for example, Athenagoras Colwell seems to have understood things that way when he says "popular opposition preceded and underlay all official opposition to Christianity in the first two centuries and a half' (1939/70: 53).

The Imperial Cult

107

Embassy 3). Athenagoras says Christians welcome the emperor to investigate "our opinions, our zealous obedience towards you and your house and government" (3). Christians apparently carried on the practice and attitude of most Jews. 1 7 7 They knew, partly from bitter experience, that "opposition to an important part of the machine of the socially ordered world view is dangerous" (DeSilva 1991: 192). Most Jews trusted Rome to "do the right thing" whenever they felt their rights were threatened in their locality. According to Josephus, Rome generally supported the Jews against the local opposition; Jews were generally exempt from imperial worship but were obligated to take the oath of allegiance on accession and at other appointed times (Ληί.18.124). They sacrificed for the emperor twice daily in the temple and more solemnly on special occasions; they dedicated synagogues in honor of emperors, and placed shields, tablets, standards and other symbols in his honor in synagogue (Scramuzza 1933: 284). Levick notes that the Sibylline Oracles XII presents Domitian as a beloved Prince of Peace (1982: 61). Most Christians apparently continued along similar lines. Paul has little to say about the emperor and nothing about any cult associated with him. He encourages the Christians of Rome to be subject to the "higher powers" (έξουσίαι ύπερεχούσαι) and he speaks of ol άρχοντες - , seeing all of these as υπό θεοί) and as a servant (διάκονο?) of God (Romans 13: 1-4). 178 First Peter 2:17 recommends honor be given to the emperor (τιμάτε τόν βασιλέα). Honor was often given in the form of statues, sacrifices, prayers - is that the kind of honor (τιμή) "Peter" could include? Timothy is encouraged to see that prayers and thanksgiving (ευχαριστία - such thanks were given to Artemis by her devotees, I.Eph. III.961) be made for "kings and all who are in high positions" (1 Tim 2:1-2). This was the attitude of Polycarp (Martyrdom of Polycarp 10.2) and was experienced by Marcus Aurelius in battle (Justin First Apology 68). Generally, the second century emperors were reasonably tolerant of Christians in Asia, at least. Trajan's advice to Pliny recommended that Christians not be hunted out (Ep. 10.96). Hadrian wrote to the proconsul of Asia that popular clamor against Christians was not enough and that Christians were to be investigated only if a clear case could be established against them in a court of law (Eusebius H.E. 4.9). Antoninus wrote to the Council of Asia that persecution only encouraged Christians in their atheism and interpreted Trajan's advice to Pliny to mean that no Christian could be charged simply for calling him/herself Christian. In fact, the accuser would be liable to penalty

177 178

And of most minority groupings. Minorities generally do not want to cause trouble in their alien but adopted homeland, and if anything, tend to be politically conservative. It is presumed that these expressions do in fact refer to Roman government.

108

Some other cults

while Christians be let off even if they were Christians in fact (Eusebius Η. E. 4.13). 2.1.4. Revelation179 It is only in Revelation that there is any suggestion that some Christians thought quite negatively towards Rome. Hemer claims that Christians were faced with a "cruel dilemma": either associate with the imperial cult or with Judaism (1986: 10). This was only a dilemma for those Christians who took the extreme line of dissociation from both Jewish and gentile groups, socially and cultically. This appears to be the line advocated by the Seer.180 The very purpose of Revelation was to "awaken and intensify Christian exclusiveness particularly vis-à-vis the imperial cult" (Yarbro Collins 1983: 399).181 Hemer states that the pressures of the imperial cult were not so strong against Christians in Ephesus mainly because it was such a strong and influential Christian centre (1986: 40). It is a debatable claim resting on the assumption of a highly successful Pauline mission - a claim discussed in a later chapter. If Revelation is a guide, what was the state of the Christian communities in Asia Minor, and in Ephesus in particular? Yarbro Collins says that they were struggling to survive physically and to establish any kind of identity. They were an extreme minority and in a very precarious position (1986: 319320).182 Moffatt believes Revelation was "addressed to tiny communities in the cities" of Asia Minor (1974: 285 η 2). They might have been tiny, but were they struggling and in a precarious position? It would seem not on the basis of Revelation. In fact, the opposite was probably the case. The Christians addressed in the letters by John have become so involved in the cultural, sociopolitical-religious life of Asia Minor that John feels he needs to call them to withdraw. It is The Seer who wants to create a ghetto because he believes his audiences have compromised. In the message to Ephesus in Revelation, there are two slight hints of the relationship between Christians at Ephesus and the imperial cult. But they are only slight hints. The first is in the reference to the Nicolaitans (2:6) whose 179

180 181

182

See especially Yarbro Collins (1984), Hemer (1986), Thompson (1990), and DeSilva (1991). Whether his readers in fact followed his advice is another matter. The Seer was probably a lone voice. Not surprisingly, a tradition describes John as "a certain Hebrew in Ephesus ... who spread a report about the seat of the empire of the Romans, saying that it would be quickly rooted out, and that the kingdom of the Romans would be given to another" (The Acts of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist John the Theologian). S.E. Johnson agrees. Christianity in the Asia of Revelation "is in desperate danger" (1975: 108).

The Imperial Cult

109

works (£ργα) the followers of the Seer hated (μισεί?). Yarbro Collins suggests that these Nicolaitans had no compunctions about banqueting in honor of Roma or the emperors (1985: 215); Hemer claims that they sacrificed to the emperor (1986: 10). But neither offers any evidence. It is possible that the name Nicolaitans was deliberately chosen by some Jews/Christians to parody the imperial cult. The emperors identified with Victoria/Νίκη 183 and the imperial cult endeavored to convey the message to the provinces that Rome ruled and conquered all; the Nicolaitans in opposition to the cult claimed the Nike of Christ and saw themselves as the "victory-people"; or, they had victory over the people, that is, over the Roman political system. If this were the case, they would hardly have participated in imperial festivals and cultic practices. If they saw themselves, like some Corinthians, to be living already in the eschatological kingdom, then eating food offered to idols may not have been against their conscience, but participating in any way in imperial festivals would have been most unlikely. 184 The other possible hint of imperial cult relations is found in 2:3. There are those who are "enduring patiently and bearing up for my name's sake". It is the phrase δια τό δνομά μου that may be the clue. Claiming the "name" (presumably that of "Christian") brought social and legal problems in both Jewish and non-Jewish environments as is known from Matt 10:22; Luke 21:12; John 15:20-21; 1 Pet 4:14, 16; Justin Dial. 39, 96; Athenagoras Embassy 2; and elsewhere. The "name" is also a significant theme in Revelation, and in that book is often related to "power" and authority. In terms of the imperial cult, Christians chose to worship the name of the Lamb and not that of the "beast". Some Ephesians were weakening in their resolve to bear and endure (2:4) even though they did not agree with those Nicolaitans who had totally "sold out" in the mind of John. Having said all this, however, the context of Rev 2:3 suggests it is not conflict with the imperial cult which the Seer has in mind, but an internal conflict of authority with lying, self-designated apostles (2:2).

NEIKH appeared on Ephesian coins especially in the period from Galba to Domitian (Karwiese 1970: 333). The νίκαι and the ώραι also appear together on Artemis images on the goddess' breastplate with a collar of seeds and grain (Wotschnitzky 1961: 211). The Apostolic Constitutions say that the Nicolaitans were "falsely so-called" (7.8). Does this mean that they were not, in the opinion of the "orthodox", the victors they claimed to be? For the early fathers' understanding of the Nicolaitans, see Charles 1922: 1.52.

110

Some other cults

2.1.5. The Letter to the Ephesians B. Harris suggests that a number of passages in this letter reflect Christians at Ephesus being under imperial pressure. He points to 4:17-24; 5:15-18; and 6:12-13 (1979: 15 η 1). Admitting that the letter belongs in the area of Asia Minor, if not to Ephesus itself, only the last passage can be reasonably understood as reflecting such pressure. The first is too general and could be applied to any minority Christian group in any "pagan" environment; the second likewise. The third has more possibility. Ephesians 6:10-20 speaks of Christians in the wrestle πρό? τά? άρχά?, πρό? τα? έξουσία?, πρό? του? κοσμοκράτορα? του σκότου τούτου, πρό? τα πνευματικά τη? ποι/ηρία? ΈΝ TOI? ΕΠΟΥΡΆΝΙΟΙ? (6:12). Arnold holds that the powers are those of Artemis and of the pagan powers of magic - he does not consider them as referring to the imperial cult (1989: 67). Mussner is more typical in thinking the pantokrator Christology of Ephesians to be against the emperor cult (1982: 747). Similarly, Faust understands 6:12 to be related to the pancosmic dominion of the emperor (1993: 449). No doubt such an interpretation is possible and even likely, but it is a very broad reference to the imperial cult, and would suggest a wrestle not against any particular emperor but against the whole Roman political system. 2.1.6. The significance of statues and images185 In order to further understand the environment in which the Christian communities were created in Ephesus, the significance of statues, especially those of a public nature, 186 can be mentioned. Pekary says it is almost impossible for moderns to appreciate their number and significance (1978: 727). "Public places were a parade ground of statues" (Judge 1992: 186). Cicero wrote that Asia abounded in statues, pictures, plates, garments, slaves, beauty and money (Three Books, 309). Philo also was acutely aware that statues and images were set up in the most conspicuous places in cities "to adorn them" (πρό? κόσμον, De Abrah. 267), and that pride in one's city was equated with pride in the sculpturing and painting of innumerable forms in the temples, shrines and altars (Decalogue 2.6-9). In Aphrodisias (east of Ephesus) every fourth year there was an άγών των άγαλματοποίων (Pekary 1978: 728) and Ephesian sculptors had achieved wide fame and often worked abroad and advertised their Ephesian school; some had Roman patronage 185 186

p o r t j , e variant understandings in scholarship of the terms ά γ α λ μ α and εΐκώυ, see Koonce (1988). More wealthy Romans like Cicero and Pliny had private collections of statues and images, which included those of the gods (Cicero Ep. ad Attic. 1.8). Seneca also mentions houses with displays of ancestral busts (On Benefits 3.28.2).

The Imperial Cult

111

(Hanfmann 1975: 62). Statues were of the gods, of heroes, of citizens who had achieved for Ephesus in a variety of fields, including athletics, and of Roman emperors. Concerning the latter, Hanfmann claims that "the most cogent visual symbol of the justice, majesty and authority of the Roman Empire was the statue of the Roman emperor" (1975: 73). The image of the emperor was to be treated with the highest respect and dignity. According to Philostratus, they were more dreaded and more inviolable than those of the Olympian Zeus (Vit. Apoll. 1.15). Asebeia or impietas became associated with treason already in the time of Augustus (Bauman 1974: 3) 187 and it included such behavior as melting down an image for the silver (Tacitus, Annals 3.70.2); striking a slave who happened to have a coin with the image of Tiberius on his person (Philostratus, V//. Apoll. 1.15); changing clothes or undressing in front of his image (which suggests the image stood within households); taking a coin impressed with an imperial image into a brothel; and removing garlands from his statue. Such behavior risked the death penalty (Bauman 1974: 80-84). Athenagoras in the second century CE reports two statues of pagan heroes in Alexandria Troas which were able to give oracles and to heal the sick. He says they could do that through the power of the daimones (Embassy 27). Athenagoras does not doubt they had that power. Lucian writes of images that could move and speak through clever technology (Alexander the False Prophet 26). Dio refers to a certain Sejanus being disturbed by smoke coming out of one of his statues and a huge snake coming out of its head. He also reports a statue of Tyche turning its back on Sejanus while he was sacrificing (58.7.13)· While holding that statues and images were younger than their makers and therefore not to be identified with what they represented, Athenagoras acknowledged that in certain places, cities and countries, some movements of statues are brought about by invocations at them, although he also seems to be aware of idol-operators, referring to "the names of those who man the idols and work through them" (Embassy 23). Scherrer (1984) has suggested that the image of Revelation 13 be understood as one such mechanised statue. Botha rightly warns that these mechanical images "should not be seen as cynical manipulation (that would be forcing our values on ancient experience) as it was part of the rituals" (1988: 95). The very size of many Roman imperial statues indicates that they were meant to symbolise a political reality. The colossal image of Domitian re-presents his power. Such statues reminded inhabitants that Rome ruled over all. Barnes claims the Roman emperors from Augustus to Trajan were far more aggressive and expansionist in policy than has been conceded. He says Domitian was For a history of the development and usage of terminology relating to treason and other crimes against the emperor, see Bauman (1974).

112

Some other cults

careful and cautious in terms of aggression, but with Trajan it was "outright aggrandisement" (1989: 148). Polybius pointed out the cruelty of Romans (1.86) believing that they rely on force in all their enterprises and think it is incumbent on them to carry out their projects in spite of all, and that nothing is impossible once they have decided on it (1.37).

As noted earlier, Oster points to the globe resting at the right foot of Trajan in a colossal statue of that emperor in Ephesus and sees this symbol as a strong political propagandist message proclaiming Roman mastery of the world - a symbol which shows how profound and inexorable was the conflict between the followers of Christ and the devotees of the State and its King, both of whom claimed to worship the ruler of the earth and master of land and sea (1982: 149). 188

2.1.7. Jews, Christians, and statues Friedländer claims that Essenes refused to enter cities to avoid going through gates which were surmounted by statues and images, believing it unlawful for a Jew to walk beneath an image. On the other hand, he also says that some Christians who had been image-makers did not abandon their jobs because it was all they were capable of doing. They appealed to the example of Moses' brazen serpent (1936: 305, 309). In the Mishnah, the tractate Abod. Zarah presents inconsistent views. On the one hand, all images are prohibited (3.1); but some Rabbis prohibit only certain images, and R. Gamaliel argues in Pauline fashion that it is legitimate for him to bathe in a bathhouse of Aphrodite which contained her image (3.4). Such variation is not at all surprising. Some Jews, like some Christians, felt more comfortable in the presence of such imagery; others did not.189 Judge (1991) suggests that when believers went to the market in Ephesus they had first to sacrifice to Domitian whose image stood to the west of the upper market where one would pass on arriving from the harbor. Then they were to receive the mark upon their wrist or forehead (the "mark of the beast" Revelation 13:16). If any Christians rejected this practice or law, it would

The nagging question is whether all Christians felt this conflict or only some. There is little doubt that some accommodated themselves in some way to the imperial claims, while others took a much harder line. The latter are represented by the Seer in Revelation while the former may possibly be seen in the Pastorals. The variety of practices among Jews/Christians cannot be underestimated.

The Imperial Cult

113

obviously have ostracised them from city life as its basic level: "an implied apartheid policy" (1991: 159; also B. Harris, 1979: 22). There is no evidence until well into the third century that Christians vandalised or attacked sacred shrines or statues. More likely, they followed Jewish behavior and showed respect (Ex 22.28; Philo De vita Mos. 2.26; Josephus Ant. 4.207; on the part of Christians, Rom 2:22. See also Thornton 1986: 123). The majority of Christians, like the majority of Jews, were not blasphemers against the traditional pagan gods. 190 Paul, according to Acts 19, disturbs the industry of Artemis shrine-makers by claiming that gods made by hands are not gods. It would appear that Luke is comfortable with the grammateus' claim that Artemis was not made by hands her image fell down from heaven - and so was not herself under threat. That is the only direct reference to the image of Artemis in the New Testament, unless the image described in Revelation 12 is a parody of her. Vögtle thinks rather that image is inspired by the myth of the evil dragon and the birth of a son of god through a divine mother. He has the Egyptian Osiris-Isis-Horus myth in mind (1971: 399). But since Revelation belongs to Asia Minor, he suggests that possibly the Python-Apollo-Leto myth is behind it (400). This suggestion brings the image closer to Artemis, the sister of Apollo and daughter of Leto. A further suggestion is that the woman is a representation of Roma, the embodiment of the Roman state (403). In the end, Vögtle prefers the sun-god myth as the source for the chapter. But could the image parody Artemis in the seer's mind? "Dressed with the sun" could mean dressed in gold, 191 that is, it is a gold statue, or a wooden image covered with gold. The original Artemis image in Ephesus was made of wood (Fleischer 1973: 121) 192 , but gold was certainly featured in her "wardrobe". Xenophon refers to an image of Artemis at Scillus which was made of wood while that at Ephesus was of gold (Anab. 5.3.12) and the Artemis' birthday procession of 104 CE which featured images donated by In the Acts of Peter, Marcellus accidentally breaks an image of the caesar. Peter tells him to sprinkle the image with water. The image is restored (ch 11). The point is supposedly that the Christian has no fear of any offence against the caesar. Celsus accused Christians of brazenly insulting the gods and striking their images, taunting them and challenging them to strike. The charge is denied by Origen (Contra Celsus 8.38-41). Or could the "breasts" be suns? Mucianus, according to Pliny, said the original Artemis image was made of wood of the vine, although others thought it was made of ebony. He also claimed that the image never changed even though the temple in which it was housed altered or was restored seven times (Pliny N.H. 16.79. 213-215). Modern scholars are not so sure about the immutability of the image. LiDonnici, for example, believes that changes were made to the original image over time (1992: 403). It is possible that what was at some stage part of her "wardrobe" became permanent in the image itself.

114

Some other cults

Salutaris included silver and golden images of Artemis. Or it could refer to the zodiacal decoration, which included the sun, around the neck of a known Artemis image (Arnold 1989: 21). The child-bearing woman of Revelation 12 could parody Artemis since the latter was the goddess of childbirth and since her own birth at Ephesus was so significant in Ephesian mythology. No certainty is possible, but the suggestion is worth consideration. For the sake of completeness, does 1 John 5:21 (Τεκνία, φυλάξετε έαυτά από των ειδώλων) refer to the Roman imperial cult? Stegemann suggests so: The end of the letter is a reaction to a crisis "welche durch die gerichtliche und polizeiliche Verfolgung der Christen seitens der römischen Behörden heraufbeschworen worden ist" (1985: 291). He parallels Pliny Ep. 10.96.6 with 1 John 2:18-20 (292). Suggitt (1985) and Brown (1982) suggest other interpretations: ghosts, phantoms, or anti-heretics, rather than imperial images. In conclusion, the message of Paul and of those who saw themselves in his tradition allowed or even recommended a certain accommodation to the presence and claims of the emperor (1 Tim 2:2, for example). The Seer of Revelation, however, warned against any such accommodation and exhorted his followers to understand the imperial cult as representative of forces opposed to the One who is, who was, and who is to come. If the latter writing is dated around 70 CE, then there may well have existed in Ephesus a direct confrontation between a Pauline stance and that of "John" on the issue of the imperial cult. The socio-political circumstances of the various Christian communities and the theological bases for their understanding of the imperial cult created these variations and potential internal conflicts. Those circumstances and bases are beyond the scope of this book.

2.2. The variety of cults in Ephesus Modern excavations have revealed "the multifarious and variegated phenomenon of religious life in ancient Ephesus" (Oster 1990: 1663), and that Ephesus, like Rome and Corinth, was "a melting pot for a multitude of GraecoRoman and Eastern religions" (Oster 1976: 24). Knibbe (1978: 489-503) lists numerous other gods beside Artemis at Ephesus. 193 While the concentration is on the cult of Artemis, the point needs to be emphasised that this particular cult was not isolated from other cults. Coming from a monotheistic tradition, it is tempting to view each cult as a distinct entity in itself and not to see it in relation to other cults. It is possible that certain cultic practices were common to two or more cults. So, a dance or a song or a processional procedure may have been common to Artemis, to Demeter, to Dionysos. This is not surprising, particularly since cults were the responsibility 193

Similarly, PW Supplementband ΧΠ cols 281-286.

Variety of cults

115

of "groups" (θίασοι, which in turn belonged to the φρατρίαι) within the city, and such groups were determined either by one's kinship or place of birth. An individual could lay claim to organise and participate in a particular cult, or an aspect of it, by right of his or her relationship within the group.194 It is known one person could hold similar status in two cults. An inscription from Aphrodisias honors Julia Laivilla 'Ασία? άρχιβρείαν καΐ κοσμήτειραν τη? Έφεσία? 'Αρτέμιδος- καΐ άρχιερβίαν τη? λαμπροτάτη? Άφροδισείαν πόλε ω? (C/G 2823). The house of C. Flavius Furius Aptus clearly indicates Ephesians were not monocultist: the owner was a priest of Dionysos; he had life-size images of Tiberius and Livia in that house; poetic dedications to Aphrodite have been found there; and a seven metre coiled bronzed snake (related to Aesclepius?) has also been discovered (Mellink 1982: 569). It cannot be assumed that if and when any of the Ephesian polycultic followers identified themselves with a Christian community that they immediately ceased their participation in such cults nor that they abandoned the thinking that accompanied them. It is more probable that they were in some sense syncretistic. Many inscriptions indicate the significance of the Prytaneion, the city hall which functioned as the official reception centre for the honoring of guests. Later it was directly related to the goddess Hestia who was often denominated with the epithet Βουλαία "mirroring the civic and urban significance of this goddess" (Oster 1990: 1689). She was symbolised by the eternal flame. In inscriptions, it is the prytanis - the highest religious official in the city, whose role it was to maintain the sacred flame - who gives thanks (βΰχαριστβίν) to Hestia Boulaia for her saving action, in much the same way as the neopoioi gave thanks to Artemis. It is interesting to note, though, that while the neopoioi give thanks to Artemis alone according to nearly all the inscriptions, the prytanis gives thanks usually to Hestia Boulaia and to all the gods. Many times it is to Hestia, Demeter and all the gods (ευχαριστώ Εστία Βουλαία καΐ Δήμητρι καΐ πάσιν θεοί?).195 Rarely is Hestia linked with Artemis although an inscription has been found in which there is a request for the two goddesses to save Plutarch the prytanis and his children {I.Eph. IV. 1068); and after a time, the image of Artemis stood with Hestia in the Prytaneion. Kearsley (echoing Knibbe) has made the suggestion that there were periods of time when the Artemis cult was at a low ebb in terms of its political and civic power and that of Hestia at a high level, so attempts were made to move Artemis - whose temple stood outside of the civic Non-Ephesians could also be reponsible for some cultic activities in Ephesus. The Prienians served as priests at the Poseidon sacrifices; and the Samians still "owned" part of the sea-board of Ephesus and presumably any cults associated with the area (Strabo 14.1.20). See I.Eph. IV.1060, 1065, 1066 for examples.

116

Some other cults

centre - into the city square and into the Prytaneion. The curetes, who participated in the cult of Artemis, appear to have "moved from the Artemision outside the city and made the Prytaneion within the city-walls their base instead" (1991: 2), while maintaining their participation in the Artemis cult. This happened in the first century BCE. This need not mean there was conflict between the cults, but that each cult had its waxing and waning, possibly due to financial and political clout or lack of it. It is also worth remembering that the curetes were not solely dedicated to Artemis. Egyptian cults also left their mark on Ephesian cultic life well into the third century CE. Ephesus was under Egyptian control from about 246 BCE till the end of the century, and trade between Alexandria and Ephesus was of very long standing (Knibbe 1978: 500; Mellor 1975: 56; Wörrle 1971). Sacred objects such as scarabs and amulets found in the Artemision point to a strong Egyptian influence already as far back as the 7-6th century BCE (Hölbl 1978: 12). Philostratus' second century CE tale of Apollonius' voyage from Egypt to Ephesus relates that images and idols were traded between Egypt and Ionia. In that story, images of gold, ivory, and stone were on board a ship and were to be sold in Ephesus to those who desired to dedicate them. Presumably, the gods were Egyptian, and Apollonius rebukes the boat-owner for polluting the gods in this way (Vit. Apoll. 5.20). Hölbl provides evidence that Artemis and Egyptian gods appear on the same artefacts in Ephesus; and that a great number of oil lamps found in Ephesus have Egyptian gods represented on them (1978: 66-80). Coins depicting alliances between Alexandria and Ephesus indicate mutual gods. The cult of Serapis was strong in Ephesus and in Asia Minor generally, beginning from at least the third century BCE and being at its most popular by the third century of the Christian era (Knibbe 1978: 500-501), 196 another indication that Ephesian cults did not succumb quietly and quickly to the Christian movement. There was also at least one temple of Isis in the city, and in some circles Isis and Artemis were equated as "two aspects of the one divinity" (Kelly Heyob 1975: 67).197 Isis was honored in Ephesus - according to a second century CE inscription - as protector of sailors on the seas; in addition, the first fruits of the new year's navigation were offered to her (Oster 1990: 1678). Numerous other cults were also associated with Ephesus. There were Anatolian mother-goddess cults, some very ancient (Vermaseren 1977). 196

197

For more detail on the strength of Egyptian cults in Asia Minor, especially as indicated by the temples of Serapis and Isis, see also Salditt-Trappmann, 1972. Xenophon's Ephesian love-story indicates the Artemis-Isis links and those of Ephesus and Egypt in general. See Gwyn Griffiths 1978: 409-437. Witt's comment that "in Paul's eyes Artemis resembled Isis polyonymous" (1971: 261) is mere speculation, however. There is nothing to suggest that Paul knew anything about Isis, let alone enough to identify her with Artemis.

Variety of cults

117

Athenaeus refers to a festival for Poseidon in which the pourers of wine were known as ταύροι (Deipno. 10.425e). 198 Diodorus also records that in the fourth century BCE, the nine cities that joined the κοινή σύνοδο? of the PanIonian League offered sacrifices of great antiquity and on a large scale to Poseidon. While originally these celebrations were held at Mycale, they were shifted to Ephesus (15.49). An inscription also reads: ol εν Έφέσω έργάται προττυλεΐται πρό? τω Ποσαδώνι (CIG 3028). Finally, other gods, presumably with associated cults, were also present in Ephesus' history. Zeus, in some mythological traditions the father of Artemis and Apollo, is known with various epithets from at least the fifth century BCE. Knibbe lists Tyche who, although not an institutional goddess in Ephesus as in Smyrna, kept going after the other gods had waned and when Christianity was on the rise (1978: 501). Knibbe rightly concludes es ist ein erstaunlich reichhaltiges Inventar an Göttern und göttlichen Mächten, das die religiöse .Infrastruktur' von Ephesus ausgemacht hat (502).199

In addition, there were over the centuries hero cults of Androcles, Alexander the Great, Pixadorus, Publius Servilius Isauricus, and Apollonius of Tyre. Many of these cults were associated with the hero's burial place and tomb200 a factor worth remembering in the light of the importance of the tombs of John and Philip's daughter and other Christian heroes at Ephesus.201 Cults were officially sanctioned and civic. There were of course other practices and beliefs which did not always have such sanction or status. Astrology was prevalent in Ephesus, and Vespasian granted only to that city the right to conduct the Balbilla games in honor of that astrologer from Alexandria who had guided Nero in Rome and who possibly lived in Ephesus very soon after the time of Paul there (Cramer 1954: 130). And there were also those popular beliefs and practices which are often derogatorily called superstition: augurs and omens, 202 potents and herbs, 203 the evil eye. Underlying it all was the 198

199

200

201 202

Harrison is probably right in holding that by dressing up as the bull, these young men believed they gained the mana of the animal (1963: 30). Artemidorus writes of an "ethnic custom" in Ephesus of youths voluntarily fighting with bulls (Oneiro. 1.8). Börker claims that recent finds confirm this statement of Knibbe's. He suggests that an inscription dedicated to Artemis which reads: συν τω [...] θείω, the lacuna be read as παν (1981: 181-188). For example, Androcles' tomb (Pausanius 7.2.6; see also 7.2.8 and 7.3.5). The tomb of Heropythes, "liberator of the city", was apparently in the agora in the time of Alexander (Arrian Anab. 1.17.11). Traditions existed also regarding the Virgin Mary, Timothy, and Luke being buried there. An inscription found in Ephesus refers to the interpretation of the flight of birds (CIG 2953). The popular desire to use non-official "witchdoctors" in areas such as

118

Some other cults

deeply held and growing belief that the worlds are inhabited by spirits and daemons which affect daily life just as much if not more than the "higher" gods. The higher gods had more power and were gods of cities or states or even the cosmos, but the beings that preoccupied the daily lives of individuals tended to be closer and more pertinent and needed warding off or attracting through herbs and potions, amulets and charms. The idea of a supreme power ruling the world grew stronger in imperial times, leaving as a result a residue of lesser gods and ambiguous daemons who became then intermediaries between the supreme god or gods and humans. Most religion is pragmatic - if it works, take it on board; if not, discard it. And many people are eclectic in their religious beliefs and practices. It would appear that Ephesus was no different. The people took on what worked for them and what they had learned from experience and what was reinforced by the re-membering of their myths and so "belonged" to them. This tolerance of gods and the powers they represented accounts for the harmony which appears to have existed among the multifarious cults in a city like Ephesus. People could participate in and benefit from all cults; the distinctions were probably made along the lines of who "owned" the cults with their rituals, songs and myths. This harmony was supported by the wealthy who provided the means for a cult to maintain its power through their contributions of money, images, buildings, restorations, festivals, games and feasts - all those things that bound a city and its people together, and brought it well-being and prosperity. The Jews already knew the advantage of having wealthy patronage; the Christians soon learnt it.

2.3. Women In Ephesian Cults Finally in this section, in the light of the significance and status of women in Christian communities of Asia/Ephesus (as depicted or at least implied in Acts, the letters to Timothy, The Acts of Paul, The Acts of John, Revelation, and the Fourth Gospel), it is necessary to comment on the status of women in the wider community. Zeitlin claims:

agriculture is demonstrated by both Cato and Columella in their works O n Agriculture. They forbid the overseer in agri- and horti-cultures to consult a haruspex, augur, harilous or Chaldaeus because such advisors disturb ignorant minds with vain superstition (Cato 5.4; Columella 11.1.22). While medical experts like Soranus tended to despise "alternative" remedies, at a popular level the use of potions and plants was common, undergirded by the belief that herbs and plants had power.

Women in Ephesian cults

119

Clearly, religious life was an important activity for women, both for external support and redress of personal concerns and as an alternative, even if temporary, to domestic life (1982: 130).

2.3.1. The status of women Ephesian women had a reputation for wealth, beauty and virtue. This is true of Melitte in Achilles Tatius' novel, of Anthia in Xenophon's tale, and of Apollonius' wife in the story of that man's exploits. In the Acts of Paul, the Ephesian Artemilla is greeted with a groan from Paul: "Woman, ruler of this world, mistress of much gold, citizen of great luxury, splendid in thy raiment" and is asked to forget "thy riches and thy beauty and thy finery" (A.P. 7). In the story told by Trimalchio, the matron of Ephesus is renowned for her beauty, virtue and love (Petronius Satyricon 3). It is only in death that this image is broken: Petronius relates that the funeral custom of Ephesian women was to follow the procession with their hair loose, beating their naked breasts and mutilating their faces. Death signalled the absence of beauty and virtue. A further indication of this occurs in the story as the matron gives in to the soldier's offers of both sex and food while they are in a burial vault of her deceased husband. In terms of wealth, Kearsley draws attention to the case of Claudia Metrodora from Chios, who in the first century CE was στεφανηφόρο? and patron of Chios. She distributed oil to the whole polis, donated a public bath, and held banquets and games for Chios. She was also βασίλεια of thirteen Ionian cities, a position which included religious and ceremonial status. She married and lived in Ephesus (1985: 128-9). Melitte, the Ephesian woman of Achilles Tatius' novel, was very wealthy in her own right, owning a large house with costly furnishings, servants, country-estate with gardens, and other wealth which she can promise to Clitophon should he marry her (5.11.5-6; 5.17.1). Melitte met the hero of the story in Egypt which indicates she was also a woman who travelled. Rogers (1992) points out that women contributed to the wellbeing of Ephesus from their own wealth, as well as with their husbands, especially in the late hellenistic period. 204 The hundreds of inscriptions from Asia Minor indicating women acting as benefactors, distributing wheat, wine, oil and meat, suggest there were wealthy women who owned vast estates of grainlands, vineyards, olive groves and pasture lands (van Bremen 1983: 227-228). The mobility and the home-ownership of Prisca and her husband Aquila suggest the wealth of that Ephesus-residing Christian woman, and can be compared with Onesiphorus, presumably of Ephesus at least for some time, A Christian lady, Scholastikia, in the fourth century CE donated enough gold to pay for the reconstruction of some baths' walls in Ephesus (Rogers 1992: 222-3).

120

Some other cults

who also owned a house and could afford to travel to Rome and had the means to support Paul (2 Tim 1:16-18). The listing of Prisca before the name of her husband (Acts 18:26; Rom 16:3) is also indicative of her status within the Christian community, if not more widely. Of course, this is not to suggest that all or most women in Ephesus had such wealth and status. No doubt, the majority of women did not, but shared the general lot of those who belonged to and in the house (οΙκία), who played no part in affairs of the city, and who rarely travelled beyond their immediate neighborhood.

2.3.2. The participation of women in the cults The cult of Artemis was fundamentally a cult of the female, for both male and female. It can be said that Artemis, who consorted with women, represented the powers of a life unbound to the male. Ephesus as a city stood under her dominion, protection and blessing. On the other hand, Artemis was by no means exclusive to women. After all, her sanctuary was closed to married women. In one sense, being virginal made her identifiable with men. Her role in preparing women for marriage and for child-bearing would also have been understood by men to be advantageous to them, since for so many Greek men, as for women, marriage and family were high in creating status and honor. Her roaming the mountains, and especially her hunting with bow and arrow or with spear, imply that she adopted areas of life traditionally and culturally "male". The Ephesians had a female goddess who was firmly identified with the world of the male and yet was not bound to any male. In terms of cultic life in Ephesus, it is clear that women played a significant role and held important offices in many cults.205 The mythology of Ephesus bolstered their status in the Artemis cult. According to Pausanius, from very early days, if not originally, the Amazon women resided at the sacred place and performed rituals to Artemis there (7.2.4). Cultic activity for women was more prominent in Asia Minor than elsewhere (Ramsay 1900: 67). Kearsley notes that the fifteen known women who were άρχΐ-epeíai in Ephesus is the largest group known from any city (1986: 186). At least some held the title in their own right and were not dependent on the title of their husbands. Women were prominent in the Artemis cult as priestesses; and in the cult of Hestia Boulaia in the civic centre of Ephesus, the influential position of πρύτανι? is known to In Asia Minor, 28 women are known to have held the position of prytanis (a position of very high rank involving the finances and cultic life of the city) in eight cities in the first three centuries of the Common Era; 37 were stephanephoroi (positions of high public profile and prestige, if not much political clout) in 17 cities over a five century period; and 18 women in 14 different cities held the position of agonothetis (a position of responsibility for contests) in the first three centuries (Trebilco 1991: 120-122).

Women in Ephesian cults

121

have been held by women (for example, Claudia Trophime, I.Eph. IV. 1012). Favonia Flaccilla was both prytanis and γυμνασίαρχο? {I.Eph. IV. 1060). Although generally excluded from the Games, a number of Ephesian women were chosen as θεωρό? των μεγάλων 'Ολυμπίων (Engelmann, 1978: 154), and some at the same time held the status of Ιέραία τη? 'Αρτέμιδος· (L'année épig. [1972] 579.180). Claudia Caninia Severa was Ιέρεια καΐ κοσμήτειρα καΐ πρύτανι? καΐ θεωρό? των μεγάλων 'Ολυμπίων (L'Année épig. [1972] 587.183). Clearly, some Ephesian women held high status and rank within the city and its cults and festivals. 2.3.3. Women in the cults of Demeter and of Dionysos Other female deities, beside Artemis, represented the wild, the outside, the stranger and had strong cultic following in Ephesus. Demeter was the goddess of corn and since corn was staple in the diet of many people it is not surprising that she should be remembered ritually in order to guarantee a sufficient supply of corn, if for no other reason. Zeal for the rites and religion of Demeter was yet strong in the second century CE and ... prospered in Ephesus for more than half a millennium (Oster 1990: 1670).

Herodotus was aware that the Demeter cult was active before his time (6.16) and centuries later, a petition of 88-89 CE reminds the authority that the μυστήρια καΐ θυσίαι ... Δήμητρι Καρποφόρω καΐ θεσμοφόρω καΐ θεοί? Σεβαστοί? are performed every year and so ought to be performed during his term of office by the μυσταί (New Docs 4 (1987) 94). The Thesmophoria were Demeter-centred festivals exclusive to women.206 In this festival, which lasted for three days, women enjoyed privileges that were not possible in normal life: the right to organize a women's society with complete autonomy and proper female archontes, to ward off male intervention, to leave their houses and stay outside, even during the night, to perform private and secret rituals (Versnel 1992: 37) which included the otherwise-forbidden drinking of wine. It was a ritual of exception, even of reversal. Like many myths and rituals, the Thesmophoria expressed a paradox: Married women (only they could participate) became as virgins waiting for marriage, yet the very festival was clearly one to promote the fertility and productivity of both women and cereals and to celebrate the procreative qualities of women. It is another example of women becoming wild, "of nature", in festival and ritual, while in day-to-day Clement of Alexandria in his Exhortation to the Greeks (ch. 2) understood the Thesmophoria as the rape of Persephone in tragedy form (έκτραγωδούσαι).

122

Some other cults

life they lived as tamed and civilised through marriage and the domesticity of the hearth. Some Ephesian inscriptions indicate that the Demeter cult was combined with that of Dionysos and that guilds existed for that combined cult with officials who had particular functions and duties (Merkelbach, 1979). The festival of Dionysus (who in one tradition originated from Lydia in Asia [Euripides Bacchae 13, 55, 64]), stands as the epitome of ambiguity. To Aristides, Dionysus was both male and female, "a twin to himself. He is numbered among both the young men and girls" (Or. 41.4-5). Heraclitus refers to the procession for Dionysus, presumably at Ephesus, in the fifth century BCE and notes: βμνβον άσμα αίδοίοισιν... and: μαίνονται, καΐ Χηναΐ£ουσιν (Frag. 15). The month of Lenaeon at Ephesus was dedicated to this strange but exciting and inspiring god who is the god of confusion, especially sexconfusion. Achilles Tatius thought Eros and Dionysus "two of the most violent of the gods (δύο βίαιοι 9eoí) ... who drive the soul towards madness (έκμαίνουσιν)" [2.2.3], Modern scholars are probably correct in claiming that the Dionysian rituals "provided the perfect symbols for the expression and resolution of socio-sexual tensions within a sanctioned context" (Kraemer 1979: 75 η 78; compare also Slater, 1968). What is questionable, however, is whether Ephesian women perceived themselves as being male-dominated and saw such rituals as a release of frustration and escape from such domination, as Kraemer holds (1979: 80; also Bremmer 1984: 285-286). Modern Western women may perceive themselves in that way. Can it be assumed that Ephesian women of the first century CE did likewise? Rituals deal with ambiguity; they invariably invert social roles. They transgress the borders of the social taboos. That was true for both sexes. Both male and female were "ecstatic" through their participation in the festivals, and saw themselves as being empowered to return to the confines of the city and day-to-day life. Both male and female shared the mystery of birth, life and death; and their family, tribal and clan groupings bound them together in the myths and rituals which helped them to live with such mysteries. While it is possible that women saw their festivals as an escape from maledomination, it could also be argued that they saw the males' participation in rituals as an attempt on the part of males to capture the essential power of women: the power to give birth to new life. It was probably during the Dionysian festival (καταγωγία - the coming down from the hills and into the city streets?) that Timothy, according to the Christian legend, publicly opposed the cult and suffered with his life - an indication that at least one Christian tradition was aware of the threat of that cult in Ephesus. The Acts of Timothy account also suggests that Christians did not understand the festival.

Women in Ephesian cults

123

It is curious that scholars have not examined the various texts of the Acts of Timothy, both for their cultural information and their Christian bias. Keil understands these Acts to be historically reliable, and believes the katagogia were part of or identifiable with Dionysian rituals (1935: 83). Archaeologists have found a statue-group dedicated to Dionysos in 92-93 CE and placed at the crossroads of the Curetes Street and the Marble Street as a reminder to the Ephesians of the katagogia (SEG 35 (1985) 1116). It is at these crossroads only a few years later that Timothy challenged the cult followers, according to the Acts. Earlier scholars thought the katagogia belonged to the Artemis cult (Ramsay 1890: 110) but it would appear that was more due to the fame of that goddess than for any close study of the festival itself, although it is another little hint that the practices of the various cults were not unique to each cult. The inscription found in Priene referring to someone Ιερήσεται Sè καΐ του Διονύσου του καταγωγίου (I.Priene 174.1.5) clearly links the festival with Dionysos. Bearing in mind that the Acts of Timothy is a Christian record of the festival, one can still construct the import of the katagogia for many of the Ephesians. In the Acts report of the festival, some people in the procession went about with cudgels (clavae). Such cudgels had phallic symbolism. It is also known that in the Dionysian drama, women came forward to be beaten, believing it promoted fertility and that it symbolised communion with the spirits of the dead (Orloff 1981: 24). Dawkins (1906) records a modern ritual in Thrace which he believes is in the Dionysiac tradition, and in that ritual women are flogged. Dionysos and death, Dionysos and blood were powerful connections in the cult: to eat the flesh and drink the wine meant ^ κ σ τ α σ ι ? for the communicant and identification with the god. According to the Acts, images (simulacra) were held by some of the participants. This holding of images clearly identifies the drama as cultic, as the image of Dionysos was carried from the outside, where he was born, into the theatre or into the temple. The reference to the wearing of masks (personae) is a further pointer that this is a Dionysian ritual, since masks apparently were reserved almost entirely for his cult. Nearly all participants, both male and female, were masked. The mask functioned as a symbol of transition, and transition was at the heart of the Dionysian cult (Wiles 1991: 113); he is the "double-god" of life and death (Detienne 1989: 2). Masks "identified" the wearer with the god, the powers, and the creatures of the ritual. The actors (possessed by the "power" of the beings they re-presented) proceeded into the city singing songs, no doubt the song-cycles of the myths well-known to the spectators of this drama (Nilsson 1951: 11). As they processed, they would attack men and women like brigands and make great carnage among them (magnam caedam eorumfaciebant). It is doubtful that this is what physically and actually happened, but rather that it was all part of the re-

124

Some other cults

presentation and the spectators played their role in it. The Christian's comment is that the Ephesians believed that by such behavior, they were honoring their god (se suum honorare daemonem).207 Then follows: ut eos videretur homines honorare, quorum maximus cultus est mors eorum qui honorant. "Thus people might be seen to be honoring those beings for whom the greatest act of worship was the death of those giving the honor". Dionysos was the god who entered into the underworld of the dead in search for his mother and who came out with the gift of life and celebration. To honor Dionysos meant following his path via the drama with its mythological song-lines. By "dying", the participants in this drama were at-one with the god and so had access to his life-giving power as well. They were incorporated into the cycle determined by the gods. For the participants, Dionysos symbolises the transition across "the boundaries between life and death, land and sea, city and wilderness, civilisation and savagery, reality and illusion" (Wiles 1991: 113). Included could be the transition from virgin to married, since Dionysus was also celebrated in the context of marriage. Death and marriage were not strangers in Greek culture. For Timothy, all this was madness (insania) from which he tried, by various means, to dissuade the Ephesians but without success, and finally the mob stoned him and, rather ironically in the circumstances, he lost his life. For Christians, the only legitimate "madness" or "possession" was that of the Spirit of holiness given as a seal in baptism. The "madness" of Dionysos was not life-giving according to Timothy. Clearly, two claims to give life, two claims to possession by the gods, could not stand side by side without conflict. According to the Acts of Timothy, the Christians of the early second century CE lost the conflict, their hero was killed and the Dionysian cult continued. Before concluding this section on the involvement of women in the various cults of Ephesus, it is important to note that there were many other aspects of the life of women beyond their official and well-known rituals. An insight into this more mundane but no less significant aspect is given in Plautus' play, The Braggart Warrior. In this Latin play of the third century BCE, Periplectomenus, an elderly Ephesian gentleman, complains about those wives who ask their husbands for money to buy presents for their own mothers at the Matrons Festival (in honor of Mars, March 1); or to give to the sorcerer (praecantrix) at the festival of Minerva (March 19-23), or to the dream interpreter (coniectrix), the clairvoyant (hariola) and the soothsayer (haruspica) [691-699]. Of interest is the fact that all the diviners are female·, that they charged money for their services; and that there were festivals for Minerva (in Greek theology, Athena) and for matrons in honor of Mars (a Roman festival, therefore, or was it

Another example of the Christian unwillingness to call a pagan deity "god",

Summary

125

celebrated in Ephesus as to the god Ares?) at which women brought presents for their mothers. Many of the Ephesian cults offered women significant status and well-being, a factor not lost on Jews and, later, Ephesian Christians among whom women seemed to play a significant role in their respective communities. With Artemis they "belonged" - they were part of the city, its cult, its traditions, and its wealth; with Demeter, they were associated with the cycle of death and life, production and reproduction, and so had power (even magical) on the estates and outlying farms and gardens of the city, as they planted and nurtured crops; with Dionysos, they were able to transgress the barriers between marriage and virginity, between male and female, between humans and the gods. Whether there is any evidence of women coming out of such cults into Christian communities is another question.

2.4. Summary It has been the aim of this section to provide a context in which Paul lived and worked in Ephesus in the middle of the first century CE. I have wanted to underline the complexity of Ephesus' history with its many and significant political and cultural influences. I have also wanted to demonstrate and emphasise the complex, dynamic, and diverse nature of the cults of Ephesus, but have concentrated on the cult of Artemis in the city because it is that cult in particular that is seen in Acts 19:23-41 as the one major obstacle to the progress and security of The Way - the Christian community - in Ephesus. In Artemis, Christians encountered a goddess of very ancient history - a history kept alive through festival, ritual and myth; a goddess who had absorbed the cultures of many peoples into her history. Artemis and her temple were the symbols of Ephesus and so their presence ran deep into the very roots of the city. It was centuries before those roots finally loosened and Artemis' influence faded away. But there is no doubt that in the first century Christians met a deity whose beneficent and protective power was experienced and appreciated by many in Ephesus, and whose temple in its sheer beauty and grandeur symbolised her presence. In encountering Artemis and other gods and their cults, as well as the growing influence of the imperial cult, the cult of Jesus whom Christians worshipped quasi deo (Pliny Ep. 10.96.7) could at best hope to be considered as one amongst them.

Section Two Paul in Ephesus 1. Paul and Artemis in Ephesus 1.1. Introduction This section will examine the presence and work of Paul and the first Christians in Ephesus on the basis of the evidence of Acts and of Paul's own writings. Since Paul is known as "the apostle to the gentiles", evidence demonstrating his work among gentiles - his success or otherwise among them - will be examined to find that there is little support for any claim that Ephesus was the centre of Pauline gentile Christianity or that Ephesus was the city where Paul met with the most success among gentiles. The section will also look at the evidence of Paul's work among Jews and the conclusion reached that Paul had as much influence among Jews as he did among gentiles, a factor almost completely ignored in biblical scholarship. The common opinion is that Ephesus was the epitome of Pauline Christianity and the one city in which it can be said Paul was successful. Knibbe & Alzinger talk of Paul's "tausendfältige Frucht bringende Saat" (1980: 767); Bruce says "it is plain that the Christian propaganda had been remarkably successful" and cites Acts 19, that is, the Ephesian mission (1958: 129), and "the missionary enterprise of Paul and his friends in Ephesus proceeded at an extraordinary rate" (1958: 131); Pereira claims "Ephesus appears to be the centre of Paul's most successful apostolate" (1983: 33); and while acknowledging that Paul had problems there, Grundmann speaks of "die fruchtbare und grosse Tätigkeit in Ephesus" (1964: 67); Lähnemann can claim that it was at Ephesus that "die erste grosse Blüte der christlichen Kirche erwuchs" (1976: 522). Others agree with Lambrecht that Luke emphasizes "the success of Paul's activity in Ephesus" and he cites Oster: "Paul's Ephesian labors are a meteoric burst before the darkness of the eclipse of his journey to Rome" (1979: 331). In the case of some scholars, success is assumed on the basis that Paul spent so much time at Ephesus. So, for example, Ramsay said "the long residence suits the greatness of the work" (1935: 273) and "the teaching spread so fast that Paul was tempted to remain longer than he had intended" (1935: 277); and Arnold:

Introduction

127

Following Paul's two and a half year ministry in Ephesus, his new churches undoubtedly experienced increased growth with many new converts being added (1989:167).

So assumed is the success of Paul that other questions are determined in its light. Green argues that Romans 16 could not have been written to Ephesus because many noses would have been put out of joint at Ephesus if Paul had sent his love to only twenty-six people after having laboured in their midst for upwards of three years (1970: 327 η 88).

The reality may be that twenty-six is about the number that Paul had been able to claim as his own at Ephesus after three years work.1 If Romans 16 is directed to Ephesus, then it is further evidence that there were few gentiles in Pauline communities at Ephesus, since so many of those mentioned are Jews (Weiszäcker 1902: 330-338). Scott argues that Philippians could not be written from Ephesus because if this was written at Ephesus, it was surely ungenerous in the last degree. All his best friends were there in his company ... Once more, he tells how the church around him is divided into factions, some of which regard him as an interloper and exult over his misfortunes (1:15-16). This does not answer to the conditions at Ephesus, where the church had been founded by Paul and was subject to his control (1955: 6).

But for just the very reasons mentioned by Scott, Philippians could well have been written from Ephesus. It is possible to argue that Paul was not in control at Ephesus, his authority was never unquestioned, and Ephesus was marked by factions and divisions. And there is sufficient evidence to suggest that to speak of Paul as founder of the Ephesian church is inaccurate or at least open to question. Even Luke - who tended to see Paul in heroic terms - had access to sources and traditions which suggest that Christians were in Ephesus prior to Paul, and Luke is content to allow Apollos and Prisca and Aquila to have their rightful place in the story of Christian communities in Ephesus. Lightfoot claims that Colossae must have been founded by Paul because he spent three years at Ephesus and there must have been contact between Ephesus and towns like Colossae in Asia (1879/1959: 30). Likewise Hemer says Smyrna "must have been a primary object in the evangelism of Asia during Paul's Ephesian residence [Acts 19:10]" (1986: 66). Acts 19:10 is made Ironically, it is the number of Christians mentioned in Romans 16 that convinces Caird the chapter must be addressed to Ephesus! "Its long list of affectionate greetings shows us what might be expected in a letter from Paul to a church he knew better than any other" (1976: 9).

128

Paul and Artemis

to carry virtually all the weight when Paul's success in Asia is discussed. In a later chapter it will be shown that it cannot bear that weight. Eiliger thinks that the Johannine community could not have been in Ephesus while Paul was there, or even soon after, since Ephesus was such a strong Pauline centre of mission. The theory is that the Johannine community originated in Syria-Palestine and that some time after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE some moved from the east into Asia Minor and to Ephesus (1985: 158). This hypothesis for the origin and movements of the Johannine community may be accurate, but the reasons for such a theory are debatable, namely that Ephesus was so strongly Pauline that the Johannine community could only have come later. Thomas Robinson insists that "Ephesus was the chief city of Paul's most successful mission" (1985: 35); and he speaks of "the stunning success of the Christian mission to the gentiles as compared to the mission to the Jews" (131). Kistemaker shares the picture: The local church [at Ephesus] experienced phenomenal growth in the three year period [of Paul's mission] ... The city of Ephesus experienced a transformation because of the living and powerful Word of God (1990: 691).

Kistemaker's claim is totally unsubstantiated. There can be no doubt at all that Christians made only a negligible impact on the city of Ephesus. It was transformed by Rome and by Artemis, but not by "the living and powerful Word of God" and certainly not during Paul's three year stay. Orr & Walther maintain the tradition and write that "the fantastic success of Paul's preaching was accompanied by the desertion of idol worship and the burning of magic books" (1976: 90). Even if it be granted that some gentiles so acted, can the scale of "fantastic success" be proven? As in Robinson's claim of "stunning success ... to the gentiles", the definition of "stunning success" apparently does not refer to the numbers of converts. Robinson himself believes that by the end of the first century CE, there were about one thousand Christians in Ephesus (1985: 201). A few years later, he revised that estimation to the lower figure of five hundred, which he calls "unrealistically low" because it means conversions were at the rate of about 15 per year (1988: 107 η 60). Even if the higher estimate holds, the average conversion rate would have been 30 per year. Remembering that often whole households "converted", that is not a large number and hardly puts Paul's success in the "stunning" category. Of course, that is also assuming that those Christians by the end of the first century were Christians as a result of Paul's mission. By the end of the century there were evidently Christians belonging to "John" who might have been in some tension with the Pauline group, and were most likely in greater numbers than those claiming Paul as their founder and authority.

Evidence from Acts

129

Robinson's figures are probably reasonably accurate. In his three year mission to Ephesus, Paul may have persuaded about 40-60 people to convert to his understanding of what God had done in the person of Jesus. The other point is, of course, that not all of these "converts" were gentiles. Even if one allowed the high estimate that 70% were, that would indicate that about 25-40 gentiles followed Paul. Again, in a city of 200,000 people, hardly "stunning success".2 There have been a few scholars who have seen things differently. Bauer was not quite so confident of Paul's success. While he held that "Paul had laid the foundation in Ephesus and built up a church through several years of labor" (1971: 82), he was also well aware that at the very least, it will be but a short time before the Apostle to the Gentiles will have been totally displaced in the consciousness of the church of Ephesus in favor of one of the twelve apostles, John (1971: 83-4).

But even Bauer could not shake off the almost unquestioned scholarly tradition that the Christian mission to Ephesus was very successful - at least initially - and that success was due solely to the missionary endeavours of Paul and his supporters not only in Ephesus itself but from that centre to neighbouring regions in Asia Minor.3 1.2. The Evidence from Acts 1.2.1. Introduction I now want to examine the mission of Paul to gentiles in Ephesus on the basis of the Acts of the Apostles. Other canonical and non-canonical literature will be examined for evidence of Christian-Artemis links and for explicit or implicit indications that some Christians came out the Artemis cult in Ephesus. If it can be shown that many Christians did come out of that cult (or any other in Ephesus), then there would be ground for claiming that Christian communities For other estimates of Christians in Asia Minor, see also Reicke (1969). It is acknowledged that it is virtually inpossible to determine numbers with any accuracy at all. Few scholars hold another view. MacLennan makes the passing comment: "Paul worked very hard in and around the city [of Ephesus] but did not seem to be very successful there". But that is the end of his comment (1990: 70). Ramsay also notices that the Christian movement was not as effective in Ephesus as it was in other areas of Asia Minor (1900: 147). Snape concludes: "In all probability the opposition to Paul was much stronger at Ephesus than at Corinth, because, at Ephesus, Paul was an intruder" (1954: 7). Lüdemann hints at Paul losing any "foothold" he had in Ephesus (1984: 86).

130

Paul and Artemis

in Ephesus were gentile in composition and nature. But the fact is that there is veiy little evidence that Christians attracted adherents of the Artemis cult. Those who did abandon Artemis for Christ would not have done so without maintaining some syncretism in their thought if not also in their practice. The curious fact is that none of the literature available (Acts, 1 Timothy, Ephesians, Revelation) reveals any suggestion of such syncretism, with the possible (but unlikely) exception of the Nicolaitans of Revelation 2. In this search for gentile Christians in Ephesus, I acknowledge that the Artemis cult was no more monolithic than was Judaism or Christianity at the time. There were undoubtedly many nominalists in Ephesus who still claimed to be kv Άρτέμιδι. Some of these may have been attracted by the Christian Way. The administrators of the cult of Artemis had to publish its propaganda to counteract any threat that might appear and no doubt had to appeal to the nominalists to make a greater commitment to the honoring of Artemis. 1.2.2. Paul and Artemis in Acts Having said that, it seems reasonable to expect that if Paul was so "fantastically successful" among gentiles of Ephesus, he would have made some identifiable impact on the cult of Artemis; and it would also be reasonable to assume that many of the gentile converts came out of the cult. But there little evidence to substantiate the claim of Arnold - and not a few others - that "the influx and expansion of Christianity eventually wrought the demise of the cult of the Ephesian Artemis" (1989: 28) unless "eventually" means three to four centuries later. Closer to the mark is D. Williams' rather grudging comment that Paul "had probably made little inroad in the worship of Artemis" (1990: 339). Nor is there any evidence that "the prominence of idolatry made it [Ephesus] a prime target for Paul's efforts" (Orr and Walther 1976: 358); nor that "the shrine to Artemis would have been one of the special challenges that attracted Paul to Ephesus" because Paul was "a pugnacious warrior" who was "attracted rather than deterred" by the Artemis cult (Cole 1988: 28). Paul neither had "targets" in the sense of opposition to be conquered, nor did he see himself as an iconoclastic destroyer of, or warrior against, pagan religions.4 According to

Such ideas are found only in the third and later centuries of the Christian era. There is quite some evidence to suggest that if Paul had any target at all it was Spain which probably suggested more to Paul the ends of the earth (ή οίκουμένη) than a pagan population to be conquered by the gospel. Of interest here is the claim of Hefele that the Jews were so powerful in Spain in the first centuries of the Common Era that they "might at one time have hoped to Judaize the whole country" (1894: 158). If this be so, is that what attracted Paul there? Bowers (1975) and Jewett (1988) hold that Jews moved in significant numbers to

Evidence from Acts

131

Acts, if Paul has any target in Ephesus, it is first of all the synagogue (18:19; 19:8). Pereira has little evidence that Paul saw Ephesus as a "battlefield" with Artemis as the opponent (1983: 190). Even in Paul's own writings, there is not a word about Artemis in particular, and very little about pagan cults in general. What he does say is not specific nor is it scathingly derogatory (1 Cor 8; 10:19-22; 1 Thess 1:9. His most vehement language is used when speaking generally in Rom 1:18-32). Christians, like Jews, in the first two centuries of the Common Era were not aggressively anti-pagan. So the claim of Deissmann needs close examination: "Paul carried on a life and death struggle [at Ephesus] with the anciently entrenched heathenism" (1930: 333). That it was a "life and death struggle" is probably true, but that it was such against "heathenism" remains to be proven. The struggle may well have been with Jews; or it may have been with mobs of people betraying him to Roman authorities. Lietzmann's categorical claim bears repeating: "No source depicts Paul as a missionary seeking to win unconverted Jews or pure pagans" (1961/3: 113). Sloyan agrees: "Very little in the New Testament inclines us to think that there was a direct presentation of the gospel to non-Jews" (1985: 765). And along similar lines, Dom Dix: we utterly misunderstand Paul if we imagine him as engaged in founding a new "Gentile Christianity"... He cannot even conceive of the salvation of the Gentiles except by their becoming children "of Abraham" (1953: 56; compare also Nock 1972: 51).

If Lietzmann, Sloyan, and Dix are correct, then the understanding of Paul as "the apostle to the gentiles" becomes an open question. 5 I am concerned specifically with the evidence from the sources concerning Paul's mission to Ephesus. To what extent was it directed to the gentiles, and with what success? There are no baptisms of gentiles in Ephesus reported by Luke; nor are any gentiles said to believe as a result of Paul's preaching (unless 19:18 implies that). Compare this lack in Ephesus with Corinth (and elsewhere), where the common Lukan procedure occurs: Paul preaches, people hear, believe and are baptised (18:9. Compare 13:48; 14:1; 14:21; 16:14-15; 33-34; 17:12). As to how many of the converts are gentiles is another matter. Jervell notes the frequent reportings of "mass" conversions following Paul's preaching - Acts 11:21, 13:43, 14:1, 17:4, 18:8 - but there is not a word about such success in Ephesus, let alone among gentiles (1988: 18).

Spain only after the wars of 70 and 135 CE. The question of Jews in Spain in the time of Paul is still an open one. See Appendix 1.

132

Paul and Artemis

1.2.3. Biblical scholarship on Acts 19: 23-41 6 This is an important episode since it is the only passage in the New Testament which speaks of Paul, the apostle of gentiles (έθνών απόστολο?, Rom 11:13), in relation to Artemis, the supreme goddess of Ephesus. Bornkamm reads this account and its context as a Lukan construction whereby Paul's preaching "shatters the worship of Artemis [and he] is able to go forth from the city victorious, paganism shattered and Jewry powerless" (1971: 79). Pereira believes that the riot reported in this section "actually ends with a complete victory of Paul and Christianity, with the support of the secular and religious authorities in Ephesus" (1983: 33). Schlatter writes similarly that Luke's narratives "are intended to show the shattering effect Paul had on the whole religious life of Ephesus" (1961: 163) and at the same time, Schlatter argues that the vehemence of the opposition is a sure sign of Paul's success. Haenchen concludes his comments on the Acts report of Paul's work in Ephesus: So Paul is victorious, without himself setting foot on the field of battle. Politically exonerated, he can as victor leave the shattered paganism of Ephesus to itself (1971: 579; similarly, 1963: 179).

Grundmann holds that in the whole Ephesian section (18:24 - 19:40) Luke wishes to claim that [NJicht nur die Welt der Magie, auch die Anbetung der Götter versinkt vor der Macht der apostolischen Botschaft, und ihre Feinde können dem Apostel nichts anhaben [and that this account] ist ein deutliches Zeichen für die weitreichende Wirkung der Predigt und Lehre des Paulus (1964: 68). 7

Grundmann uses 1 Cor 16:8 as evidence of the victory Paul sensed over polytheism which was experiencing "eine schwere Krise seiner Existenz" (69).

For inscriptional parallels to many words and phrases in this episode, see Lampe (1992). There is little doubt that Luke was familiar with local Ephesian social terminology and custom. This is a very common view in scholarship. Orr & Walther believe that "the fantastic success of Paul's preaching was accompanied by the desertion of idol worship and the burning of magic books" (1976: 90). D.J. Williams says: "Luke tells us little of Paul's years at Ephesus, but the little he does tell shows how great an impact Paul had on the city" (1985/90: 332). Stählin likewise claims that these verses "die Macht des Evangeliums über das ephesinische Heidentum anschaulich darstellen" (1975: 258); and Elliger understands that "der Paulus des Lukas ist der Triumphator" (1985: 140). Stegemann believes this episode is told as a reaction to Paul's brilliant success among the Greeks (1991: 197). And Molthagen says the episode represents the triumph of Paul's proclamation (1991: 65).

Evidence from Acts

133

Polytheism may have been at some critical point, but the cult of Artemis was not. It appears Grundmann makes no such distinction since he uses the inscription of 160-162 CE (which declares the whole month of Artemis to be a sacred month) as evidence of the decline of the cult, seeking reinstatement through that decree (69 η 35). But a decline in 160 CE certainly is no evidence that there was a similar state of affairs in the cult during Paul's stay in the sixth decade of the first century CE. Besides, that particular edict suggests a strengthening of an already strong cult rather than an indication of decline. These scholars (who probably have simply accepted uncritically the views of their predecessors) have misrepresented and misunderstood Luke who does not indicate great success on the part of Paul over against the goddess and her cult. The opposite is the case: Luke acknowledges that Paul leaves the city never to return, 8 not in triumph but as not being able to go through the great and energetic door (1 Cor 16:9) and so turning elsewhere. It may be true that Luke portrays Paul as an heroic and ideal missionary, but when it comes to Paul's stay in Ephesus, Luke and/or his sources are accurate: Paul did not return to the city, either because he had other plans (Acts 19:21 suggests this), or because Paul was banned from the city - either way, the Ephesians saw his face no more (Acts 20:38). Other teachers, not of the Pauline tradition, very soon (by the time Luke writes) took his place (20:29). In this episode, Paul (somewhat indirectly) comes across gentile Ephesians worshippers and others associated in some way with Artemis, the famed goddess of Ephesus. A close study of the text will indicate that Paul and the Christian movement made little impact on the Artemis cult. In Ephesus, Christians were not a great threat, and did not win many converts from the cult. Before examining the passage, two matters must be mentioned if only in passing. The first concerns the text itself. The variants between the Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Bezae are significant and often interesting. 9 The other matter concerns Luke's use of the tradition in this episode. It is unlikely that Luke was an eyewitness to events and more likely that he is using sources. Stegemann grants little historical value to Luke's version of the "riot" (and to any other Ephesian episodes) and believes, rightly, that Paul plays only a Nebenrolle in it (1991: 197). Molthagen gives it little historical credibility as an event in Paul's time, but thinks it may be a report of a later conflict between Christians and local Ephesians (1991: 70). Lüdemann believes the original source of 19:23-40 told of a profane event, with Luke introducing Paul and his companions (1987: 226-227). Lampe has difficulty with Liidemann's Grundmann thinks that the only way to explain Paul's calling of the Ephesian elders to Miletus is on the basis that Paul was exiled, having also been imprisoned in Ephesus (1964: 71-73). See Delebecque (1983) and Ropes (1926: lvi-lxxxiv).

134

Paul and Artemis

hypothesis believing that Lüdemann does not clearly distinguish between the events which have alleged local scenic elements like those in the theatre and with the grammateus, and those events which come from tradition. Lüdemann seems to be saying that all the narration goes back to Luke and only the "local color" is traditional, and that Luke himself probably tested his creations on the basis of the general knowledge about Ephesus at his disposal. Lampe argues that if only the fragments of local color go back to "tradition" and not also a few of the events - or narrative pieces - then the text is ab ovo Christian and there is as little sense in speaking of the profane/secular character of the episode as there is of Christianised additions (Lampe 1992: 71). Lampe thinks Luke has not been so free with tradition. The character of Alexander for example is known to his readers/audience - there is no τι? as in Luke's introduction of others (1992: 71). He rejects the commonly-held "intermezzo" idea of 19:33-34 on the basis that Alexander is known and is a Judenchrist. Luke himself, and his audience, were Judenchristen (75). Lampe is far happier to grant some historical value to the account and believes that Luke records an original Christian conflict ab ovo even if the tradition does not go back to Luke but has been received by him (76). The speech of the grammateus, however, Lampe is prepared to accept as being constructed by Luke himself (76). 10 Lampe's position rests on the claim that Alexander was known to the audience as evidenced by the absent τις·. That is a very thin thread on which to hang an hypothesis. The absence of Paul from nearly all of the related events gives weight to the claim that this is either a non-Christian disturbance used for Luke's purposes, or an account of a disturbance involving Christians either during Paul's stay there but not involving Paul or in a period closer to Luke's time of writing with an "insert" involving Paul, albeit tangentially. If the possibility that this is an accurate account of an event in Paul's own experience is dismissed, then the more feasible possibility is the second or third of the above two mentioned. That the episode is based on what was originally a nonChristian disturbance leaves far too much of the narrative as a Christian reconstruction.

1.2.4. Acts 19: 23-27 ν 23: The phrase κατά τόν καιρόν refers to a general time - while Paul was spending a little more time in Asia and not intending to stay indefinitely [έπέσχεν χρόνον] (19:22). Luke is not very definite about Paul's movements and plans concerning Ephesus. Wills claims the speech parallels the pattern of Christian addresses in Acts and elsewhere (1984: 287).

Evidence from Acts

135

There was a τάραχο? ούκ ολίγο? ne pi τη? όδοΟ. Τάραχο? has the meaning of consternation, anxiety, commotion, and need not mean anything on a large scale.11 The disturbance is concerning "The Way". It is interesting to note the Jewish terminology which occurs in the Ephesian episodes. "The Way" (ή όδο?) and "the kingdom" (βασιλεία) Paul preaches (19:8; compare also 20:25) are basic Jewish terms. As will be discussed in more detail in the next chapter, when Luke uses the term "The Way" he is referring to a group of people, and not [only] to their teachings or practices. The presence of a group of people who call themselves "The Way" had caused a disturbance within the Jewish community (19:8) and does likewise now also among the gentiles in Ephesus. If this group spoke and taught about a "kingdom" and a "resurrection" and about "the Coming One", all of which meant the end of things as the Ephesians knew them, that this should cause "not a little disturbance" is quite understandable. 12 Ephesians who knew their history would remember the turmoil the city went through whenever "kings" claimed Ephesus as part of their kingdom. They also were sensitive to the trouble such talk might bring from the Romans (19:40). ν 24: Demetrius, 13 a worker in silver who made shrines of Artemis, 14 used to bring or was bringing (imperfect: παρείχετο) not a little trade/business (εργασία) to the artisans. It is difficult to determine the status of artisans in cities such as Ephesus. On the one hand, there was a "strong moral antipathy towards professional manual workers", with some prohibited from citizenship (Burford 1988: 383). For Aristotle, "the best ordered state will not make an artisan (βάναυσο?) a citizen (Politics III.3.2). Many centuries later, Dio Chrysostom's comment on the linen-workers of Tarsus is an example of antipathy and ambiguity regarding citizenship rights for such groups (Or. 34). On the other hand, craftworkers were not divorced from the legendary

Compare the same wording used in 12:18 where the τάραχος takes place among the soldiers at the discovery of Peter's escape from prison. Here, of course, the disturbance is ούκ όλίγος·. The phrase θορύβο? και ταραχή is used in Philo (De vita Mos. 1.178) and occurs in an inscription referring to a bakers riot/strike in Ephesus in the second century (I.Eph. Π.215). It needs to be remembered that people lived and worked in very close proximity to one another and privacy was at a high premium for all but the very wealthy. Hicks conjectured that the Demetrius here is the same one mentioned in an inscription as veoTTOLÓs1 (1890: 403). Luke paraphrased his original source which read Δημήτριό? TL? όνόματι, άργυροκόπο? ων καΐ νεοποιό? τη? 'Αρτέμιδος· (1890: 418). It is no more than a conjecture. No silver shrines have been found, but there are artifactual remains of a miniature marble temple of Artemis, clearly made for devotional purposes; and a small lead idol of Artemis, also made for such purposes, has been found (New Docs 4 [1987] 9). The Codex Bezae does not specifically say the shrines were silver - simply, ναοί.

136

Paul and Artemis

Daedalus who was a "practical workman and magical contriver of fantastic devices" (Burford 1988: 367). Harrison makes the interesting claim that the curetes "have all manner of magical capacities" and that "closely akin to this magical aspect is the fact that they are metal-workers. Among primitive people metallurgy is an uncanny craft, and the smith is half medicine man" (1962: 26). This is an understandable association. Makers of shrines, like makers of anything sacred, may have been understood to be "inspired", filled with the spirit of the gods or the Muses, like other "makers" (ποιηταί), the poets and the singers. Skill was not a natural ability but divinely inspired. Such a view might add weight to the suggestion of Hicks that Demetrius was νεοττοιό? (1890: 403-407), albeit for different reasons than he proposed. On the other hand, Aristotle held that the priesthood, at least, should not be appointed from among the tillers of the soil nor from the artisans (βάναυσοι = τ ε χ ν ΐ τ α ι in Aristotle) because they were not citizens, in his view (Politics VII.8.6). Demetrius is wealthy - he had to obtain his silver presumably at some cost. His wealth and his business brought work for others. They stood to lose more than Demetrius and that possibly explains why the latter drops out of the picture once the guilds are alerted to what is at stake. Kistemaker misunderstands the situation when he states that Demetrius and the guilds "under the guise of religion, [they] defended their source of income" (1990: 696). Pereira likewise thinks Demetrius is motivated only by vested interests (1983: 191). But Demetrius is not a con-artist, a profiteer, or hypocritical in any way. Prestige, money, honor and devotion to the gods went hand in hand. The gods were "business" and good for business. The importance of patrons and benefactors and their quite massive donations at times towards the continuation, upkeep or renovation of the cults has been mentioned. Honor for the gods brought honor for those who served the gods; dishonor for the gods brought dishonor to those in the business of the gods. Much that was done in association with the worship of Artemis was quite intimately connected with business. Demetrius made shrines of Artemis - that brought honor to Artemis, honor to Ephesus and honor to Demetrius. So for the Ephesians, Demetrius was an honorable man in much the same way as Vibius Salutaris was at the very beginning of the second century CE. Demetrius was a man of status among the guilds, possibly the patron of some of them. The fact that the grammateus singles him out from the technicians who are with him (ol συν αΰτω τ ε χ ν ί τ α ι , ν 38) indicates he too is aware of Demetrius' superior status and that Demetrius has the rights of appeal to the courts. ν 25: Demetrius calls the τ ε χ ν ΐ τ α ι and the έργάται together for a special meeting (συναθροίσα?). The former group are Demetrius' own craftsmen, qualified silversmiths; the latter are workers in the same trade and similar

Evidence from Acts

137

occupations, but employed in a lower order of activities. Codex D does not mention the second group at all: The meeting is only of συντεχνάται. 1 5 The verb συναθρο(£ει.ν is sometimes used to denote meetings for the purpose of worship. 16 It is the same verb used in the order of Claudius banning Jewish meetings in Rome in 41 CE (Dio 60.6.6). That there were guilds of silversmiths is substantiated by the inscriptional evidence. From Smyrna, the guild is ή συνεργασία των άργυροκόπων καΐ χρυσοχόων (New Docs 4 [1987] 9). An Ephesian inscription refers to ό τόπο? των άργυροκόπων (J.Eph. Π.547) which marked the place where the silversmiths conducted their business; and another speaks of τό πλήθος· των άργυροχόων (J.Eph. 11.585). Demetrius' speech is addressed only to the guilds of craftworkers and their laborers and not to the general population. He emphasises the source of their livelihood - the making of replica temple-shrines. It is a profitable business eutropia suggests more than just a means of income, it implies prosperity, "an easy means of earning a living" {BAG 324). ν 26: "This Paul" (ό Παύλος ουτο?) 17 - who has not been mentioned previously in the episode - persuaded (πβίσα?) and misled (μετέστησβν) 18 a large number of people with his message that they are not gods who are made by hands. This verse is often understood as evidence that Paul had a dramatic influence on the cult. "The incident shows how radically the pagan cult was affected by Paul's preaching" (Pereira 1983: 190). But Paul's message would not have been new for the Ephesians. It had been said before, and it was to be said again. Their own Heraclitus centuries before had said: ούκ ϊστε δτι ούκ εστι θεό? χειρότμητο? ... ολος ό κόσμο? αύτω ναό? έστι (Letter 4). As Attridge says:

Delebecque makes too much of this point, claiming that Demetrius is flattering all the workers by addressing them in this way (1983: 420-421). The Codex Bezae text only refers to τεχνίται and never to the έργάται as in the Vaticanus text. On the other hand, Delebecque's point can be taken that when Demetrius addresses the artisans in Codex Bezae as "AvSpes1 συιτΕχνεΙται., the addition of the final word may well be one used by Demetrius to curry favor: "My dear colleagues", or "My dear fellowartisans". BAG 791. Compare Acts 12:12. That sense cannot be ruled out in this verse. Guilds often met in rooms and halls that had space for the image of a god, and they saw themselves as being under the patronage of the deity. Worship was never far away. Codex Bezae adds τΐ? ποτε which adds to the belittling of Paul which Demetrius is trying to achieve. The tense of the two verbs is aorist, suggesting that a period of time has elapsed since Paul so behaved. Once again, it is possible to think that Paul is no longer in Ephesus.

138

Paul and Artemis

The criticism of religious cults involving images had a long history and in the last century BCE and the first two of the Common Era it seems to have been especially prominent (1976: 16).

Jews and Christians did not have a monopoly on monotheism nor on the monarchy of God; nor were they the only ones to reject the idea that god could be made in an image of human manufacturing. The pre-Socratic philosophers of the sixth and early fifth centuries BCE, Thaies, Anaximander and Anaximenes - all from Miletus in Asia Minor - "believed in a single immortal divinity which was all-powerful and all-embracing - and not human in form" (Muir 1985: 196). Centuries later, Apollonius of Tyana scoffed at the practice of wearing images of the gods around the neck (Philostratus Vit. Apoll. 5.20); and almost contemporaneously with Paul, Seneca was saying: prope est a te deus, tecum est, intus est (Ep. 41.1). But these ideas generally "did not, of course, touch most ordinary Greek citizens" (Muir 1985: 199). This complaint of Demetrius does not indicate that Paul had great success in Ephesus nor that many "converted" and became Christian. For Luke "conversion" means μετάνοια and π ί σ π ? (for example, Acts 2:38; 16:31) or at least a turning away from idols to worship the living God (14:15-17; 17:24) and Luke records none of that in his Ephesian narratives. The verb μεθίστημι means "to change an opinion; to come to a different point of view" (BAG 500; compare its use in Josephus Ant. 10.242; 19.193 and Philo Quod Deus 34 and De Ioseph. 238). L.T. Johnson understands the verb more in a social and political sense (1992: 347) - Paul's message was changing the opinions and the thinking of the crowds. The fickleness of the crowds was wearying to those trying to keep order and control. So there is no need to understand that Demetrius is concerned about conversions to The Way. But having said that, there is little doubt that Demetrius was concerned for his business and that concern was brought about by the message of Paul and the effect it was having - and potentially could have - on the usual buyers of Demetrius' products. Paul was changing people's opinions about whether gods made by human hands are in fact gods or not. This is not the same as saying that Paul convinced these same people to believe in his message about Jesus Christ (whom, curiously, Paul never mentions directly in any of his sermons to gentiles as Luke records them). The audience in Athens was prepared to listen to Paul's ideas about the gods until he introduced the matter of the resurrection (Acts 17:16-32). When Paul talked of Jesus (indirectly) and of the resurrection, "a few men [and at least one woman] became followers of Paul and believed" (Acts 17:34). The same was probably the case also in Ephesus. That Paul had been doing this "not only in Ephesus, but nearly throughout the whole of Asia" is to be understood as hyperbole to make a point (compare

Evidence from Acts

139

Mark 1:5). Demetrius uses rhetoric to some effect in this address to his workers. ν 27: From a business viewpoint, Demetrius claims that the guilds' trade is coming into disrepute because the very temple, replicas of which the guilds make and sell, is being disregarded. That in itself may have been enough to incite fellow craftsworkers to take action, but there is a clincher: "If this keeps up, the very goddess herself may even (τε καί) be robbed of that magnificence for which she is revered (σέβεται) throughout the world". Demetrius does not say this is already happening. He simply - with rhetorical astuteness - mentions it as a possibility or as a likely consequence (μέλλειν). It is the rhetoric of emotive persuasion based on the argument from fear: If that happens then all of Asia, let alone all the world, would no longer come to Ephesus and trade and business in shrines would be finished altogether. It illustrates Luke's awareness of the power of rhetoric, and is not to be understood as an admission on the part of Demetrius (or a claim on the part of Luke) that Artemife is ruined and that Jesus Christ is the victor in Ephesus. Luke is not claiming the end of the Artemis cult. It is possible that he is indicating (possibly apologetically) that Christians are against the association of reverence for the gods with business. Ramsay says: The first way in which Christianity excited the popular enmity, outside the Jewish community, was by disturbing the existing state of society and trade, and not by making any innovations in religion. The rise of a new god and a new worship was a matter of perfect indifference to almost everybody in the cities of the Roman provinces (1900: 130).

Ramsay is partly right, but the distinction he makes between worship of gods, and society and trade, was not one that local Ephesians would have made. To introduce a new god inherently had the danger of upsetting society and trade just because these elements were not divorced in local minds. In this sense, the rise of a new god and a new cult was far from being "a matter of perfect indifference". If Luke is criticising the "business of religion", then he was not the first, nor the only one, to point out the wrongs of the cult, its temple and its economics. Apollonius criticised the Ephesians for allowing robbers to inhabit the temple (Philostratus Ep. 65). It is known from an inscription dated about 44 CE that the Roman proconsul made efforts to straighten out the finances of the Temple. During the time of Claudius, the diversion of the funds from the temple to private pockets had reached such a high level that the proconsul had to intervene (Grant 1986: 27). This is very close to the time Paul would have been in the city. It is also known that Nero ransacked many of the temples of Asia even to the point of removing the images of the deities (Cramer 1971: 373). Presumably, Nero acted out of economic necessity. It is quite

140

Paul and Artemis

understandable in such an economic environment that someone like Paul was not welcome and was perceived as a threat. Excursus: Guilds and Associations19

Strabo called Ephesus "the largest trading centre in Asia this side of the Taurus" (14.641) and later, Philostratus says Ephesus "had increased in size beyond all cities of Ionia and Lydia and, having outgrown the land on which it was built, had advanced into the sea" (Vit. Apoll. 8.7.28). It is not surprising, then, that guilds were significant in the life of the city. Ramsay says that cities in Asia had trade guilds (έργασίαι), led by presidents (έπιστάται or έργατηγοί) [1895: 105-6] or at Apameia, έμττοριάρχαι. Guild members (συμβιωταί.) lived together in "streets" like Shoemakers street (1897: 441). Broughton records long lists of guilds in Asia Minor (1938: 841-44). 20 Strabo speaks of ol τεχίται of Dionysus who were a guild of dramatic and musical artists headquartered at some stage at Ephesus (14.1.29); and an inscription from the reign of Antoninus Pius mentions the "Actors' Guild devoted to Dionysius" on the occasion of the contests of the Great Ephesia at Ephesus (Oster 1990: 1676). This indicates that some guilds were closely associated with the temple(s). Acts 19:25 includes crafts beside silversmiths who were associated with the Artemis cult, and presumably operated in close proximity to the temple. Burford (1972) claims that the guilds/collegia were important because the civic cult was too vast and possibly too remote, and the performance of private ritual was also essential for most - a need met by collegia where meals and funeral needs were satisfied and where work was done under patronage of the gods and other civic benefactors. In this sense, then, the very place of work where these guilds met served as sacred space. Barton and Horsley (1981) support this understanding of the role of guilds at this time as fulfilling the same function as cults. They were based on associations in which membership was not limited by sex or civic status, by

19

20

See Barton and Horsley (1981) and Wilson (1927: 120-135). The study of guilds is important because it? is possible that some early Christian communities were either modelled on them or existed as such themselves. For Jewish guilds, see Wischnitzer (1951). For labour disputes in Asia, see Buckler (1923). Broughton includes guilds at Ephesus of tanners, leather-workers, shoemakers, towelweavers, hemp-dealers, wool-dealers, bakers, fishermen, sculptors and potters. Jefferson Loane says that in the Rome of 154 CE there were some 167 guilds and that the carpenters' guild numbered between 1000 and 1500 (1979: 64 n 15).

Guilds and Associations

141

age or race (16). 21 Oaths were taken along strict moral lines (18). They suggest that the existence of such small cultic units bears witness to the way in which the political, cultural and religious uncertainties of the later hellenistic period led men and women to seek 'salvation' in social structures of their own making (25).

How true this is of Ephesus is difficult to ascertain. It is understandable that groups of people with a common trade or with a common ethnic and linguistic origin would band together, particularly if they felt the least bit excluded by the civic cult around them which existed primarily, but not only or exclusively, for the benefit of citizens. Common in inscriptions is the use of the word τόπο? in reference to guilds - each guild had its space marked on a column in the street: for example, the τόπο? of bakers. 22 This could be in the mind of the Seer in the letter to the angel of Ephesus who must take care lest the lamp be removed from its τόπο? (Rev 2:5). The lamp or menorah (λυχνία) may have been a symbol in Ephesus of the Jewish guilds or associations and may have been used to mark their τόπο? in the city streets. Many of these associations and guilds had varying degrees of political and social autonomy. Magie says that associations sought such privileges as exemption from military service, immunity from every liturgy, freedom from billeting, and truces and inviolability during festivals (1950: 1.428-429). It is not surprising that these groupings were known to be sources of disturbances, and occasionally came under suspicion, as Pliny's correspondence with Trajan illustrates.23 Dio Chrysostom records unrest at Tarsus when some citizens held a guild (πλήθο?) of linen-workers responsible for θορυβό? καΐ άταξία in the city. This guild was έξωθεν τη? πολιτεία?. Dio recommends that such guilds be granted citizenship rather than being allowed to fester on the outside (Or. 34). 24 These linen-workers reflect a political status very similar to that of many In another paper (1992a), Horsley examines the stele set up in Ephesus by an association of fishermen and fishmongers around 55 CE. He claims that 50% of the identifiable members are Roman citizens and that since at least 25 of the names also occur in the New Testament, it may indicate that many members of Pauline communities also had Roman citizenship. The claim seems to be made on the basis that "a considerable number ... possess Latin cognomina" (1992: 132). Broughton 1938/75: 825 - τόπο? των φυράτρωυ. See also I.Eph. II. 547, 549, 551, 552. Pliny Ep. 10.34. The problem concerned the firefighters of Nicodemia. His advice is worth noting in full: If you believe them to be detrimental to you and instigators of insurrection and confusion, you should expel them altogether and not admit them to your popular assemblies; but if on the other hand you regard them as being in some measure citizens, not only because they are resident in Tarsus, but also because in most instances they were bom here and know no other city, then surely it is not fitting to

142

Paul and Artemis

Jewish and Christian groups.25 In fact, in cities like Ephesus guilds could have been the basis for many Christian communities and for their evangelism.26 Like everything in the city, guilds were expected to maintain the "collective piety"27 of the city and thereby its well-being. To that end, they were often also cultic organisations and their places of meeting sacred, under the patronage of a god. Because guilds and associations were often made up of non-citizens,28 they were a potential source of unrest. A Christian πλήθος- had that potential. The authorities, however, would have been in a dilemma: Guilds brought wealth and trade to a city. Jewish guilds, assuming with some evidence that they had been in the city for generations,29 would have brought wealth and business to Ephesus - something which locals would have been loathe to lose, particularly if, at the time, revenue through the temple was down. The Christians were inseparable from these Jewish guilds, either in fact or at least in the minds of other Ephesians. Prisca and Aquila ran a business and presumably operated as or in a guild. They were of some substance (and were disenfranchise them or cut them off from association with you. But as it is, they necessarily stand aloof in sentiment from the common interest, reviled as they are and viewed as outsiders (Αλλότριοι). But there is nothing more harmful to a city than such conditions, nothing more conducive to strife and disagreement... I encourage you to enrol them all as citizens (Or. 34.23). The word πλήθο? is occasionally used in inscriptions as a word for a guild or association (New Docs 4 [1987] 8; also Broughtön 1938/75: 824). Interestingly, it is also used in Acts when referring to gatherings of Jews or Christians (2:6; 4:32; 5:16; 6:2,5; 14:1,4; 15:12,30; 17:4; 19:9 which refers to Ephesus; 23:7 and 25:24). See Hock 1979, 1980. This is a phrase used by Nilsson (1951: 150) and is an apt description of a phenomenon strange to Westerners who have such an individualistic understanding of piety. "Collective piety" could stand as a good translation of eusebeia. The guild of linen-workers in Tarsus about which Dio Chrysostom writes (Or. 34.21) clearly did not have citizenship status. A cartel at Ephesus suggests otherwise for a fishing guild which had about 100 members who were prepared to make a donation towards a toll-house, a significant percentage of whom had freedmen status if not citizenship (Horsley 1992: 132). Of interest is that the donations appear to be familial and almost in every case the man named is meant to be understood as the pater familias. Slaves also belonged to the guild. Horsley points out that the diversity of social status in this guild provides "an intriguing analogy" for a similar spread in Christian communities of Ephesus (109). The familial character of those Christian communities would also parallel this guild. Were the συγγευεί? of Paul (Romans 16:7, 11, 21) his blood-relatives? If so, and i/Romans 16 was written for Ephesus, then that would indicate Paul had a significant number of relatives in that city, which would also go towards explaining why he spent so long a time in the city. For Jews in Ephesus, see the next chapter. That some Jews operated as a guild is suggested by an inscription charging Jews with the upkeep of a fellow-Jew's tomb (I.Eph. 1676). One responsibility of most guilds was to provide for the burial of their members (I.Eph. 2212).

Evidence from Acts

143

associated with the synagogue, even though Christian, 18:26). Paul also had a trade and possibly worked under the patronage of Prisca and Aquila. As such a worker, Paul brought money into Ephesus and so contributed to its economy. It has been pointed out that Luke in his gospel and in Acts is very concerned about any who associate their religion with making financial gain (C.K. Barrett 1979: 290; Pesch 1986: 183). In Acts, for example, Ananias and Sapphira (5:1-11), Simon Magus (8:9-24), and the owners of the demon-possessed at Philippi (16:16-24) all illustrate this point. The burning of the magic books immediately prior to this episode (19:11-20) also suggests that The Way, the followers of the Christ, is opposed to the religion-business-profit connection. It seems likely that Luke tells this Artemis shrine-makers episode partly for the same reason: Christians remove the bond between money and cult. They are not motivated by financial profit30 nor do they operate as a financial institution. Wealth is to be distributed not for honor and status, as in the Graeco-Roman world, but for the well-being of the poor and of the Christian community. 1.2.5. Acts 19: 28-41 ν 28: It is the guilds that cause the confusion here, not the temple officials nor the priests/priestesses of the cult, a point well-made by Ramsay contra Hicks (1900: 120-123). The potential for stasis arising from guild disturbances is evidenced by second century CE records of a bakers' strike at Ephesus (I.Eph. 11.215), and a linen-workers guild being responsible for θόρυβο? καΐ αταξία and for στάσι? καΐ ταραχή in Tarsus (Dio Chrysostom Or. 34.21). Demetrius' speech has its desired effect: the craftsmen are full of fervour (πλήρεις- θυμού). This expression is normally understood to indicate rage (RSV; Trebilco "enraged" [1994: 348]) or fury (GNB, NIV, Rackham 1901: 367; Bruce 1988: 373; L.T. Johnson 1990: 348). And it probably is meant to be understood that way. But there is the possibility that it indicates the guilds' fervour rather than their anger. The behavior of The Way is a serious matter affecting the cult of Artemis as practised by the guilds who were under her protection and possibly also her patronage. Demetrius has just given these workers the cue for their hymnic response by twice mentioning the greatness of the goddess (ή μεγάλη θεά ... ή μεγαλειότη? αύτη?). So they begin chanting loudly (rather than "shouting"): "Great [is] the Artemis of Ephesians".31 Κρά£ειν has the flavor of intense emotion, and occasionally may Possibly the grammateus' defence of the Christians that they are not temple-robbers (Ιεροσύλοι) would add substance to this thought. The crime of Ιεροσυλία was not only the physical stealing of something out of the temple, but also making profit and wealth through the temple in an unfair and immoral way. The exact phrase ή μεγάλη Έφεσίων "Αρτεμι? is also used in an oath by Anthias to Habrocomes in Xenophon's tale (1.11.5). Anthia swears by this goddess who is ή

144

Paul and Artemis

even imply a liturgical cry (compare Gal 4:6, Rev 7:2; 14:15. It is commonly used in relation to spirits and demons, Mark 5:5; 9:26). This chant of the craftworkers is not in itself an answer or response to Paul and his message, but it is a prayer/hymn, calling on the name of Artemis (Ramsay 1900: 140), and taken from the context of the cult. The chant is not saying: "Paul, you think your god is great, we think ours is really the great one". These guild-members (who have come together for a "religious" meeting?) join in their cultic hymn. Nor is this "a one-lined chorus" (Kistemaker 1990:703) - the chant Μεγάλη ή "Αρτεμις· ' Εφεσίων is shorthand for the whole hymn or at least shorthand for the whole mythology which bound Artemis and Ephesus so closely.32 ν 29: It is not difficult to imagine how τάραχος· can turn very quickly into σύγχεσις·. In cities such as Ephesus, conditions for both work and living were very crowded. Such behavior was not at all uncommon or strange. Philo claims that every city is full of such disturbances and that the crowd (δχλος) regularly fills everything with confusion and turmoil [θόρυβο? καΐ ταραχή] (Flaccus 41). Codex Bezae says the guild members rushed out onto the street. That they then moved into the theatre is not surprising. The commercial agora33 stood well within one hundred metres of the theatre. Arcadiane Street which had silversmith shops (I.Eph. 547) was also very close to the theatre. This scene is one familiar to Philo who writes of a crowd streaming εΐ? τό θέατρον where they proceeded to call out with one accord [άνεβόησαν άφ' ένος συνθήματος] (Flaccus 41). Paul was not a citizen of Ephesus. He was an outsider and probably not even regarded as κάτοικο?, a resident from foreign regions. Luke, who in the Ephesian episodes appears to have a good understanding of local terminology, calls Gaius and Aristarchus συνέκδημοι Παύλου, which implies that Paul too was an έκδημο?, a stranger, a traveller (compare Philo Spec. Laws 4.36). The advice of Cicero to such people was presumably accepted by most cities: Outsiders are welcome but they must not interfere with the gods and customs of the city in which they are living/staying (Moral Duties 1.34). Outsiders were πάτριος· ή μ ΐ ν θεό?, which is a small hint that it was the aboriginal tribe of the Ephesians who "owned" Artemis and she was the "aboriginal" goddess (and not the Artemis of the Greeks, for example). In this case in Acts, the guilds sing the myths of the most ancient Artemis and so, as in Anthia's oath, are calling on the "power" of the one who was the fundamentum of Ephesus. Can it be paralleled with the hymn-singing that marks the opening of the English Football Cup Finals? More than just the one line is sung! Or, when Christians pray the "Our Father", more than that line is prayed. An Egyptian cult inscription found in Ephesus begins with a similar acclamation: μέγα τό όνομα του θεού (Bull. épig. 1955: 258). There was both a political and a trade agora in Ephesus, each in different parts of the city (Eiliger 1985: 64).

Evidence From Acts

145

dangerous to the stability of the city if they brought in their gods and refused to participate in the acceptable cults of the city. Schille's suggestion that Gaius and Aristarchus were typical of a Kollegialmission is attractive (1967). Gaius is identified in Acts 20:4 as being from Derbe and not from Macedonia as here. Schille's claim that Derbe represents Gaius' last place of mission and not his place of origin is speculative (1967: 46). But the grouping of these two suggests that they were part of the common Christian strategy of a community sending "apostles" in pairs (Acts 13:2; 15:22; 19:22; Mark 6:7. Compare also Acts 20:4). On the other hand, they appear to have been travelling (and therefore also have been commissioned?) with Paul. Ephesus appears to have been influenced by Christians from many quarters: Prisca and Aquila from Rome/Corinth; Apollos from Alexandria; Paul from Antioch/Jerusalem; and Gaius and Aristarchus possibly from Derbe and Thessalonika. Consideration needs to be given to the possibility that many such itinerant evangelists directed their work at people from their home areas now living in Ephesus. The impression given is that as the crowd moves into the theatre they forcibly and violently grab hold of (συναρπάσαντε?) Gaius and Aristarchus. From where and why these two men are seized upon is not made clear. They are simply identified as being συνέκδημοι with Paul. Was it because they were known to be strangers in the city that they were seized? Luke (deliberately?) identifies them as being Macedonians, that is, non-Ephesians. This verse raises the question: Where were the Ephesian converts to stand by Aristarchus and Gaius and Paul, if the mission had been so successful so far? Marshall simply says "the opponents evidently were not interested in the local Ephesian church leaders" (1980: 318). He assumes that there were such local leaders. ν 30: There is mention of the disciples (οι μαθηταί.) who would not allow Paul to go into the theatre. As is often the case with Luke, it is assumed that there are disciples in Ephesus since they have not been mentioned before nor have they been called by that term before. Elsewhere in Acts, the word μαθηταί refers to Christians. Presumably they were local Jews (who had separated off with Paul, Acts 19:9) who knew what Ephesian crowds were like. They appear to have had some authority over Paul (ούκ εϊων αύτόν. 34 Compare 16:6). It is too easily assumed that wherever Paul went, he was the kingpin and his authority was above that of the local community. Here, he is under the authority and direction of the Ephesian Christians.

Delebecque probably exaggerates the importance of the Bezae's έκώλυου compared with ούκ εϊων of the Vaticanus (1983: 424). He thinks the former indicates greater effort to stop Paul.

146

Paul and Artemis

ν 31: Some of the asiarchs 35 send a message to Paul urging him not to sacrifice himself (μή δούναι έαυτόν) in the theatre. This would suggest they saw grave danger for Paul if he chose that course of action. Friesen points out that in the some 280 references to asiarchs in the published coins and inscriptions related to Asia, a great deal of diversity exists in the actual wording of the title ... [so] it seems that the title Asiarch could encompass various sorts of functions in several different institutions (1993: 97-98).

He argues with some cogency against the traditional scholarly opinion that the asiarch was the provincial highpriest. Their precise role is unclear especially in the early part of the first century CE, but clearly they were men (there are extremely few references to women as asiarchs) of some wealth and status in the city. The annually-elected position included a close association with the temples as the inscriptions άσιάρχος· ναών των èv Έφέσω (Chapot 1902/1967: 477,479) indicates. Why would people of such high social status and rank bother to warn Paul? It is common to see this as Luke making the point that Christians are not dangerous to the state (Haenchen 1971: 578) or that Paul's preaching had received a favorable hearing in the upper classes of Ephesian society (Bruce 1981: 400; D. Williams 1985: 334). Mussies interprets this verse somewhat differently by understanding δντε? αύτω φίλοι to mean "being friendly to him" (1990: 190). Understood that way, the asiarchs were fulfilling what L.T. Johnson calls "the niceties of obligation demanded by philoi in the Hellenistic world" (1992: 349). It is what Aristotle recommended: "Friendship (φιλία) is the greatest blessing for the state, since it is the best safeguard against revolution" (Politics II. 1.16). Quintus Cicero (proconsul in Asia a century before Paul's time) in similar vein stressed the importance of friendship (amicitia), suggesting that anyone seeking the consulship should make friends with a wide cross-section of the people, from senators to active and influential freedmen, to leaders among the trade guilds because "if you strike a friendship with the leading men ... you will easily, through them, secure the masses that remain" (Handbook of Electioneering 29-30). It is striking that Paul nowhere addresses the Ephesian gentiles as he does those in Corinth and Athens and as he is reported to have done at Ephesus in some editions of the Acts of Paul. In the latter, Paul says to the Ephesians that they should repent because their gods are only wood and stone; they don't hear or see. They are exhorted to be saved or else God would burn them up (A. P. For their role, function and status, see Friesen (1993: 92-113). Also Brandis, PW 2[1896] 1564-1578; Lily Taylor (Beginnings 5 [1933] 256-262); Kearsley (1986).

Evidence from Acts

147

7). Such preaching comes from a position of relatively high status of Christians among the gentiles, and this is certainly not the position of the historical Paul. Even in the apocryphal Acts, Paul's preaching at Ephesus is unsuccessful, apart from the conversion and following of one or two women. In this episode, the only one to attempt to address the local population is Alexander. ν 32: Luke portrays the crowd as acting out of ignorance. Many times in the first decades of the Christian movements, it was such crowds who called for and stirred up opposition to the Christians and asked for judgment to be passed against them (Acts 13:50; 14:2; 14:19; 16:19; 17:5; 18:12. Martyrdom of Polycarp 3; Athenagoras writes: "the mob is at enmity with us for our name's sake", and speaks of "lying informers", Embassy 1-2). Luke is making the point that such crowds act out of confusion; when an official of the city comes along, he will be able to see that there is nothing to be concerned about. The fact that many in the crowd did not even know why they had gathered implies that they, at least, are not explicitly anti-Paul nor therefore anti-Christian. The word εκκλησία is the regular term used for the official meeting of the demos. It met up to twelve times a month (Rogers 1992: 228). The phrase έι> τη έννόμω εκκλησία in ν 39 suggests this particular meeting was not official or formal. ν 33: This is a difficult verse with unusual grammar. Συμβιβά£ειν is not a common word in Greek literature and some manuscripts offer variants at this point. In a fourth century CE papyrus the verb has the notion of "including" (Oxy.P. 48.3410); in the Septuagint it appears to mean "instruct". The noun from the verb, and the verb itself, can mean "reconciler, reconcile". Possibly the role of Alexander was to act as reconciler between Jews/Christians and the demos. Kosmala guesses the clause means "pressed together against Alexander" (1959: 349). Bruce translates ν 33a: "Some of the crowd put Alexander up; the Jews had pushed him to the front" (1988: 375) which is attractive. Lampe says the force of the συμ- must be maintained and so understands the phrase to mean: "Sie ließen Alexander zusammen (mit Gaius und Aristarchus) aus der Menge herauskommen" (1992: 72). The subject of the verb is difficult to determine. It may well be understood to be impersonal or collective which would then give the sense that the leaders of the assembly admitted or agreed to give permission to Alexander who was in the crowd and was pushed forward by the Jews. Συμβιβό£ειν may be understood this way elsewhere in Acts. In 9:22, Paul is described as συμβιβά£ων ότι ουτός· έστιν ό χριστό?. In his agitation of the Jews, Paul "agrees, allows, includes" that Jesus is the Christ. In 16:10, where the verb is used again, the sense may be the same. Paul has had a dream and so the group decides to go immediately to Macedonia συμβιβά£οντε? δτι προσκέκληται

148

Paul and Artemis

ή μα? ό Geò? εύαγγελίσασθαι αυτού?. Paul's followers "allow, agree, admit, take on board, or include" the fact that God wanted them to go to Macedonia. Alexander is a Jew. It is generally understood that he is pushed forward by Jews who wish to dissociate themselves from the Christians (Clarke 1836: 877; Rackham 1901: 368; Knowling 1974: 415; Howard Marshall 1980: 319; Elliger 1985: 139; Pesch 1986: 181; Bruce 1988: 377; Faust 1993: 329). This is possible, of course. But it also makes sense to understand Alexander to be a Christian (,Judenchrist) and because he comes from Ephesus, he is to speak on behalf of the outsiders Aristarchus and Gaius, his fellow-Christians. Meyer believed Alexander was "gewiss ein Christ" (1854: 354) holding that the verb άπολογεισθαι indicates as much (355). The fact that Luke suddenly introduces him would suggest he was known to his Christian audience; otherwise one might expect "a certain Alexander". This is the point made by Lampe who points to 18:2; 19:24; 19:14; 10:6 and 21:16 as examples of the indefinite TÍ? used by Luke when speaking of someone previously not referred to in his account and presumably also unknown to the audience (1992: 71).36 Lampe may be right. However, his suggestion - which is not originally his, but proposed nearly a century ago (for example, Weizsäcker 1902: 479) - that this Alexander and the Alexander mentioned as a coppersmith in 2 Tim 4:14 are one and the same is speculation and nothing more. Lampe would like to believe that because Alexander was a coppersmith, he had some status and so could stand in opposition to Demetrius, the silversmith (1992: 73). This is an interesting suggestion but identifying two men with the same very common name is hazardous. Lampe is correct, however, in holding that the term 'Ιουδαίο? is used here as elsewhere in Acts by Luke to express ethnic identity and not "als konfessioneller [Begriff]" (1992: 72). Alexander is pushed forward, or "pushed to the front" (Bruce 1988: 377) by the Jews (προβαλόντων αυτόν των Ί ουδαί,ων). He wishes to άπολογείσθαι τω δήμω.37 The δήμο? makes no distinction between Jew and Christian at this point. Horsley gives credibility to the idea that this is not a riot against Christians particularly but against Jews generally in Ephesus: 36

37

Bruce (1988: 377 n 75), and Rackham (1901: 368 n 1) are both conscious of the sudden appearance of Alexander as if he were known, either to the Christians or to the city. Both, however, see him as divorcing Jews from Paul. Luke uses some technical political terms in this passage: έκκλησία, and δ ή μ ο ? which in inscriptions is very commonly used in the sense of a political, legal body which makes decrees and gives honors to citizens. It would normally be distinguished from the δχλος. Γραμματεύς, άσιαρχει?, and σ τ ά σ ι ? are also terms of a political or civic nature and are strong pointers to an informed source being used here. Similarly, the cry: "Great Artemis of the Ephesians" indicates familiarity, as does the use of ή θεός (ν 37).

Evidence from Acts

149

Christians in the Greek cities at this date can scarcely have been visible to non-Jewish outsiders as anything other than a schismatic Jewish group, at most (1992: 122).

The fact that Alexander speaks would also indicate that there was no such division in any one's mind. He is a Jew, known as such to the inhabitants of Ephesus, and pushed forward by the Jews. Presumably he comes from Ephesus. Did Alexander have citizenship which entitled him to a voice? If so, did that entitle him to speak for his foreign friends? The question is rarely asked as to why the Jews were present at all in this meeting of the demos. Did some of them belong to Demetrius' artisans? V29 may imply that more than just artisans now attended this meeting, although it is not clear just who is the subject of ώρμησαν in that verse. Is it the whole city or only the artisans? Probably the former. The meeting is referred to by Luke as a coming together of the demos but it is not a regular ecclesia (v39). While the grammateus gives the impression that this is a very undisciplined gathering, it is clearly a standard, regular form of meeting in Ephesus since Paul thought he would be given an opportunity to speak, and some Jews also thought that Alexander would be granted a hearing - all of which implies that there was some process being followed. In addition, the meeting is under the authority of the grammateus which also indicates some formality in the proceedings. The presence of the Jews in this meeting and their desire to be heard according to standard custom suggests that Jews had some voice in the demos and possibly even in the ecclesia of Ephesus. It is significant that the Christians who are taken into the theatre, Aristarchus and Gaius, are specifically identified by Luke as not being from Ephesus. They are Macedonians (19:29). In the Acts of Paul, the first complaint made about and against Paul is "we don't know where he comes from" - in other words, he is a stranger (A.P. 2.16). As already noted, citizens in cities like Ephesus had strong antipathy towards strangers who upset their traditions, let alone their economic system. From the viewpoint of the Ephesians in Paul's time, Christians were Jews who brought in a cult from outside and not one which belonged in their city because it did not acknowledge the very goddess who was the protector of Ephesus. The Ephesians were not totally surprised by the claims of the Christians, since these Jews were preceded by many Jews in the city who had claimed the right to follow their own laws and to be exempt from the claims of the city on them, as will be shown in the next chapter. The Roman emperors, on the other hand, were prepared to stand alongside Artemis and they were accepted warmly by the Ephesians. In fact, it could be said that the Ephesians would not tolerate an emperor who wished to supplant Artemis, and so the

150

Paul and Artemis

emperor had no choice but to stand, at the very most, alongside her in the city. 38 ν 34: It is not clear how the crowd recognized Alexander to be a Jew, but if Jews in the crowd were pushing him forward, that in itself would have given him away. There is no need to suppose he dressed differently or spoke with a different accent. The drowning out of Alexander's speech is understandable since Jews were known for their insistent and persistent claims for exemption from worship of the local gods, and that was also the case in Ephesus since they insisted on practising their own customs. 39 The opposition would be even more understandable if this Jew was known to be a Christian and a friend of Paul, a Jew whom the artisans claimed was upsetting the cult. Just as the response of the artisans to the Jew-Christian Paul had been the prayer-chant Μεγάλη ή "Αρτεμις· Έφεσίων (ν 28), so the city (πόλις·) now responds with the same cry against the defender of Paul - Alexander, the Christian Jew. Care needs to be taken in understanding this response of the demos to Alexander. Trebilco thinks it is an expression of anti-Jewish sentiment (1991: 25); Stegemann calls it "antisemitismus" [1991: 205; Kosmala "casual antisemitism" [1959: 349]); Faust describes the episode as an "ethnokulturelle Konfrontation zwischen Juden und griechischen Mob" (1993: 329). But modern experiences should not color judgment. This is not racist behavior, but the reaction of Ephesians to anyone or any group who were anti-social, that is, who did not participate in the cult of the gods, or who acted in anyway to denigrate the gods, thus upsetting the well-being of the city. There is no physically violent behavior against Alexander, but simply a concerted effort not to allow his voice to be heard. The ancient myth of Artemis drowns out the new myth of the Christian Jews. That such a disturbance was not a new occurrence in Ephesus can be seen from Josephus' reporting of Jews in that city appealing to Augustus about 5060 years before Paul appeared in Ephesus. They appealed against mistreatment by the cities of Asia (ol πόλεις- έκάκουν), especially at the hands of Greeks whom Jews said καταβλάψειν kv τοις- έπΐ μέρους·. It appears that these actions of the Greeks in Ephesus included stealing monies meant for Jerusalem; asking for a bond for Jews to appear in court on the Sabbath; and stealing holy books and sacred possessions from the synagogue (σαββατεΐον) or from an άαρών (Josephus Ant. 16.160-164).40 The story of Alexander the Great illustrates the point. He wished to have himself acknowledged as a god in Ephesus. The city politely declined, tactfully saying that it was not right for a god to honor a god (Strabo 14.1.22). See, for example, Josephus Ant. 14.10.12. For another example of Jews being "on trial" in the theatre, see the incident at Antioch in about 70 CE reported by Josephus. An apostate Jew, Antiochus, appeared

Evidence from Acts

151

ν 35: The clerk's reply shows how confident and strong the Artemis cult was in his eyes. He sees neither the temple nor the goddess as being under any threat. The word διοπετέ? suggests that some Ephesians saw Artemis' image as not being made of human hands, as Paul had reputedly complained about other gods, but was rather of heavenly origin. This indicates yet again the strong claims of Artemis in the city. What was the διοπετέ?? Seltman makes the interesting suggestion that it was not a meteorite but a neolithic implement which was kept in the temple-like shrine on the top of the head of the Artemis image (1952: 132-134). The idea that the image was believed to have fallen from heaven would be supported by Euripides' reference to the άγαλμα of Artemis on the Taurian coast which el? τούσδε ναού? ουρανοί) πεσβΐν (Iph.T. 86-88) and a little later, τό τ ουρανού πέσημα τη? Διό? κόρη? άγαλμα ( 1384-1385).41 Artemis was the daughter of Zeus. The fire of the Ephesian Artemis near the prytaneion on the south slope of Mt. Pion was believed to have been ignited by a spark from heaven (δαλόν άπ' ούρανόθεν, Engelmann 1987: 150). If nothing else, the grammateus' distinction between the great Artemis and the διοπετέ? indicates the essential importance of the image of Artemis in the minds of the Ephesians. It clearly was of great antiquity, its origins lost in myth and legend; but Ephesus was its neokoros, as well as being neokoros of the great goddess. The claim that everyone knows of this honor and responsibility is supported in an inscription a century later (CIG 2972; Kearsley 1992: 203-206). ν 36: These things are irrefutable and non-debatable. Demetrius' purpose would have been met: The official voice of the city reinforces his business. The mythology continues; the threat of a god not made by hands (and from whom of course no artifact business can derive) has been averted. ν 37: What is more, the grammateus does not believe that Paul's companions are either blaspheming Artemis or robbing her temple. Both crimes carried very serious punishment, if not capital.42 Frequent Jewish advice was that Jews should not blaspheme the local deities or rob temples (compare Rom 2:22; Philo De vita Mos. 2.205; Josephus Ant. 1.249, 310, 318).« before the ecclesia in the theatre and accused some Jews of planning to burn down the city. The crowd was so infuriated they burnt the accused then and there (Wars 7.4748). There is no such violence apparent in this episode. The belief that certain sacred objects fell from heaven is not unique to Ephesus. Aristides refers to Athenian α γ ά λ μ α τ α some of which were των ουρανίων (Panathenaic Oration, 354). According to Socrates, Ιεροσυλία carried the death penalty (Xenophon Soc. Apol. 25). Not that this prevented some Jewish writers from ridiculing the gods as "senseless stones, befouled with constant blood of living things and sacrifices of foor-footed

152

Paul and Artemis

vv 38-40: The grammateus distances himself from Demetrius and his fellow-craftsmen 4 4 and warns them of the possible consequences of their behavior. As noted in a previous chapter, σ τ ά σ ι ? was seen to be the fundamental cause of social and political instability, and hence intolerable to those in power and with authority. Now it is not the Christians who face the charge of causing unrest, but the crowds. Cicero was aware how easily in Greek towns craftsmen, shopkeepers, and the urban proletariat could be stirred up if they were offered the right incentives. He also despised the Asian-Greek way of conducting meetings and making decisions: When you hear Greek resolutions, you are not hearing evidence; you are hearing the wild decisions of a mob, the voice of every nonentity, the din of ignoramuses, an inflamed meeting of the most unstable of nations (Pro Fiacco 17-19),

If Cicero, who served as consul in the region of Asia, is typical, then the concern of the grammateus, who was the chief civic authority in the city, is easily understandable. What he says may be a gentle put-down of the artisans' guild. The ancient image of Artemis of heavenly origin is what matters, not the replicas. The long and well-known history of Artemis in Ephesus could well stand in spite of any threat to a guild which made images. As far as he is concerned, this whole affair is of concern only to the guilds, and should be sorted out at that level (έγκαλείτωσαν άλλήλοις·). It is not unknown for the grammateus of the demos to have held a position within the temples as well. 45 If that were the case here, the calmness and almost condescending nature of the grammateus towards the guilds is the more understandable. Artemis is not under threat - Luke acknowledges that. If Luke shared the vision of Tobit that "all the gentiles will turn to fear the Lord God in truth, and will bury their idols" (14:6); then that dream remained unfulfilled at Ephesus. This is far from being "a successful mission to the gentiles" in Luke's mind. In all the Ephesian episodes of Acts, there is no evidence of any gentile becoming Christian as there is in Athens (17:34) and Philippi (16:23), and no names are mentioned of any convert, Jew or Gentile, as in the above two places and also in Corinth (18:8) with the possible exception of Alexander. In Ephesus, the only baptism recorded is that of the followers of John (19:5). Luke nowhere mentions Christians by name who were Ephesians apart from Trophimus, who is ó Έφέσιο? (21:29).

beasts" (Sib.Or. 4. 28-30). The Fourth Sibylline Oracle may have an Asian provenance and a dating of about 80 CE. This distance is accentuated by the addition of oìrros in Codex Bezae at this point. Gaius Arrius Antoninus was γραμματεύς· τοΰ δήμου καΐ dpxLepeùç ναών των έυ Έφέσω (L'annee Épig. 1971. 456, 458).

Artemis in Post-Pauline Literature

153

Arnold's recent claim that Artemis' "reputation as a supreme deity certainly did falter after her encounter with Christianity" (1989: 35) lacks evidence at least from this episode. So does the claim of Howard Marshall that "throughout Ephesus and its neighborhood many of the worshippers of Artemis were turning to Christianity" (1980: 317). Oster more correctly says that there was "protracted conflict between the devotees of Christ and Artemis in Ephesus" (1976: 25), although he offers no substantial evidence of that conflict. He rightly believes, however, that "the pagan sources make clear that the religion of Artemis of Ephesus was still a strong and vital force in the city of Ephesus long after Christianity arrived" (29). The archaeologist J.H.T. Wood, while not claiming to be a biblical scholar, was more accurate than many who are in observing that "on the departure of St. Paul, Christianity probably received a severe check by a reaction in favor of the worship of Diana" (1879: 328).46 1.3. Artemis in Post-Pauline Literature 1.3.1. First Timothy The letter addressed to "Timothy" in Ephesus (1 Tim 1:3)47 makes no direct mention of Artemis although it has been suggested that the hymn or poem of 1 Tim 3:16 is a counterattack to the Artemis claims (Oster 1976:43), or at least to "contrast the Christian Lord with Artemis of Ephesus" (Gealy 1955: 423. Kelly also allows the possibility, 1963: 89). Gealy claims that the following parallels apply: The Christian μέγα ... μυστήριον parallels the μεγάλη cry of the Artemis cult; both Christians and Artemis followers sang hymns of high honor; flesh and Spirit "contrast strikingly" with the stone fallen from heaven (Acts 19:27); both Christ and Artemis claim universal worship; and while Ephesus may be the keeper of Artemis in her temple, Christians acknowledge the Lord in heaven (1955: 421-423). He could also have noted that both Christ and Artemis "appear". While these parallels may at first reading appear "striking", a closer study shows that they are groundless. While the possibility that Christian hymns of this period were written as counterattacks or apologies cannot be ruled out, the He offers no evidence, however. He hoped to have found an inscription banning Paul from Ephesus. "I shall not relax in my endeavour to accomplish [the finding of such an inscription]" (1879: 328). He did not find it. It probably did not exist mainly because Paul's impact was even less than Wood thought. It is not my intention to debate whether or not Timothy is addressed to Ephesus; nor will I later debate similar issues such as the audience of Romans 16 or of the letter called Ephesians. I simply wish to argue that if these writings are understood to be related to Ephesus, then certain points can be made.

154

Paul and Artemis

general tone of the Timothy letters is compliant towards the non-Christian environment, and good relations between Christians and others are encouraged. 48 More importantly, apart from the "appearing" concept, such concepts as "being justified in/by the spirit" (έδικαιώθη kv ττνβύματι), "believed" (έπιστευθη), and "taken up in glory" (άνελήμφθη) have no known parallels at all in the Artemis cult language. The hymn clearly uses the common Christian language of descent/ascent which has much closer affinity with Jewish (may be tending gnostic) thought than with traditional Artemis cult language as far as the latter is known. In addition, the accentuated use of the passive voice of the verbs is another pointer to Jewish patterns of thought - in these actions and movements of Jesus, God was acting. If there is any apologetic in the hymn at all, it is more likely to be against those putting Jesus on the same level as the angels (compare Heb 2:6-9), 49 than it is to be a counterattack against Artemis. Finally, the Ephesian hymn names their great goddess; the Christian hymn does not. If it were a counterattack or apology, then one would expect the name of Jesus (as Christ and Lord) to counter that of Artemis, especially since the name was so important to many Christians. The best that one can conclude is that an ex-Artemis follower may have had felt some affinity with the language of the Christian hymn, but would not have seen it as an attack on his/her former goddess, and probably would have had to learn the meaning of the hymn from Jews familiar with its language and its worldview. Oster also notes that since eusebeia is characteristic of 1 Timothy (2:2,3:16, 4:7-8, 6:3, 5, 6, 11), its place in a 162 CE inscription reflecting piety towards Artemis "is noteworthy" (1987: 82). But the word is very common, including in Josephus and Philo; it is noteworthy in the Pastorals only inasmuch as it suggests familiarity with common usage. It by no means suggests that the audience were gentiles, let alone from the Artemis cult. It could be argued that its usage in the letters supports the apologetic argument: Christians used the term eusebeia but filled it with new meaning. But the term is hardly filled with new meaning at all. The direction of such eusebeia is changed rather than its meaning. Some writers interested in the status and role of women suggest that women referred to in the Pastorals came from the background of the Artemis cult (Gritz, Kroeger). Gritz maintains that the dress of some women addressed in 1

One might expect an apologetic poem or hymn by the Seer of Revelation, who adopts a far more aggressive and anti-social stance. The suggestion that Hebrews comes from an Ephesian environment is not considered in this thesis. If it were from Ephesus or directed to that city, it surely would support the claim that Ephesian Christianity was strongly Jewish in its expression and theology.

Artemis in Post-Pauline Literature

155

Timothy 2 was unbecoming because it was of a sexual nature which "would appear natural in the religious milieu of Ephesus with its Artemis fertility cult" (1991b: 304). Two objections can be made to this view. One is that the Artemis cult was more sexually ascetic than concerned with fertility, and that Artemis was rarely associated with fertility as such. And secondly, women's dress when entering temples for worship and the cult was far from unbecoming and "enticing" sexually, as Gritz would have us believe (1991b: 304). There were strict laws regarding the dress women wore in such circumstances, with limits as to the amount of gold, a ban on brightly colored clothing or purple garments and on painting the face white. Women were not to have their hair bound up and they were meant to go barefooted into the temple (Mills 1984; compare also the dress of Anthia in Achilles Tatius 8.13.1). Such dress and demeanor suggests modesty rather than sexually enticing apparel. In fact, the recommendations of 1 Tim 2:9 sound very similar to the practice among such cult-attenders, which would suggest that those women who did not follow this advice were motivated by other factors than their previous associations with the Artemis cult if, indeed, that was their background. Scholer's particular comment is also generally the case, that there is "no clear or particular evidence that connects this heresy [of 1 Timothy] with any pagan worship in Ephesus and its sexual activities and connotations" (1984: 199 η 19). The heresies and associated practices opposed in Timothy can be better understood on a Jewish background. That is not to say that they did not have a [distinctive] Ephesian flavor or that they were totally isolated from the influence of the Artemis cult - Jews and Christians did not live in a social or "religious" vacuum. But nor does it mean the problems came from gentiles who brought with them practices and ideas from the cult of Artemis. 1.3.2. The Letter to the Ephesians Barth says of Ephesians that it is surprising that no mention is made of Artemis (1984: 16). Surprise is, of course, eliminated if the letter was not written to the Ephesians in the first place. But that aside, it is surprising only if one holds that former adherents of the Artemis cult are addressed in the letter. Evidence that this might have been the case are the references to τα (for example, 2:11, 3:1). The references to these gentiles' past, which they are called to remember (2:11), are very vague and are referred to in relation to those "near", the Jews. Did the author really have much clue as to their gentile past? Arnold (1989) claims that Ephesians was written to encourage gentile Christians in their struggle against especially, but not only, the magical and demonic powers of Artemis - whom presumably they previously

156

Paul and Artemis

worshipped.50 It has already been shown that his evidence depicting Artemis as "demonic" and as closely related with magic is weak. Fundamental in Arnold's thesis is the notion that in Paul's thought "the heathen cults were the instruments of the kingdom of Satan" (67). As shown in the previous chapter, this is a debatable claim. And questions still remain concerning Artemis. Can Arnold's claim be substantiated that Christians who before their conversion received false comfort from Artemis by viewing the zodiacal signs so prominently depicted on her cultic image and assuming that their goddess held sway over the "powers" controlling fate would now experience true and profound comfort knowing that they had been chosen by God before the foundation of the world. There would be no reason for these converts to consult either Artemis or any other pagan deity for oracular advice (128-129)?

What evidence is there that Ephesians refers to Artemis in such terms? Arnold points to the κοσμοκράτορε? (Eph 6:12), which is terminology from the magical/astrological world (65), and says the author places them under the leadership of the devil. He goes on to claim that "the way the term is used in this context may serve as the author's interpretation of the Ephesian Artemis" (67). And so Those who were once worshippers of Artemis (or other pagan deities) and/or those who formerly put their faith in magical practices and have since professed faith in Christ now have apostolic instruction about how they are to regard the deities or spirits in which they formerly trusted in light of their confession of Christ. The pagan deities are not imaginary or lifeless and therefore harmless, but neither are they omnipotent. They are powerful and evil emissaries of the devil himself who needs to be resisted with the powerful armor of God (67).

While acknowledging Arnold's contribution to the understanding of the powers, it is debatable whether Artemis is included in these cosmocratores, and that she is regarded by the author as being "under the leadership of the devil" (67). Arnold acknowledges that the term κοσμοκράτωρ is not used of Artemis in any texts, but he insists that "Artemis possesses all the traits of a cosmic deity who holds the power over fate" (193 η 87). He understands πρωτοθρονία, an

Apparently Arnold is not the first to suggest the letter must be understood on the background of the Artemis cult. Clarke, in a preface written already in 1815, referred to past scholars who had found references to Artemis, her mysteries, temple, hierophants etc. Clarke himself could not find these inferences - Jewish symbols are the only ones found, he thought (1836: 1420).

Artemis in Post-Pauline Literature

157

epithet used of Artemis, to mean "supreme in divine power and place" (21).51 But which Artemis does the word describe? The epithet is found in Pausanius who describes an area of the Artemis temple at Ephesus and refers to a parapet above the altar of Πρωτοθρονίη? καλουμένη? Άρτρέμιδο? (10.38.6). Artemis Protothronia is not the same as Artemis Ephesia. At best, she is an aspect of Artemis and there was a cult or ritual associated with her and specifically for her in that aspect. Pausanius says there was an image of Νύξ next to this Artemis. Was Protothronia Artemis any more significant in Ephesus than Nyx ? Callimachus throws some light on this Artemis Πρωτοθρονία. He uses the epithet for Artemis in his Hymn to Artemis (1. 228), but the Artemis he so praises is not the Ephesian Artemis in this hymn but appears to describe the Artemis known at Chesion and Imbrasus, a cape and river in Samos. SamosEphesus links are not unknown. Athenaeus knows a tradition which says Ephesus was first settled by one thousand slaves from Samos. He goes on to say "and the Ephesians are descended from these ancestors" (Deipno. 6.92). Plutarch also records a tradition that the Amazons fled from the Ephesians to Samos (Greek Questions, 56). So it could very well be the case that the Artemis of Samos was known as Protothronia and it is this Artemis which stood in the temple in Ephesus (Dunst 1972: 192-193). Arnold follows Oster on the cosmic-power aspect of Artemis and her association with astrology and the zodiac (1989: 28). Oster speaks of Artemis' "awesome power" and refers to terminology such as σωτηρία, κυρία, βασιληΐ? κόσμου and ουράνιο? θεός· "Αρτεμις Έφεσία as indicative of her cosmic powers (Oster 1976: 40). But these need not all suggest cosmic power. The first two certainly need not do so. ΒασιΛηΐ? κόσμου would suggest it, although the term κόσμο? need not mean "cosmic" in the sense of the universe or the world. The dating of the term and its location would also be worth knowing. 5 2 The phrase ούράνιο? θεό? could simply indicate Artemis' heavenly origins (compare Acts 19:27) rather than her status and power. There is no argument that the term κοσμοκρώτορε? has strong affiliations with astrology. This is generally known and acknowledged (Schlier, Michaelis, Cumont). The difficulty is with Arnold's identification of Artemis with these powers. The relation between Artemis and astrology is not so Is that the same as κοσμοκράτωρ? It does not necessarily have the same dimension as that term. Was Artemis regarded as the greatest of the gods of the heavens? Certainly not so in the Greek pantheon. Cook reports a throne carved out high on Mt Koressos which he thinks may originally have been known as Artemis' throne but more recently became associated with Zeus (1914-1940: 1.172). Oster cites it from an article of Keil, "Artemis als Göttermutter und Himmelskönigin". The very title suggests Keil understood Artemis to be of such supreme power and status. Does Artemis have that title because she is the daughter of Zeus?

158

Paul and Artemis

strong. The five known planets were named after Hermes, Aphrodite, Ares, Zeus and Kronos (Cumont 1960: 27). Does Arnold understand that these gods were under the control and power of Artemis? Oster believes that the power of Artemis is illustrated in the iconographie carvings on her images. "These depict her power over the ubiquitous enemy of all ancient mankind - astrological fate" (1990: 1724). If the only evidence is the zodiacal band on her image, then it cannot be claimed that this was the most significant aspect of Artemis because it is far from being the most outstanding feature of her image. Arnold trusts Fleischer (1973: 72) that the latter has established that the band around Artemis' chest is in fact zodiacal in character and that it existed on first century CE images of the goddess. Most images have five or more signs, others just one, says Arnold (1989: 184 η 141). Given that the animals are meant to be understood as zodiacal symbols, 53 Fleischer interprets them not as representing Artemis' power over the zodiac or her authority over fate, but rather as signs of the seasons (1973: 70-72) and so illustrating Artemis' power over the seasons. The crescent which is also discernible on some images is not a sign of cosmic power. Artemis was certainly not originally a moon-goddess, and Wernicke would insist that "nirgends" does she appear as such in any official cult (1895: 1354). Farnell also says there are no characteristics of the lunar Artemis at Ephesus (1896: 481) and the Artemis Selene only appears in a later epoch (531). The connection between Artemis and the moon is far more likely to have been through her role in coming to women and making them bleed (Callimachus Hymrv, King 1983: 120). Soranus, an Ephesian doctor, on the principle that "things on the earth are believed to be in sympathy with those up above", says that productive sexual intercourse is best when the moon is waxing and in the spring (Gyn. 1.10.41). Michaelis says that identification of the pantheon gods with cosmocratores is only late (TDNT 3 [1965] 913). Schlier, citing Cumont, mentions Serapis, Hermes and Helios, but no Artemis (1957: 291). Michaelis lists a number of gods called cosmocratores in the magical papyri, but no Artemis predominantly Helios, he says (TDNT 3 [1965] 914). Lee likewise lists gods but not Artemis. According to him, the Zoroastrian tradition was that seven stars represented the rulers of the world, that is, they were κοσμοκράτορβ? who controlled people's fate. They do not inhabit heaven - the abode of the highest gods - but the invisible world of the atmosphere around the earth This cannot be stated with total certainty. The variant numbers of the animals makes one ask why some and not others or all of the symbols of the zodiac? Animals such as bulls and rams need not suggest only zodiacal symbols. Even the crab would not be surprising on an image in a city on the sea like Ephesus. But the suggestion is more than reasonable and is likely.

Artemis in Post-Pauline Literature

159

(1970: 60). Ristow highlights the strong Mfi/zra.s'-Kc^oKpaTopes'-zodiac links and describes a relief (not Ephesian) depicting Mithras as the creator god who is lord of his creation (1978: 985). It is possible that Mithras, and not Artemis, provided the terminology for "Paul" in Ephesians. It is quite difficult to understand Ephesians to be referring to Artemis as cosmocrator.54 Arnold cites the Acts of John which refer to Artemis as one with δύναμι? who governs τα πάντα. But by his own admission these Acts are much later than Ephesians (1989: 22). Schlier typifies most scholars in understanding the powers (and the context of Eph 6:10-20) as belonging to the Jewish apocalyptic worldview (1957: 290293). In Eph 6:12 the wrestling is not with a local cultic goddess and her powers, as significant as they may have been, nor with the pagan gods in general. The author expresses himself in the language of hellenistic Jews (tending gnostic), and not that of former Artemis followers, even if certain words could have been understood by them from their traditional religious background. The powers of the heavens are not the gods of the Graeco-Roman pantheon, nor the gods of local Ephesus or Asia Minor, but spirit-beings which occupied the nebulous domain between the eternal God and the physical world which was increasingly being understood by many Jews to be divorced from the eternal God. 55 It is safer to assume the author is using Hellenistic Jewish terminology familiar to Christian Jews. Of course, if this is the case, then it could be argued that the majority of the readers/hearers of this letter were Jews. Arnold acknowledges that the language of Ephesians "reflects a Jewish view of the spirit world" although he knows that this "'Jewish' view, however, overlaps significantly with the Hellenistic world and in many ways is indistinguishable [from it]" (1989: 52). And Our analysis of the sources for the various terms for "powers" demonstrates that the writer of Ephesians reflects the prevailing Jewish and Hellenistic view of a belief in the reality of evil spirit-beings. The fact that many of the terms appear to have been used by both Jewish and Hellenistic groups shows that Jews and pagans in the first century could understand one another when talking about the "powers" (69).

Of course, another possibility is that it is the language of Hellenistic Jews! One does not need to speak of "both Jewish and Hellenistic groups" as if they were separable groups. Lee makes the same unwarranted dichotomy: The author uses language which is from Jewish apocalyptic so that the Jews can 54

55

Both Meissner (1982) and Faust (1993) relate κοσμοκράτωρ with the Caesar cult. This is far more likely than Arnold's thesis. For "powers" generally and Eph 6:10-20 particularly, see Faust (1993: 448-470). See Segal (1977).

160

Paul and Artemis

understand it and from Gnostic astrology so that the Hellenistic gentiles can understand it (1970: 56). That aside, common terminology does not mean that both groups understood the same thing by it. A gentile may have understood the "powers" to have something to do with Artemis, but it is highly unlikely that a Jew would have thought of "powers" similarly. And the language of Ephesians strongly suggests a Jewish writer. Arnold agrees: "it is certain ... that the recipe does reflect Jewish thought forms" and "strong Jewish influence" (1989: 152). Yet Arnold is also convinced the audience is predominantly gentile. The use of terms such as δύναμις·, ένέργεια, Ισχύ?, κράτος- (Arnold 74,75) may be common to Ephesians and to magical papyri, and Arnold may be right to insist that the Ephesians author, in using πλάτος·, βάθος·, μήκος· and ϋψος·, shows familiarity with magic terminology (92-93). But even if it be granted that the terminology is unique to the world of magic, the point remains: Is it magic revolving around Artemis, or magic in general? Arnold shows no evidence at all that such magical language was used in relation to Artemis. His evidence relies heavily on Egyptian papyrus texts which face three fundamental problems: Their dating (they tend to be well into the Christian era); their location (what was true in Egypt need not be true at Ephesus); and the absence in Egyptian papyri of any links between Artemis Ephesia and magic.56 There is another fundamental assumption made in Arnold's thesis: The addressees of the letter called Ephesians are primarily gentile. It is this basic assumption which allows Arnold to make the links between Artemis and Ephesians. Arnold claims that Many converts were streaming into the churches - converts who were formerly affiliated with the Artemis cult, practiced magic, consulted astrologers, and participated in various mysteries (122).

And again: Perhaps the majority of the converts in the churches in Asia had come from a background of magical practices and involvement in the cult of the Ephesian Artemis (124).

Unfortunately, Arnold gives no evidence to support this claim. But it is an assumption commonly made and so will be discussed in a later chapter. Arnold's argument is that gentiles previously trusted in Artemis to save them The Artemis of Greek tradition does not have strong links with magic in the papyri. Artemis nearly always is associated with magic only with Hecate and Persephone. An additional difficult but crucial question not tackled by Arnold is: What is meant by "magic" in the environment under discussion?

Artemis in Post-Pauline Literature

161

from the evil powers of the zodiac and magic, but in fact that very "savior" herself is demonic and under the control of the devil: The author intimates that even the "powers" which were once believed to be most helpful and easily manipulated, such as Artemis-Hekate and the Ephesia Grammata, were actually the ones who enslaved! (1989: 170).

It is hard to believe that this is what is being said in Ephesians. At best, the author may be saying to gentiles (if he is writing to gentiles) that instead of trusting in magic or Artemis (or any other god) to protect them and save them from the powers of evil, they can and should trust in Christ because he is the One who is lord of all powers. That Artemis herself is in league with those evil powers, or rather that those evil powers are the lords of Artemis and have her under their control - which is what Arnold implies by including Artemis among those who are αϊ μεθοδείαι του διαβόλου (Eph 6:11) -is not what the author intends to say. If the audience is predominantly gentile, as Arnold holds, the Jewish author is not warning them (informing them?) about the danger of Artemis' power. For most of the canonical New Testament, the gods have no power because they are of wood and stone and made with hands (Rev 9:20; 1 Cor 8:4-6, Acts 14:15). In the only passage where Artemis is mentioned (Acts 19) that is just the very point which is made by the Jew Paul about and against Artemis. What the gentiles in the audience need to be told is that they have to wrestle not with their past gods (who are powerless) but with other powers of which they were not so aware but which the author knows only too well from his Jewish background. As an aside, the idea of fighting against the gods would have been quite foreign to a gentile. The gods were to be placated and manipulated and pleased but not wrestled with or fought against. Furthermore, it is highly doubtful that the term διάβολο? was understood by Ephesians of a non-Jewish background to be the lord and source of all evil powers, let alone that they would understand Artemis to be under the control of that power. It is possible, of course, that the gentiles in the communities addressed had to ask their fellow-Christians of Jewish background just what the aiithor meant. If the addressees are predominantly Jewish (or even if Jews were a small minority), what relevance would the powers of Artemis have for them? The author is hardly saying to converted Jews: "You are now, as Christians, wrestling against the powers of Artemis".57 The obvious understanding is that all Christians, regardless of their background, face this struggle against the The textual variants are interesting. Some read ούκ ?στιν ήμίν ή πάλη while others read ίιμΐν. Certainly, if the author includes himself in the struggle, he almost definitely could not be referring to the pagan gods or their powers, since he is generally acknowledged to be Jewish. The second reading, however, could allow the powers to be foreign to him but not to his audience.

162

Paul and Artemis

powers because the evil day (ή ημέρα ή πονηρά) is at hand. This latter term would also seem to rule out the powers of Artemis as being in the mind of the author. Arnold realises the phrase "has end-times connotations" (113), but he makes no effort to explain how such a thought would have been understood by someone coming from the Artemis (or any other god's) cult. It is the powers of the διάβολο? (6:11), who is the evil one (ό πονηρό?, 6:16), which dominate the thought of the author and against which Christians must wrestle and stand. The gentiles may have understood the words, but the concepts and the cosmic view are strongly Jewish. Converts simply have to learn the worldview of those who have converted them and of the dominant group.

1.3.3. The non-canonical literature There is very little in this literature pointing to relations between Christians and Artemis at Ephesus. Justin says nothing - his dialogue is, significantly, with a Jew and not with a priest of Artemis. The Acts of Paul also say nothing, apart from a general reference in which Paul condemns idols of wood and stone. Ignatius, in writing to some Ephesian Christians, suggests an awareness of processions (πομπαί, Eph. 9), but they would have been well-known to him at Antioch and do not need to imply he was aware of such festivals of Artemis at Ephesus. 58 The cult of Artemis was also followed in Antioch (Libanius Or. 22.42) and Libanius suggests the Artemision festival was still being celebrated in that city in the fourth century CE (Or. 5.27, 42). That such analogies with the Artemis cult were impossible for Jews to make because they were considered "an abomination, the forbidden and hateful thing", as Ramsay thought (1904: 161), assumes that all Jews were so zealous and so orthodox an assumption that no longer can stand. The earliest and only detailed record of direct Artemis-Christian relations reported in the non-canonical Christian literature comes in the Acts of John, which may be dated from the middle of the second century CE at the earliest.59 At first, John preaches without success and is judged to be μάγο? (2:7). But then he faces the symbol of Ephesus and the ancient protective power of the goddess, Artemis, who is strongly identified with her temple (ch 37). There Pace Trevett who suggests chapter 20 and 9:2 have parallels with the Artemis cult (1989: 121). Gessel has recently proposed that the author of these Acts did not come from Asia Minor because his knowledge of the location and details of pagan temples is poor, as is his knowledge of the siting of John's grave. The author's remarks on the Artemis temple are not verifiable historically, topographically or archaeologically (1990: 111). The reference in the Acts to the destruction of the temple by John would suggest the work dates from after its destruction by the Goths in the middle of the third century.

Summary

163

John provocatively challenges Artemis by wearing black on her birthday while her devotees and priests wore white (38). He challenges Artemis to kill him or else he will call on his god to kill her followers. This was highly insulting and provocative and worthy of death, but the point is that the power of life and death lies with John's god (39-40). Until this time, Ephesus has belonged to Artemis (41); who is referred to as being αμετάθετος·. This suggests Paul's "success" in the city was unknown - or else that it was preceded by John's preaching. In these Acts it is John who has been appointed as "apostle to the gentiles". As John drives out "the evil spirit" (δαίμων) from the place, the temple collapses amid thunder and earthquakes, and "more than seven" of the images (of the gods) fall down (42). Many Ephesians turn to the God of John who has manifested such great power while Artemis remained silent and inactive (43) and they help to complete the destruction of the temple. John baptizes thousands and hundreds (2:30-31) and promises to stay longer in Ephesus until the new believers are weaned "and I have set you upon a firm rock" (45). The victory of the Christian God through John is completed by the raising of the dead priest of Artemis who then cleaves to John (47). While there is little of historical value in these Acts, it is clear that the author saw Artemis as the main obstacle to the Christian cause. All John's healings and wonders have not convinced the Ephesians (39) - the only thing that does convince them is when John provocatively challenges Artemis (40) and causes the destruction of her temple (42). In conclusion, the comparative silence in the Christian literature about Artemis and any other pagan cult in Ephesus could at least suggest that in fact until the middle of the second century CE, few Christians in the Ephesian communities were of gentile background or from the Artemis cult.

1.4. Summary The cult of Artemis remained virtually unchallenged in the face of Paul's proclamation in Ephesus. It is only in later centuries that Christians were in a position to be able to claim victory and to reshape the past, but then it is the apostle John - not Paul - who has the victory. There are no direct references to gentile conversions at Ephesus in Acts. The only Christians referred to by name in Acts 19:23-41 are non-Ephesians, unless one reckons Alexander as a Christian, and he is a Jew in any case. From the rest of Acts, Trophimus (21:29) is the only one who could with any degree of certainty be regarded as gentile. He is a "Greek" and some Jews

164

Paul and Artemis

thought he had defiled the temple with his presence (21:28-29). 60 The prophetic expectation was that some gentiles would join the Jews in the messianic age, and Trophimus may possibly represent those gentiles in the mind of Luke. But the majority of Christians in Ephesus, according to Luke, were Jews, not gentiles, as the next chapter will demonstrate. A later chapter will indicate that the evidence from Paul's own correspondence gives a similar picture. It is strange that so many scholars can insist that Paul's congregations were almost entirely gentile in composition and character. 61 Mission movements often have to cope with a back-sliding after the initial conversion. But backsliding in some Pauline communities appears to be not a backsliding into paganism but a sliding into certain Jewish ways (Gal 4:21; 5:2-3; Phil 3:2; Col 2:11-17; 1 Tim 1:6-7). Sliding into Judaism is strange, but possible, for a previous pagan; ¿acfc-sliding into them is, of course, impossible. At best, the pagan must have had some contact with Judaism in the first place either as a proselyte or as a σεβόμενο? τόν θεόν. It certainly at least allows the question to be asked whether the view that Paul's congregations were dominated by gentiles ought not to be modified to say that many, if not even the majority, of those in Pauline circles were Jews and the danger as Paul saw it was their backsliding into - or remaining in - their former way of life. Surprise in this matter stems largely from the unquestioned assumption that Paul was everywhere a successful missionary to the gentiles. Evidence of success in Ephesus is not so readily available; and the question as to what or who Paul understood precisely by "gentiles" is rarely asked. An answer to this question may give a clearer picture, in fact. 62 Raising these questions is not to doubt that Paul in many places did have "success" among gentiles and that more so than among Jews. Nor is it to doubt that Paul saw himself as "apostle of the gentiles" (Gal 2:8 where τα «ίθνη is seen as the opposite of "the circumcised"). Nor is it even to doubt that in most cases, most of Paul's congregations were of gentile majority. The question is: what was the case at Ephesus? Traditionally, Ephesian Christianity has been seen as gentile. I am There is room for a little doubt that Trophimus was gentile. It is not impossible, albeit unlikely, that he was a Jew who had apostasized or in some way become "Ελλην. Was Paul dragged out of the temple and the gates immediately shut (21:30) for the same reason: Paul himself had made the temple κοινών? Munck is a good example: the Pauline churches were purely Gentile Christian. Even if a few Jewish Christians were to be found in them here and there, they were so few that it was of no importance, so that even those churches can rightly be regarded as purely Gentile Christian (1959: 200-201, italics mine). This is consistent with his view that Paul was "a missionary to the pagans" (1959: 278). See Appendix I.

The Traditional View

165

claiming that the Jewish element cannot be so easily ignored, and that Paul did not abandon the hope of "saving" them (Rom 11:14,26).

2. Paul among Jews in Ephesus

2.1. The Traditional View It is now time to examine the mission of Paul among the Jews of Ephesus according to Acts and Paul's own correspondence. I wish to show that there is sufficient evidence to sustain the claim that the Christians in that city were predominantly ethnic Jews. It is a common claim that Christianity very quickly became a movement dominated by gentiles. So Davies: "One of the startling aspects of early Christianity is that, at a very early date, gentiles ... soon became the majority" (1974: 369). Some scholars take the point further, claiming that relations between Jews and Christians very quickly dissipated. Lake says: Owing to the speedy rejection of Christians from the Jewish society, the question of social intercourse between Jewish and gentile Christians soon ceased to be a real issue. Except in Palestine, Jewish Christianity had either ceased to exist or was quite unimportant before 100 AD (1933: 210).

Lake also claims that "the existence of any large body of Jews converted to Christianity is doubtful and improbable" (Beginnings 5 [1933] 77). Schiffman states: "The vast majority of the new Christians consisted of Gentiles and the former semi-proselytes" (1981: 148). Meeks believes that there had been a "decisive break" (1985: 94) from the synagogues and Judaism by the time of Acts, and while Johannine communities may have had close relations with Jews, "socially ... the Pauline groups were never a sect of Judaism ... [and] had little or no interaction with the Jews" even if they did have theological closeness (1985: 106). Dix, while firmly and correctly insisting that Paul remained thoroughly Jewish in his thought and expression, still maintains that "the breach between the Jewish Christians and their own countrymen was thus complete after AD 66" (1953: 63). That is, as early as 66 CE, Jews who had become Christians were completely divorced from Jews who had not become Christian. Thomas Robinson insists that "the Jewish Christians, [who] saw themselves reduced to a minority element in the church (1985: 131). It is curious that Trebilco in his work on Jews in Asia Minor gives no attention to those Jews in the region who became Christian. Apparently, he too assumes that Asia Minor was dominated by Pauline gentile Christians and that Jews resisted these Christians and Paul himself. So indeed when writing of

166

Paul among Jews

Ephesus, Trebilco refers only to gentile success and Jewish opposition (1991: 35).« It is the Pauline communities in particular which are assumed to be so overwhelmingly gentile. E.P. Sanders claims "there are virtually no signs" of Jews in the Pauline churches (1983: 190). And Louis Martyn writes equally boldly: It is highly probable that Paul preached the gospel only to Gentiles, and that as a rule his congregations were made up, therefore, of persons who were by birth gentiles (1988: 11 η 3).

Tomson likewise maintains that Paul's letters "were exclusively addressed to non-Jews apart from Romans" (1990: 59-60). However, Martyn himself is aware of some very significant exceptions: Corinth "was of mixed background" and so was Rome, he says. But the mixing of Jews and gentiles in these cities, Martyn claims, is not due to the work of Paul but to that of others. Apollos and possibly Peter are responsible for the mixture in Corinth, and Rome was not founded by Paul. In other words, Paul's work was almost exclusively among gentiles (1988: 11 η 3). This is also the view of Sanders who discusses the matter quite forcefully (1983: 179-190). Gaston asks the question (which appears to be rhetorical): "Are we to imagine any Christian Jews present in communities founded by Paul and addressed by his letters?" (1986: 170-171). This extraordinary persistence in maintaining the singularly gentile nature of Paul's mission and his communities causes such scholars problems when within those Pauline communities Jewish practices and beliefs appear to be prominent. As just noted, Martyn sees Apollos, Peter and others responsible for such situations, but not Paul. Gaston is perplexed by the Pastorals: "It looks like we have a strange hybrid, people who are really Jews or Christian Jews holding views otherwise characteristic of Asian gentile Christianity" (1986: 43). But why speak of a "strange hybrid"? What was "Asian gentile Christianity"? And whatever it was, did it ever exist without this "strange hybrid"? There is no need for such perplexity once it is acknowledged that most of Paul's communities were never totally gentile in composition. Fee, because he believes Ephesus and Corinth were predominantly gentile, finds it intriguing that Paul can refer to Pentecost (1 Cor 16:8) and so he resorts to such explanations as the Christians probably kept Pentecost observance as the birthday of the church (which surely is anachronistic), or to say that Paul uses Pentecost merely as a convenient marking of time (1987: 820). It is far more Lest one be misunderstood, it must be said that there are many scholars who agree with Kraft that "[m]any early Christian groups seem to have developed directly out of Jewish backgrounds and settings ... [and] positive contacts [with the Jewish heritage] were sometimes maintained for long periods of time" (1975: 180).

The Traditional View

167

likely that either Paul is speaking as the Jew he was, and assumed his gentile readers (if that's what they were) understood; or, that many in his audience were in fact Jews and knew exactly what he meant by wanting to celebrate Pentecost. The latter seems the more likely. Perplexity is removed once it is conceded that many of those Christians addressed and present in these Pauline churches of Asia Minor were Jews. Lightfoot is convinced that the Colossian Christian community has become so gentile in composition that "the alienation of the Judaic Christians is complete" by the time of Paul's letter with three notable exceptions (Col 4:10,11) (1879/1959: 32). But why should these three be exceptions and not the norm? Paul nominates three men of the circumcision (έκ περιτομή?) 64 who send greetings to the community at Colossae. Paul speaks of them in quite intimate ways: Aristarchus is ό συναιχμάλωτό? μου, and together with Mark and Jesus Justus is συνεργό? with Paul for the kingdom of God. That these three men, not from Colossae, send greetings to this "gentile" community (as Lightfoot thinks) hardly suggests alienation between "Judaic Christians" and Christians at Colossae. Nor does Paul's language describing the value to him of their work suggest Paul felt alienated from them or by them even though they were έκ περιτομή?. Robinson acknowledges that Judaism was influential and not easily shaken off and that Christians were not isolated from the synagogues. But he is so convinced of the domination of Paulinism (= gentile Christianity) in Ephesus that he gives just two short paragraphs to that influence of Judaism on Christian communities, and writes little more on Jews in Ephesus generally (1988: 119). There is substantial evidence to support the argument that Christian communities in Ephesus - which undoubtedly had Pauline influences - had a majority of members who were Jews, and that some of those Jews could have called themselves "Pauline Christians" (if any community ever so called themselves). When Ephesus and Colossae are put together with Corinth and Rome as "Pauline" centres with mixed Jew-gentile membership in their communities, then it has to be seriously considered whether being "Pauline" can ever mean being only gentile. Otherwise one would have to conclude that Paul frequently - if not totally - failed in his attempt to set up gentile Christian communities. Segal moves towards the likely situation. In his understanding,

Whatever that phrase means. In Ephesians, it seems an unusual way of speaking about Jews, if that is all that is meant. Rather than being a general term of Jews, the phrase probably refers to those who insist on circumcision as a [the] sign of belonging to the true Israel. Even then, it is more likely that Christian Jews would insist on that than Christian gentiles. When Trypho calls himself Εβραίος έκ τη? περιτομή? (Justin Dial. 1.2) is he underlining his Jewishness, or distinguishing himself from other Hebrews?

168

Paul among Jews the Christian mission would have been most effective where Jews gathered and where there was a population of transients away from their closest family ties ... It is likely that Christianity continued to gain converts from the Diaspora synagogues as well as from the god-fearers (1990: 271-273).

Even if it be granted that those scholars are generally right who claim that Pauline churches were gentile and divorced totally from any Jewish roots, if Bauer has left any legacy it is that Christianity was not a uniform, monolithic movement and that each Christian community must be examined on its own and for its own. What may have been true of Pauline communities in most other places was not so in Ephesus. To the contrary, there is good reason to suggest that Ephesus was and remained for a considerable time, communities of Christians who were predominantly Jews, with gentiles in the minority. It has already been shown that evidence for a gentile majority is difficult to find, and it now remains to provide evidence that Jews were in fact in the majority in Christian communities in Ephesus.65 While many scholars have insisted that Asia Minor was the centre of Paulinism (which is equated with gentile Christianity), many have also noted the strong Jewish influence and character of Christian communities in Asia Minor. F.C. Baur was aware that at a later stage, at least, certain concessions were made to Judaism in Ephesus for the sake of Jewish Christians, concessions of which Paul "would not altogether have approved" (1876: 2.40). Ramsay states: "It is evident that there were many Jewish Christians in Asia Minor" (1897: 525).66 S.E. Johnson writes that "the beginnings of Christianity in Anatolia are bound up closely with the numerous and wealthy Jewish communities" (1972: 182). Daniélou speaks of a very strong Jewish element in Asia, which influenced the Christian communities and kept alive, even among Jews converted to Christianity, the hope of a temporal reign of the Messiah. This messianic fever was never so lively as between AD 50 and 70 (1964: 385). 67

Thompson agrees with the general sentiment:

It is theoretically possible that the Jews were in the minority, but they were such a concern and provided such opposition that the writing of Paul and Luke is taken up with them. But that is not what the evidence shows. The onus of proof is on those who wish to claim that or to claim that gentiles were in the majority. Ramsay clearly uses the term "Jewish Christians" not theologically but ethnically. He makes the claim on the basis of grave inscriptions and names. Unfortunately, he provides no evidence for the claim apart from his belief that cerinthus was active in Asia Minor about this time (1964: 68). It is true that later millenarian beliefs appear to have been strong in the region (Revelation; Justin Dial. 80.4; 81.3-4; the Montanists).

The Traditional View

169

The earliest Christians in the cities of Asia were probably converts from Anatolian Judaism. Among all the cities ... indicators of a Christian presence are found for the most part where there were also Jews... Evidence from early Christian literature ... suggest[[s] that the links between Christianity and Judaism were close and that converted Jews made up a significant portion of Christians in the cities of Asia (1990: 133; italics mine).

He also is convinced that while towards the end of the first century a clear distinction could be made between Christian and Jew, "they remained entangled historically, socially, and theologically" (1990: 137). To narrow the concentration to Ephesus: Koester suggests there were a number of rival strands of the Christian movement there: 1) "The originally Pauline church" represented by the author of Ephesians and the author of Acts; 2) "a Jewish-Christian 'school' engaging in a daring interpretation of the Old Testament" (for example, Cerinthus); 3) a Jewish-Christian conventicle led by the writer of the Book of Revelation; and 4) the Nicolaitans referred to in Rev 2:6 (1965: 316). What is clear is that at least two of these strands suggested by Koester are Jewish; what is not so clear as to whether the "original Pauline church" is gentile or not. If Luke is representative of that "original Pauline church", then one would have to say that this strand is also Jewish, since the Christians in Ephesus according to Luke have strong synagogal and Jewish backgrounds. Koester, however, presumably thinks Luke is a gentile and constructs a Christian movement separated distinctly from Jews and Judaism. That leaves the Nicolaitans. It is not yet possible to say categorically who these were, but the consensus of scholarly opinion is that they practised and encouraged association with gentiles and the adoption of their customs, especially that of eating certain foods. That would suggest that they were Jews. Ample evidence can be proffered to indicate that there were Jews in the diaspora who associated very freely and unselfconsciously with non-Jews. The Nicolaitans' possible identification with "the teaching of Balaam" also suggests their background is Jewish (Hemer 1986: 88-94). Koester makes such an identification and so thinks they claimed to be "true Jews" (he cites Rev 2:9; 3:9) who engaged in daring scriptural interpretation, and who possessed mystical insight into the Divine (1965: 315). The strands identified by Koester in Ephesus were not evolutionary - that is, the one did not follow on one from the other - but the various Christian communities were contemporaneous, probably rival groups, if not separate churches. That being the case, Trudinger's suggestion (1988) deserves some attention. Trudinger posits the theory that in Ephesus there were very early (mid-first century) two distinct Christian communities. He believes the one community was of Aramaic-speaking Christians who stood in the tradition of John the

170

Paul among Jews

Baptist, Apollos, and the beloved disciple/elder whom tradition called John. From this community came the Fourth Gospel. The other Christian community was that founded by Paul and was a gentile, Greek-speaking community. But "Paul ministered to a gentile congregation in a city where there already was a strong Jewish or Aramaic-speaking church" (1988: 291). The letter called Ephesians is Paul's attempt to bring the two communities together (1988: 291). Trudinger acknowledges that his thesis is "at kindest estimate, a somewhat vague, and, it may seem, capriciously eclectic piece of writing" and yet he claims that each point he makes has sound scholarly support - it is when these points are collated and then conclusions drawn that the hypothesis is more clearly seen for what it is worth (1988: 295). But there are assumptions basic to this theory which cannot pass unchallenged or unqualified. Evidence that Paul and "John" were contemporaneously in Ephesus has not been found 68 - and his thesis rests on this assumption. Trudinger also assumes, like many others, that Paul worked only among gentiles in Ephesus. The evidence that can be gleaned from Acts, Ephesians and 1 and 2 Timothy and from Paul's own writings suggests that Paul worked among Jews and was claimed by some Christian Jews. This is the fundamental problem: It is assumed that for a Christian community anywhere to be "Pauline", it had to be gentile. On the other hand, Trudinger's theory has merit inasmuch as it suggests that from early days there were at least two Christian communities in Ephesus. Luke is certainly aware of various Christian streams in Ephesus. It also implies that Trudinger is aware that there is something "Jewish" about some Ephesian Christians. While the onus is on Trudinger to substantiate the claim that Paul and the "John" of the Fourth Gospel were in Ephesus simultaneously, it is possible that Paul and the John of Revelation were together in Ephesus or in its neighborhood, if one assumes a dating for Revelation of about 69 CE. And while Robinson must validate his claim that the communities of Paul and those of the Seer were the same, the earlier dating of Revelation allows a higher possibility that the two communities existed side by side in the time of Paul or shortly thereafter. Another way of viewing the question of the Jewish nature of the Christian communities of Ephesus is to examine the "problems" known to be there. Robinson lists John the Baptist, Apollos, Nicolaitans, Cerinthus and the Ignatius letter and rightly says that the connections between these problems have not been made (1985: 122). While it is not necessary to find connections and so to give the impression that things flowed in some coherent sequential

68

The common patristic tradition is that John was in Ephesus and died there in the reign of Trajan (For example, Irenaeus A.H. 2.22.51; 3.3.4). But a tradition that John was in Ephesus at the time of Nero is not unknown (Wernicke PW 12 (1937) 1351.

The Traditional View

171

pattern or line from Paul's time to that of Ignatius, a common element in these "problems" is their Jewishness. 6 9 In addition, too easily the assumption is made that the Jews of Ephesus (if not elsewhere as well) almost to a person rejected the teaching and practices of the Christians, whether Pauline or not. Kraabel can state: "Paul's mission to the Jews of the Diaspora synagogues ... is finally all but fruitless" with the events at Ephesus being the final straw and the final abandonment of the synagogues by Paul (1985: 226). Luke in Acts does not hold such a view of things in Ephesus. The letter to the Ephesians also clearly indicates that Jews were certainly present in the Christian community addressed in that city. 70 Assuming that these two writings are dated towards the end of the first century, then they would be in basic agreement with the non-Pauline Ephesian material of that period: the Fourth Gospel and Revelation. These writings have a strong Jewish flavor. Frend is right - a visitor to Ephesus before 135 CE "might have had some difficulty in differentiating between the orthodox Jewish and Christian communities in the town" (1985: 34). It is not surprising, then, that Irenaeus (himself of Asia Minor extraction) thought it much easier to evangelise Jews because they had the scriptures and because they, who were in the habit of hearing Moses and the Prophets, did also readily receive the first-begotten of the dead, and the prince of the life of God (A.H. 4.24.1; emphasis mine).71 They were not all "problems" at Ephesus! John the Baptist and Apollos need no explanation in this regard. The Nicolaitans were probably Jewish. Cerinthus was clearly of strong Jewish persuasion, if not ethnically Jewish himself. The problems Ignatius addresses at Ephesus are not clearly defined in these terms. In the second century, the problems of Asia Minor included the Montanists, who have peculiarly Jewish tendencies. Marcion was strongly rejected in Asia - the fact that many of his opponents wished to retain the Jewish heritage in the Scriptures may just possibly be linked to their own ethnic origins. The Pascha controversy also cannot be divorced from Jewish tendencies which clearly continued in the area. Even if the letter was not addressed to the Ephesians, the fact that at sometime in the second century it was claimed to be indicates that someone at that time understood Ephesus to be a community of both Jews and gentiles, and not only a gentile church. There is no doubt that many Christian communities in the east remained strongly Jewish in character and in composition. Eusebius says that towards the end of the first century, the Jew Justus was made bishop of Jerusalem "one of the vast number of the circumcision who by then believed in Christ" (3.35.1); and that down to 135 CE, all the bishops of Jerusalem were Hebrews in origin and "the whole church consisted of Hebrew believers" (4.3.5). In Edessa in the fifth century of the Common Era, when Rabbuia was bishop of that city, "es können schon Tausende von Juden gewesen sein, die ... den Weg in die Gemeinde gefunden haben" (Blum 1969: 105) and "viele von ihnen (Juden) stimmten mit Freuden in jedem Jahre zu, das Zeichen des Lebens, nämlich die Taufe auf den Messias, zu empfangen" (cited in Blum 1969: 105). It may not be incidental that

172

Paul among Jews

Rackham (and some others of his generation of scholars) is right in saying that Paul was, comparatively, very successful among the Jews of Ephesus (1901/57: 350). If that be the case, then it would be legitimate to speak of a community of Christian Jews at Ephesus who claimed to be "Pauline".

2.2. Diaspora Jews Luke depicts a Paul who is attracted to the synagogues of the diaspora and who at Ephesus, if not also in other places, has some success with Jews there. In fact, Luke paints a Paul who brings the gospel of the Christ (who is Jesus) to Jews in the diaspora in such a way that it is tempting almost to understand Paul's call as "apostle to the nations" to mean "apostle to the diaspora". If Paul did have an interest in diaspora Jews, it is important to understand who these Jews were; why Paul was interested in them (if only according to Luke) and how they might have received his message. Neusner claims that all land outside of Palestine was unclean with corpse-uncleanness and so it was impossible for one to keep the laws of cultic cleanness outside of the Holy Land (1983/4: 422). If this be true, it would not be surprising if Paul's different understanding of who and what is clean and unclean made some impression on and had some attraction for diaspora Jews.

mit Freuden in jedem Jahre zu, das Zeichen des Lebens, nämlich die Taufe auf den Messias, zu empfangen" (cited in Blum 1969: 105). It may not be incidental that Ephesus had some links with Edessa. The story of Agabus' letter to Jesus and the reply (king in Edessa at the time of Jesus) has been found in a door post of a house in Ephesus; and John the bishop of Ephesus who converted thousands of pagans in Ephesus, was from Edessa. It is also worth noting at this point that in Ancyra during the time of St. Theodotus, the saint "paganorum atque Iudaeorum magnum numerum adduxit ad ecclesiam" (cited in Ramsay 1897: 525). Ramsay believes that many Jews became Christian in Anatolia, especially in Acmonia and Phrygia (1897: 674). Generally, there is widespread evidence that the relation between Christians and Jews remained a close and vigorous one for many centuries (Chrysostom's Discourses Against Judaizing Christians is an excellent example; so also is the eighth century CE Disputation of Sergius). There are claims of frequent conversions of Jews to the Christian faith through those centuries. The Alexandrian history records the conversion of Theodosius the Jewish priest in the time of Julian who was convinced that Jesus was the messiah and so were very many others of his people (History of the Patriarchs 1.121-122). Kant refers to cemeteries in Cilicia in which it is clear that Jews and Christians were buried side by side (Massingberd Ford says the same for Phrygia 1966: 146). His conclusion simply cannot be gainsaid: "Indeed, the Jewish and Christian communities, in some places until late antiquity, had such close affinities that it is often difficult and artificial to make distinctions between them" (1989: 686).

Diaspora Jews

173

2.2.1. The relation of diaspora Jews with non-Jews The following observations are general because there is little data of any kind outside of Acts dealing with Jews in Ephesus. They are made, then, with an acute awareness that what is true of one city may not have been true of another. "[L]ocal factors ... provided a strong formative influence on Jewish communities in Asia Minor" (Trebilco 1991: 188). Both Kraabel (1982: 457) and Goodenough (1965: 9) also have rightly insisted on the great diversity of Diaspora Jewry. It is estimated that in the first century CE, there were approximately 3 - 3.5 million Jews in the Diaspora and about one million of them inhabited Asia Minor (van der Horst 1990: 166-167).72 It was in the heart of Asia Minor more than anywhere else that the power and influence of Judaism made itself felt both with christians and with pagans (van der Horst 1990: 176-177; compare also Hengel 1989: 116).

Evidence for such claims is provided by archaeological and epigraphical data from Sardis in particular, and Ramsay has shown the strong Jewish influence in Apamea and Phrygia. Unfortunately, no such firm evidence exists to show this was also the case in Ephesus itself nor that it was the case in the first century CE or earlier. It can, however, be reasonably assumed that because Ephesus was a chief city of Asia, and because there is evidence for Jews being a significant minority in Sardis and Aphrodisias (cities in close proximity to Ephesus) and in Phrygia to the east, that there were large numbers of Jews also in Ephesus. The question of Jews holding local citizenship is still a debated subject in scholarship. Roman citizenship is quite common - Paul himself claimed it (Acts 16:37). Appelbaum shows that many Jews in Cyrene had such citizenship (1979: 159). Josephus reports that the procurator Florus in the mid 60s CE scourged and crucified some men of equestrian rank ών et καΐ τό γένο? 'Ιουδαίοι άλλα γοϋν τό αξίωμα Ρωμαϊκόν ήν {Wars 2.308). Whether or not some Jews held citizenship in the cities they inhabited is another question. One funerary inscription, clearly Jewish, reads Αυρ. Σαμ[βαθίου] Ίουδα Έφ[βσίου] Ίουδέου (SEG 39 [1989] 1222). The term Έ φ έ σ ι ο ? can, of course, simply refer to the place of residence, although that would appear a little strange in an epitaph from Ephesus. That it indicates citizenship status must be a possibility. There is wider evidence that some Jews identified themselves and were identified significantly with the structures and organisation of those cities. So a third century CE inscription from Sardis 72

Figures are clearly guesses. Elliott states that in Asia Minor before 67 CE there were between 250,000 and 280,000 Jews in a total population of four million. He calls this a conservative estimate (1981: 45, 66).

174

Paul among Jews

refers to particular Jews as Σαρδιανοί and also βουλευταί (New Docs 3 [1983] 56). Once again, the problem is that there are so few such inscriptions and their date and locality make it impossible to generalise over time and place. However, Josephus does suggest that Jews were generally prepared to call themselves by the name of their native cities. He ridicules Apion's astonishment that Jews are called Alexandrians. "All persons invited to join a colony (αποικία), however different their nationality (τό γένο?), take the name of the founders" and so Jews in Antioch are called Antiocheans, and those in Ephesus "bear the name of the indigenous citizens, a right they received from Alexander's successors" (C. Apion 2.38-39). Regardless of their citizenship status, most Jews thought of the city they inhabited as their πατρίς· (CPJ 11.32)73 Ramsay believes the Jews of Akmonia (and Asia) had so identified their interests with those of their neighbors and had become so Asian or Roman that "we need not wonder that the Akmonian Jews became magistrates and agonothetai and highpriests of the imperial cult" (1897: 651). Trebilco is slightly more cautious, suggesting that in Asia Minor although Jewish communities did not have local citizenship as a body, many members of the communities interacted regularly with gentiles and were involved to a significant degree in city life. Moreover, some Jewish communities were influential and respected in their cities (1991: 186).

On a wider socio-political level, there is evidence that some Jews were prepared to swear by the names of the Emperor or of the heathen gods (CPJ 11.214). At Julius Caesar's death, some mourned his passing because he had been more sympathetic to them than was Pompey (Suetonius Divus Iulius 84.5). According to Philo, Augustus commanded that for all time to come two lambs and a steer should be sacrificed daily in the Temple for the emperor (Legat. 23, and 40) and the Jews appealed to this practice as a sign of their loyalty when challenged by Caligula (Josephus Wars 2.10.4. See also Schürer 1979: 2.312). 74 In an attempt to distract gentiles from damaging Jewish synagogues as they did in Alexandria, Philo appealed to them to remember that in destroying their synagogues, the gentiles were not adding to the honor of the emperor but detracting from it since many synagogues existed on the good graces of benefactors. Recent scholarship favors the non-citizenship status of most Jews, at least in Alexandria. See Kasher (1985), for example. Hemer, however, argues cautiously that some Ephesian Jews had citizenship in their city (1986: 38). Minority ethnic groups still today will often show ostensibly strong loyalty to their new country of habitation. In Australia, Jewish meeting places will often have an Australian flag or a plaque remembering those who have died in fighting for Australia in war, or some such overt symbol of loyalty to their new patris.

In Acts

175

Everywhere in the habitable world the religious veneration of the Jews for the Augustan house has its basis as all may see in the meeting houses (al π ρ ο σ ε υ χ α ΐ ) 7 ^ , and if we have these destroyed, no place is left to us for paying this homage (Flaccus 49).

Despite the "close relations with the pagan environment", Trebilco believes that "much evidence points to the strong retention of Jewish identity by communities in Asia Minor" (1991: 187), an opinion shared with Goodenough (1957: 295). Many Jews of the first century CE, as also of earlier centuries, were conscious of their differences from other nations.76 Philo says that the whole Jewish nation is in the position of an orphan (σχεδόν 8è και το σύμπαν Ί ουδαίων έθνο? όρφανοΟ λόγον έχει) compared with all other nations. When misfortune happens to others, they have nations who come to their aid, but the Jewish nation has none to take its part, as it lives under exceptional laws which are necessarily grave and severe, because they inculcate the highest standard of virtue (Spec. Laws 4. 179).

These "exceptional laws" did not go unnoticed by those around them. Juvenal said Jews wanted contemnere Romanos leges (Satires 14.96-106). Later, Philostratus saw the Jews as being in revolt (αφέστασι?) not only against the Romans but against everyone (πάντων ανθρώπων) and as living a βίον άμικτον, not sharing their tables nor joining in the libations, prayers or sacrifices (Vit. Apoll. 5.33). On the other hand, Philo claims that the νόμιμα of the Jews were honored by "almost every other people", something virtually unique to Jewish customs and laws (De vita Mos. 2.17,18). There is evidence that in some diaspora areas there were Jews who were responsible for, or at least charged with, sedition and treated accordingly by local government. So in Alexandria under Caligula and Claudius (Tcherikover and Fuks [1957: 1.73-77]); in Libya, Jews and the pagani "qui habitabant apud eos, seditiones movere et pugnare coeperunt" and in Mesopotamia, early in the second century CE, "cum ... fecissent seditionem Iudaei", the governor commanded that they be removed from the whole province (Chronicon Maroniticum 95). Josephus records among other instances Jews in Antioch causing disturbances (for example, Wars 7.47-48). Philo apologetically appealed to the stability and reliability of his people, at least in Alexandria. They are not a wandering, nomadic horde "occupying the homelands of others as strangers and vagrants, open to the reproach of waiting

75 76

This suggests that those houses had some symbols of the emperor in them. Trypho was bothered by Christians who did not differ in their way of living from the nations with no festivals, circumcisions, or sabbaths (Justin Dial. 10)

176

Paul among Jews

to seize the goods of others", nor have they just borrowed land because they had no means to buy it, but instead they have acquired the land and cities for their own property, a heritage in which they live as long established citizens and therefore offer first fruits from it as a sacred duty (Spec. Laws Π.168).

In their thanksgiving festival of the Sheaf they give thanks for the whole human race and not just for their friends, neighbors and local cities like the pagans do (164-167). In other words, Philo is wanting to demonstrate that the Jews (at least in his part of the world), far from being anti-social (in the fullest meaning of the term), are even more concerned for the οικουμένη than their gentile counterparts. To summarise: Generally, Jews of the Diaspora in the first century CE maintained their identity and sought permission from the cities in which they lived to continue to practice their ancestral ways and to be allowed the concessions granted to them by earlier Roman authorities. This sense of identity was maintained despite their enculturation in dress and language, in housing and work-conditions, and even in art forms, symbols, and architecture as shown in some Diaspora synagogues.77 Kraabel is right to insist that Jews in the Diaspora - at least in Sardis - felt quite at home in their world, that they were not syncretistic (1982: 450), and that they were "self-confident", maintaining an independent, integral form of Judaism (1978: 20-21). While the evidence firmly suggests this to be the picture, the question can still be asked: Was this true of all Jews or were there exceptions? In other words, were there those who did, in fact, abandon the laws and customs of their ancestors? And if there were, how many of them were there and what form did their "apostasy"

A few clear examples of social enculturation will suffice. It is well-known that many Jews took on non-Jewish names: Philo, Josephus Flavius, Paul, Apollos are four famous examples (See also CPJ Π.116-117). Kant says the inscriptional evidence shows that "Jews preferred Greek names and sometimes even bore theophoric names of the pagan environment" (1987: 673). In Babylon, Jewish children bore names which put them under the protection of the local gods (Bickerman 1988: 47). While Josephus claims that "our nation does not encourage those that learn the languages of many nations, and so adorn their discourses with the smoothness of their periods" (Ant. 20.264), he himself learned Greek in order to be able to write his history for them. Josephus also claims to have met a certain Aliturius in Puteoli, who was a Jew and "an actor of plays and much beloved by Nero" (Life 3.16). Harris (1976) gives evidence of Jewish involvement in the theatre, athletic games, chariot races and such like. Archaeologists have proved beyond any doubt that many Jewish communities adopted their neighbors' symbols - animal, astrological, and political - for use even within their synagogues (See, for example, Goodenough 1965).

Diaspora Jews

177

take? And another question: What did such Jews 78 make of the Christian εύαγγέλιον? 2.2.2. Evidence of apostate behavior Jews of the Diaspora, and presumably therefore of Ephesus, officially stood for at least three things: monotheism79 and its accompanying rejection of idols and idol worship; a refusal to eat meat that had been sacrificed to such idols, and a refusal to partake of any food and drink used or intended for such use by gentiles; and obedience to the Law, which was observable to gentiles in the practice of circumcision, of sabbath observance, and of a certain self-control and sobriety. On the other hand, it is essential to underline that just as there were frustratingly diverse forms of Christianity, so there was also a diversity of forms and practices among Jews themselves. "[I]f we would understand Judaism in any place or period, we must be prepared for a great variety of phenomena" (Goodenough 1965: 9).80 In terms of monotheism, numbers of Jews had throughout the history of their people an inclination to participate in the cultural and religious environment of their neighbors. The repeated prophetic warnings against idolatry were not simply given to reinforce the existing practice of abstention from local idols and all that pertained to them, but in fact were a reaction to those Jews who to various degrees compromised or even abandoned their ancestral form of religion. Examples are numerous: The Golden Calf of Exodus 32, the warnings against idolatry in Deuteronomy 12, and the encounter of Elijah with the prophets of Baal (1 Kings 18) are well-known biblical

The question as to whether or not they either regarded themselves or were regarded by others as Jews is very difficult. The difficulty is exacerbated by the centuries that have followed and colored by modern responses to the same question: Who is a Jew? Is Schiffman's comment accurate for the first century CE: "Sinners they were, but Jews all the same" (1981: 116)? According to Schiffman, disagreements regarding who was a Jew did not exist (1985: 4). Amir says Judaism (Ιουδαϊσμό?) is "a sort of fenced off area in which Jewish lives are led" (1982: 39). One "remains" in Judaism or one "transgresses" (40). The point of Hayman (1991) is worth keeping in mind that it is possible many Jews were more monarchial than monotheistic. This seems particularly true of those involved with magic. Cohen hints in the same direction (1987: 82-84) as does Chester (1991: 62). W. Knox correctly underlines the flexibility of Jewish thought: "As long as the unity of God and the supremacy of the Torah were preserved, Judaism was prepared to adopt any argument and any form of thought that seemed to suit the purpose" (1961: 55). In terms of known groups, besides those familiar through the Gospels, there are also at least the Essenes, the Therapeutae of Egypt, the Covenant Community of Damascus, and community of those baptised into John's baptism in Ephesus.

178

Paul among Jews

examples. 1 Macc 1:43 says: "Many even from Israel gladly adopted his [Antiochus Epiphanes'] religion; they sacrificed to idols and profaned the sabbath". Another account tells of Jews gathering the bodies of their fallen kin for burial: "Under the tunic of every one of the dead they found sacred tokens of the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear". The highpriest Jason sent envoys to carry 300 silver drachmae to be used for sacrifices to Hercules (2 Macc 4:10-20). Bickerman also points to a Nicetas who donated 100 drachmae to the festival of Dionysos in lasos in Caria. "He might actually have believed in Dionysos" (1988: 252). Schürer notes Oropus of Greece in the third century, a Jewish master who freed his slave "having seen a dream, at the orders of the god Amphiaraos and Hygeiea" (3.1.138). Bickerman is right that such activity was inevitable among Jews, especially those at the extremities of the social ladder (1988: 252) and that from a pagan point of view, such behavior was perfectly acceptable since they themselves were polytheistic and relied only on practice not on conversion (1988: 254). While some willingly participated in such activities, there is also the possibility that some other Jews had little choice. Juvenal laments that a "holy fount and grove and shrine" on the Appian way south of Rome once used in the cult of Numa, was rented out to Jews "who possess a basket and truss of hay for all their furnishings" (Satires 3.10-20). 81 Possibly, these Jews had little choice. Even if apostasy in its fullest expression may have been relatively uncommon, the partial abandonment of some Jewish practices and customs is strongly evidenced. Josephus writes of some who abandoned Jewish ways from birth and adopted Greek customs (for example, Ant. 18.140). Nolland concedes that "undoubtedly there were in every generation Israelites who abandoned their ancestral ways in whole or in part" (1981: 185. See also Moore 1927.1: 342; Tcherikover 1961: 353).82 The book of Tobit decries those tribes that "joined in apostasy" and used to sacrifice to Baal (1:5) and who "ate the food of the gentiles" (1:10). The Maccabees refer frequently to Jews who under pressure yielded in matters of Torah obedience (for example, 1 Macc 1:43). Josephus refers a number of times to Jews who "left off all the customs that belonged to their own country and imitated the practices of the other nations". They chose to live according to "the Grecian way of living" even to the point of hiding the "circumcision of Elsewhere, Juvenal uses the same words (basket + hay icophinus faenumque) to describe a certain Jewess (Satires 6. 542-547). Juvenal, who seems not to be wellversed in Jewish ways, creates an impression of poverty and begging, but the basket + hay probably indicates the first-fruit basket (Deut 26:1-11) or a basket used to keep food warm on the sabbath. Pace Flusser who says blithely "Jews in Palestine and elsewhere were not attracted by paganism and remained faithful to their God and their distinctive way of life" (1976: 1092).

Diaspora Jews

179

their genitals, that even when they were naked they might appear to be Greeks" (Ant. 12. 240-241). The practise of epispasm is well-attested in Jewish pseudepigraphal writings (Ass. Mos. 8:3; 1 Macc 1:15; Jubilees 15: 1-14). Philo, whose own nephew abandoned most of the ways of his ancestors, knew of Alexandrian Jews who were not circumcised (Kraft 1975: 191), and his own perception of circumcision as a spiritual mark as much as a physical sign at least left the door ajar for a more thoroughly spiritual approach as taken by Paul and most Christians 83 . 2 Macc 12: 39-40 indicates that there were Jews who wore magic amulets with the names of heathen gods on them. Goodenough discusses a Jewish magical amulet and says: "Here is syncretism at the full and alive" and notes that "it is quite apparent that the pagans held Jewish magic in high honor" (1953: 294,206) which clearly indicates the close relation between Jewish and pagan magic. Philo warns against anyone who under the name and cloak of being a prophet (όνομα καΐ σχήμα προφητεία?) claims inspiration and encourages Jews into the worship of the gods recognised in the different cities. Such a prophet is an imposter (γόη?). Even if a brother or very close relative or friend should bid anyone to "fraternize with the multitude, resort to their temples, and join in their libations and sacrifices, we must punish him as a public and general enemy" no matter how close the relationship (Spec. Laws I. 315-316). This indicates that there were in fact such impostors and the attraction to join in with the locals was quite strong with the temptation coming both from within (fellow-Jews) and from without, as Philo goes on to say: kinship, whether ancestral and based on blood-relationship (that is, fellowJews) or from intermarriage (κατ' έπιγαμία?) must be cast aside if the honor of God is at stake (317). Philo makes a similar warning about Jews joining in There is some confusion about the importance of circumcision for being Jewish. Schiffman can on the one hand say: "without circumcision one could not be considered a member of the Jewish people" (1981: 127) and yet he is clearly aware that at certain times and in certain places, Jews were not circumcised (for example, in Egypt [Josh 5:2-9] and under Hadrian pre 135 CE) and that there were uncircumcised Jews at other times (1981: 126-129). Dunn insists that "no circumcision, no covenant" was the belief of most Jews (1991: 305). But 1 Macc 2:46 makes it clear that under Antiochus Epiphanes there were many Jews uncircumcised, and J.J. Collins says "we must allow that there were some ethnic Jews who abandoned circumcision without repudiating Judaism" (1985: 173). In addition, Yarbro Collins notes that circumcision is not mentioned in any documents concerning Anatolian Jews but "[I]t is probable that at least Anatolian Jews practiced the rite" (1985: 202). Ign. Phil. 6:1 refers to uncircumcised Jews. Cohen says the bible "nowhere regards it [circumcision] as the essential mark of Jewish identity or as the sine qua non for membership in the Jewish polity". It was only in the Maccabean times that such stringent definitions were held (1987: 52). The confusion is retained whether one speaks of proselytes or "born Jews" in this matter.

180

Paul among Jews

occult rites and mysteries, taking part in mummeries (TOUS- ... τραφέντας ό ρ γ ί ά ζ ε σ θ α ι ) and clinging to mystic fables (μυστικών πλασμώτων έκκρβμαμέι/ου?). "Let none of the followers and disciples of Moses either confer or receive initiation to such rites" (Spec. Laws 1.319). Cohen calls all those who wished to obliterate all distinctions between themselves and gentiles "apostates", and says they came in three categories: Those who took on a career in political and civic service (tax-collectors would fit this category; Philo's nephew is also a famous example of this group); those who sexually transgressed (those who "mingled themselves with the seed of mingled people" [2 Baruch 42:4] presumably means those who intermarried with gentiles - Timothy's mother being an example [Acts 16: l]); 84 and certain intellectuals (1987: 41). Presumably, those who encouraged worship in pagan temples and participation in all that such worship involved would also have been regarded as apostates. Cohen claims the numbers of apostates were never very large (1987: 42). But 1 Macc 1:11 suggests otherwise at that time, and there is sufficient evidence in Philo, in the New Testament, and in other Jewish writings to conclude that the temptation was constant and that a significant minority succumbed. 8 5 Cohen acknowledges that many Jews, perhaps even the majority, did not keep the noble ideals of the religious elite. They were too concerned with health and harvest to worry about communing with God or meditation on the Torah (1987: 78). If that were the case, how strongly did they resist the temptation to resort to the magic and the cultic practices of their neighbors (especially those who succeeded in health and harvest)? In this question, the warning of Charlesworth is also pertinent: "We dare not assume that a Jew is a 'religious' Jew" (1985: 61).86 Trebilco's judgment is that Timothy's mother was not a practising Jew (1991: 23). Presumably he makes the claim because the woman was married to a gentile. Daube also claims that such a woman in the first centuries CE was lost to the nation and her child a gentile (1980: 23). Intermarriage was not uncommon in Israel's experience, and there can be little doubt that such was also the case in the first century, even if the evidence is not so clear. In modern times, the marriage of Jews to outsiders is viewed with great concern by many Jews, especially by those who live in small Jewish communities. Ellman speaks of "the danger of intermarriage" (1987: 22) and reports that in the US in the period 1973-1978, 20% of Jews had non-Jewish spouses. See the article of Marmorstein (1935) in which he describes the third century CE "transgressors of Israel" Canto' D'HSs). Kraabel makes a similar point and adds that the Sardis synagogue, for example, was not only used for "religious" events, and it had economic and political significance in the city (1986: 152). It is impossible to ascertain what "the average Jew" did or thought at that time. Roman authors occasionally refer to Jews who appear not to fit the "orthodox" stereotype. Juvenal refers to the Jewish woman who is "a priestess of the tree" (magna

Diaspora Jews

181

Trebilco says that "we can suggest that Jewish communities in Asia Minor generally remained within the diverse fold of Judaism for the first three centuries CE" (1991: 35). Of that there is little doubt, but that does not remove the possibility - and the probability - that there were those who did not. It can be argued that the majority of Christians in this period in Ephesus, if not for the whole of Asia Minor, were ethnic Jews, some of whom were on the very fringes of their communities if not actually abandoned by them for their imitation of "heathen ways". The question is: How many Jews in any given city, like Ephesus, were lawobserving, traditional Jews? Did those who were involved in civic affairs and held civic positions compromise (if not abandon) their Jewishness? It is unfortunately almost impossible to make such calculations. Modern situations are far from reliable parallels, but they can give some general indication of what is possible, if not also likely to have been the case in a city like Ephesus. In Australia, towards the end of the twentieth century, it is estimated that approximately 20% of Jews are "non-practising", that is, they do not observe Sabbath, attend synagogue, keep dietary laws. They have little problem assimilating into much of the gentile population and its practices, especially in regard to food and more importantly, marriage.87 It is generally estimated that in any Greco-Roman city of imperial times, Jews constituted about 10% of the local population. Assuming Ephesus had a population of about 250,000, there may have been up to 25,000 Jews in the city.88 To be conservative, if 10% of them were "not-practising", that would mean there may have been 2,500 Jews in Ephesus who might have found the message of Paul quite attractive.89 Here was another Jew, of some admirable learning and rhetoric yet working with his

87 88 89

sacerdos arboris) and is one of those Jews "who will sell you whatever view of a dream you like for a few coppers" (Satires 6. 542-547). Petronius writes of a certain Habinnas, a sevir and a monument mason, who had a servant who sang Vergil and other Latin poets poorly, never went to school, was a good imitator of hawkers and other sounds of the market. Habinnas objected to this servant because he "recutitus est et stertit" (Satyricon 68). Presumably, he was a Jew. It is likely that Juvenal and Petronius misunderstood or misinterpreted the behavior of these Jews. The woman noticed by Juvenal was interpres legum Solymarum and that implies she may have been highly respected among her own people even if grossly misunderstood by Juvenal. The Bulletin November 24 (1992) 22-25. A higher figure has been estimated: 75,000 (Robinson 1988: 114). Renan already noted that Christianity did not appeal to the traditionalists in Judaism but to those on the fringe (2. 60-61). Of course, there would have been some "practising Jews" who also found Paul's message attractive. It is a mistake to assume that there was something in Paul's teaching that an "orthodox" Jew found fundamentally impossible to accept. After all, Paul would have put himself in the category of "orthodox". Paul represented a position which could unite practising and non-practising Jews.

182

Paul among Jews

own hands and able to support himself, assuming the role of a prophet, calling people to believe that the messianic age has come in Jesus - born of a woman, born under the Law - and that now what made one a true member of Israel and a true child of God was not circumcision or sabbath or dietary laws but the new covenant of God in Jesus Christ. In addition, the message of Paul was that Jews could also have table-fellowship with gentiles and that all things are now clean in the Lord. If one were married to a gentile, that marriage was not to be dissolved. Even if 10% is considered too high a percentage of those who had abandoned Torah-observance or were indifferent to it, and the figure were halved, that still allows the possibility of something like 1,000 such Jews in Ephesus, and even if only 10% of them actually accepted the message of Paul, that would leave 100 Christian Jews - a figure which might be too high to approximate that suggested by the New Testament for a city like Ephesus by the time Paul had left the stage. None of this is to suggest that Paul himself was an apostate or that he had abandoned Torah-observance. He may have been that - the issue is not important for this discussion.90 The point is that Paul did insist that Torahobservance was not binding for anyone claiming participation in the new covenant brought in through faith in Jesus as the Messiah of God. To those who had failed, or had chosen to live a non-observance life, or had been ostracised by the more orthodox Jews in their community, such a message could have had some appeal. It is surprising that scholars have not seriously considered these Jews.91 The eschatological vision of the prophets included the gathering of the scattered Jews and some gentiles "on that day". So Isaiah says that "in that day ... the Lord will recover the remnant which is left of his people; he will raise an ensign for the nations (cnrpeiov el? τα Ιθι/η) and will assemble the outcasts of Israel

Watson claims that Paul's aggression towards his opponents who insisted on circumcision indicates "[h]is own utter alienation from Judaism" (1986: 77). Alienation tends to be felt more strongly while one still remains within a community rather than from the outside. If Watson means Paul abandoned Judaism, then he has misunderstood Paul's aggression. McGiffert thinks Paul had a reputation as an apostate Jew "who was doing all he could to destroy the influence of Judaism in the world at large" (1897: 345). Segal (1990) calls Paul an apostate. But one could be an apostate without wishing to "destroy the influence of Judaism" - in fact, from one point of view, a person could be regarded as apostate for the very reason that they wanted to increase the influence of Judaism by offering gentiles entry into Israel! Tannehill hints that he is aware of this group when he says that Acts 19:10 implies that Paul had contact with "a much wider circle of Jews than those who attended the synagogue of Ephesus" (1988: 99). Who these Jews are, however, Tannehill does not say.

Diaspora Jews

183

(συνάξει του? άπολομένου? Ίσραηλ)" (11:12). 92 Paul's message had the potential to unite divided Jews - those who were Law-obedient and those who were not. Such unity was created in the Christ who is the τέλος - of the Law (Rom 10:4). These Jews who became Christian are "Christian Jews". They are not the same as the commonly-called "Jewish Christians" who insisted that all the Mosaic laws were still binding on all Christians, whether Jew or gentile. The possibilities are that there was a significant number of Jews who became Christian and did not insist on Torah-obedience for the very simple reason that they had not been so obedient themselves and so were attracted to the Christian gospel. 93 Of interest in this matter are the Gospels. They are generally thought to have been written in the period between 70 and 90 CE, that is, in the hidden generation between the death of Paul and those communities reflected in the Fourth Gospel, the Johannine letters, and Revelation, and the Pastorals. A significant point about the gospels is that one of their major interests is in the acceptance Jesus offers, not to gentiles, but to those Jews who were not keepers of Torah, especially, it seems, the "tax-collectors and sinners". Now, while it is true that the gospels are set in Palestine and may well reproduce the situation in that land, it is also possible that the gospels speak into similar situations which existed in diaspora communities. This is part of the "paradox"

The blindness to this group of Jews is well illustrated by Rowland who cites Is 11:12 but then immediately speaks only of the gentile involvement in the eschaton and Paul's apostolate to them (1985: 215). Zephaniah is another prophet predicting that "my dispersed ones" will "call on the name of the Lord" with a "pure speech" (3:9-10) - a passage possibly in Luke's mind in the telling of Pentecost in Acts 2. These, and other, references in the Prophets to the gathering in of the diaspora Jews "in that day" must surely have motivated some Christians to go into the world of the ethne and gather in the Jews from among them. It is possible that Paul saw this as his commission: To work among the Jews who lived among the gentiles and to gather them, together with some gentiles, into the new Israel. It is possible that Paul understood Jesus to have worked to gather those living in Israel, while he saw himself as called to duplicate the mission to the scattered of Israel. Parallels occasionally have been drawn between Paul's self-perception as an apostle and that of Jesus as depicted in the gospels - why not also parallels in their missions? To add to the possibilities and therefore to the confusion, it is possible that some apostate Jews on becoming Christian also became enthusiasts for Torah-observance. The enthusiasm and zeal of "one who has seen the light" is well-known.

184

Paul among Jews

as Sandmel calls it (1978: 341). Tax-collectors certainly existed in Asia Minor94 and "sinners" were not too hard to name and locate in its cities.95 Keeping in mind that Jews had been living in Ephesus for many generations, there is no doubt that assimilation and compromise were inevitable at least for a few, if not for a sizeable minority. How did these Jews stand in relation to the more orthodox and conservative and traditional Jews? How did they stand in the affairs of the synagogue especially when it came to worship? The Birkhat ha-minim illustrates that later there were various means of sorting out Jews (for the prayers, it seems, are fundamentally about fellow-Jews and not gentiles). Were there ways of "sorting out" Jews in the synagogues of the diaspora? What were the questions facing the diaspora synagogues? Definitive answers to these questions are almost impossible, but the pseudepigrapha and intertestamental writings supposedly coming out of Asia Minor would suggest that the matter of assimilation versus traditional orthodoxy was not low on the synagogues' agenda. One can be blinded by the Pauline tradition and accept too easily the claim that Jews rejected the Christian message. While this may be the case generally, there is sufficient evidence to suggest that Ephesus was a city in which the response to the Christian message was positive among a number of Jews who then maintained a Jewish form of the Christian movement. Nearly all the evidence available on Christians in Ephesus - whether they were in the Pauline or the Johannine tradition - points to this Jewish background. 2.2.3. God-fearers96 and proselytes97 There is no evidence of any kind, literary or epigraphic, indicating the presence of god-fearers at Ephesus. Kraabel has persistently denied that there was any such class of god-fearers anywhere, although his recent publications hint at a relaxation of such a position: It "cannot be demonstrated conclusively" (1985: 230); and "There is some historical basis for these characters in Luke's story" (1991: 280).

See SEC 39 (1989) 1180.45. There is, it must be said, no hint of any Jews among them. Of course, Acts claims that many mainline Jews also were attracted to the Christians' teaching. So Acts 6:7; 21:20 which talks of μυριάδε?. Paul himself was one such Jew (Phil 3:5-6). In recent times, Kraabel has consistently and repeatedly written on the subject (especially 1981, 1986) and evoked various responses. For an opposite view, see Gager (1986: 91-99). For a substantial list of objectors, see Oster (1993) 178 η 3. For conversion of pagans to Judaism, see Borgen (1983). There is some evidence that a person could be both a proselyte and a God-fearer (Figueras 1990: 198).

Diaspora Jews

185

Hemer represents most scholars in saying that the god-fearers in Acts are gentiles; that it was a title; that they are to be distinguished from proselytes and were so distinguished; and that they did not have full membership within the community (1989: 445). However, the matter of their ethnic background is debatable. In the Septuagint, the phrase ol φοβούμενοι is used often of Jews (Ps 115:9-11; 118:4; 135:20; Malachi 3:16). Lake also is aware that the phrase can indicate "good Israelites" as well as an uncircumcised gentile who accepted Judaism (Beginnings 5 [1933] 85,82). Feldman, who agrees with Kraabel that the term 98 is not a technical one, also holds that god-fearers are not only those non-Jews sympathetic to Judaism (but unwilling to be circumcised), but also Jews. "The fact is that, at least in the first century A.D.... [T]hese terms also referred to Jews by birth or to full converts" (1986: 59). Feldman gives as evidence a second or third century CE inscription from a Miletus theatre in which Jews are reserved fifth-row seats. The inscription speaks of a "place of Jews who are also God-fearers" (ΤΟΠΟΣ ΕΙΟΥΔΕΩΝ ΤΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΘΕΟΣΕΒΙΟΝ). The inscription can be understood in a number of ways. It has been suggested that the inscription refers to specifically and only gentile god-fearers (see Schürer [1986: 3.1.168]). But would a group of gentiles be publicly referred to in this way? The suggestion of Feldman is that the θεοσέβοι are ethnic Jews. Bertram likewise claims that in this inscription "[T]he Jews prefer to call themselves 'God-fearers' in an exclusive sense" (1965: 125; compare also Thompson [1990] 143). Finally, it may be understood to be distinguishing between Jews and θεοσέβοι. The construction των και would seem to rule out this latter interpretation; on the other hand, the inscription does not follow "correct" rules of spelling and grammar and so one cannot be categorical on this point. But the question can be asked as to who would make such a distinction in such a public place and why? It does not seem likely that in a public theatre such distinctions would have been made by Jews. It would be understandable in a synagogue (as Aphrodisias, for example, illustrates). More than likely, the inscription at Miletus refers to one group of people - Jews - and ΘΕΟΣΕΒΙ ON needs to be understood as an appellative denoting their piety. The adjective θεοσεβή? is used commonly of Jews in reference to their piety (4 Macc 15:28; 16:12, for example; it is a hapax legomenon in the New Testament - John 9:31). It has been suggested in a private communication" that the seats were granted to the Jews to placate them because they were afraid to attend public meetings in the theatre after experiencing the loss of rights which were then restored. The privileged seats in the theatre are granted and the term ΘΕΟΣΕΒΙ ON is used by non-Jews as a sign of respect. 98 99

Luke uses both φοβούμενο? τόν Qeóv (Acts 10:1) and σεβομίνο? τόν θεόν (17:17; 18:7). These are distinctive Lukan terms within the New Testament. Communication from Professor Herb Basser at the University of Toronto, Canada.

186

Paul among Jews

Although understanding the inscription this way, Feldman also goes on to claim that the evidence suggests that sympathisers, or semi-Jews, existed in "rather large numbers" (59). 1 0 0 It is sometimes claimed that Christian evangelists had a field day among these god-fearers. Rowland defends the reliability of Luke's description of Paul going first to the synagogues on this basis. Paul was an apostle to the gentiles and he knew that he would find numbers of gentiles in the synagogues, so that is where he went and "[t]his was probably the group which formed the heart of the Pauline churches" (1985: 216). 101 The problem for Rowland is that he wants Paul to be the apostle to the gentiles but he cannot find any gentiles in Acts among whom Paul has success. The gentile god-fearers provide the solution. 102 Lampe is another who believes that gentile Christians were mostly recruited from sympathetic σεβόμενοι: Diese waren das Hauptziel der frühesten heidenchristlichen Mission; für sie war die christliche Lehre attraktiv, weil sie vollen Heilsanteil ohne Beschneidung versprach und so die Zurücksetzung hinter den Juden aufhob (1989: 53).

Flusser claims that the gentile god-fearers became Christians because such a move made them equal with the Jews or even superior to them. In fact, it even allowed them to hate the Jews (1983: 39). Flusser also claims that a "vulgar anti-Judaism is found among many members of the early Gentile church" (43). Significantly, he provides no evidence for such motivation or for such behavior on the part of the god-fearers. It appears he cannot accept that Jews may have become Christians in any significant numbers. So the god-fearers must be gentile and they must be aggressive towards Jews. 103 This position as represented by Rowland, Lampe and Flusser illustrates the presuppositions that are brought to the question. Rowland assumes that "full100

'01 102

The debate continues. The new Schürer thinks the Aphrodisias inscription has finally refuted Kraabel since it demonstrates that terms like Öeoaeßeis· "could be used to refer to a category of gentiles who were in some definite way attached to Jewish synagogues" (1986: 3.1.168). Murphy-O'Connor supports Kraabel, believing that the terms "describe their moral character without implying that they belonged in any sense to the local synagogue; the council members may have been interested only in the Jewish vote!" (1992: 41). He holds that the Aphrodisias inscription "cannot be used to prove that the leading gentile members of a provincial city were adherents of the synagogue" (41). J.T. Sanders is inclined to agree (1991: 449). Unfortunately, there is almost no evidence that such was the case in Ephesus. This, of course, is what Kraabel thinks Luke is doing for theological reasons and so is not to be taken seriously historically. Luke wants to explain the movement of Christianity from a Jewish group to a world-wide movement and so he constructs the god-fearers as a link in the movement. While no one would wish to deny in any way the horrendous aggression shown by Christians over and against Jews for nearly two thousand years, the onus on such scholars as Flusser is to provide proof such was the case in the first century CE.

Diaspora Jews

187

Jews" were not the interest of Paul and so the god-fearers serve as a useful medium to explain Paul's apparent interest in the synagogues. Presumably, if Paul was successful and these god-fearers formed the basis of Paul's congregations, as Rowland believes, there must have been significant numbers of them in the first place. To maintain Rowland's position, these god-fearers must also have been gentile. Flusser also (but for different reasons) cannot see Paul (or any other Christian apostle) successful among "full-Jews" - that is an α priori for him. So the god-fearers become a suitable way of explaining the success of a Christianity which irrefutably had its origins in some form of Judaism. In terms of numbers, Kraabel is right. The evidence for Paul's success among these god-fearers is not very strong. In Ephesus, even according to Acts, it is non-existent. While Kraabel begrudgingly admits the actual existence of such god-fearers, he rightly insists that "there absolute numbers were low and their occurrences scattered" (1991: 280). 104 If that bé the case, then it has to be assumed that the vast majority of Christians were either Jews (including proselytes) or gentiles, and the god-fearers can not be used to avoid that alternative. The argument here is that in Ephesus the majority were Jews. As for proselytes, like the god-fearers, the New Testament makes no mention of them at Ephesus, although the "Ελληνες - mentioned in the synagogue at Ephesus may have been in that category (Acts 19:10). Stern, who distinguishes proselytes n j ) from God-fearers (n'Dttí ' » τ ) and from "Jews" (1980: 104), holds that "the first century and the beginning of the second saw the heyday of Jewish proselytism" (1980:41). But there is little evidence that there were "masses of Gentiles who wished to join the Jewish people and faith" by voluntary conversion (Stern 1976: 622). 105 In the

That Luke used them for his theological purposes as Kraabel insists, is not the issue of this thesis. What can be said, though, is that Kraabel joins the list of those who apparently assume that not too many Jews were attracted to the Christian gospel, and that any suggestion of that on Luke's part cannot be taken historically with any seriousness but must be understood as part of his theological agenda. It is a claim made by Flusser, another Jewish scholar: "Pagans all over the civilized world felt drawn to Judaism"; and: "Judaism became a great spiritual force by which the pagans were fascinated" (1976: 1090, 1092). He offers no evidence for such sweeping statements. Cohen is slightly more circumspect: "Many gentiles, both men and women, converted to Judaism", but he believes even more were the god-fearers (1987: 56). Murphy-O'Connor, on the basis of Philo and Josephus and the archaeological finds of later centuries, raises serious questions about such numbers (1992: 37-38). However, Josephus does state that in Antioch, after Antiochus Epiphanes, the Jews there "also made proselytes of a great many of the Greeks perpetually, and thereby, after sort, brought them to be a portion of their own body" (Wars 7.45). And elsewhere, "the masses have long since shown a keen desire to adopt our religious

188

Paul among Jews

Aphrodisias inscription, only three proselytes are mentioned but fifty-four godfearers (Horbury 1991: 54). Matt 23:15 (the only other canonical mention of proselytes outside of Acts) also implies that proselytes were rare, despite the effort. Philo talks of proselytes as those who abandoned paganism for the higher "new and godly commonwealth" and reminds his fellow-Jews that Moses encourages them to give equal rank to all the in-comers with all the privileges he gives to native Jews and for the nobility to be particularly friendly and generous towards them; at the same time, such proselytes are not to speak evilly of their former gods (Spec. Laws I. 51-53). There is no doubt that some gentiles attended synagogue on some basis or other. Even in the Temple of Jerusalem, they participated in the worship and their offerings were accepted even if only out of politeness (Schürer 1979: 2.309-311). Synagogues were not understood by Jews to be the place of the Presence and so were quite public buildings, often belonging to gentiles or maintained by gentile support and patronage. Some credibility also needs to be given to the attraction that aspects of Jewish culture had for non-Jews: Its monotheistic stance; its high moral and ethical ideals and practices; and its promise of a good life (Faust 1993: 339). But these attractions can be exaggerated. One factor that is often ignored is that of marriage. There were quite likely gentile men who married Jewish women (and vice-versa, as in the case of Timothy's mother, Acts 16:1) and "converted" for that reason, out of loyalty to the spouse and even for some economic advantage to be gained by their families. 2.2.4. Synagogues 106 There is little hard evidence of any diaspora synagogues which can be dated in the first century CE or earlier (Kraabel 1987: 50-51). Terminology is also important. McCready claims that it was only at the end of the first century CE that the word συναγωγή was associated with a building or a place of Jewish worship (1990: 161).107 And Overman warns "we should not envisage a fullblown, sophisticated institution when we encounter this word in first and second century documents" (1990: 57).

106

107

observances" especially sabbath, fasts, lighting lamps, and dietary laws (C. Apion. 2.282). For diaspora synagogues in general, see Hengel (1971); Safrai (1974: 908-944); Encyclopedia Judaica 15 (1971) 579-627; Kraabel (especially 1979; 1987); Georgi (1987), Stegemann (1991), Myers (1992), Oster (1993), and Harding (1994). But Oster claims that Jewish synagogues "were clearly architectural structures oriented towards their community" (1993: 193) and that pre-70 CE.

Diaspora Jews

189

Unfortunately, there is no archaeological evidence for any synagogue building in Ephesus, but the very few inscriptions suggest synagogal infrastructures. One such inscription of the Imperial period expresses good wishes for the άρχισυναγωγοί and the πρεσβύτεροι (I.Eph. IV. 1251). Frustrating is Hengel's undocumented claim that "there was certainly also a Samaritan synagogue in Ephesus" (1989: 122). Kraabel has repeatedly shown that diaspora synagogues (at least those in Asia Minor) indicate a Jewish community that grafted "a transformed biblical 'exile' ideology onto a Greco-Roman form of social organisation" (1987: 49). Rather than being in ghettoes, Jewish synagogues stood as symbols of a community well-integrated and well-accepted within its wider social location. The architecture was based on the public style but adapted for liturgical use, and its iconography stood in contrast to the prohibition regarding "graven images" as Jews "looked for new vehicles to carry the tradition for them and their descendants" (Kraabel 1987: 54). The building plans of diaspora synagogues indicate a strong tie still existed with Jerusalem with the building oriented in that direction. The importance of the Torah shrines indicates the significance of this element of the tradition of Judaism, but the use of Greek for bible translation also is indicative of the effect social conditions had on the community.108 While this may have been true of the majority of diaspora synagogues, there must always be reservations about assuming that all synagogues in all places (and at all times) were the same. As McCready notes: "Sources indicate substantial variation in function, pattern of ritual and worship, non-religious activities, as well as architectural design, and social settings" and "what may have fitted the purposes of a Jewish community in one location might not have been appropriate for another" (1990: 161). So, to take just one example, the Jews at Ephesus may not have had an independent, free-standing synagogue, nor one integrated - like at Sardis - into the community's public buildings. It is possible that private homes served as synagogues, and/or they were adapted for cultic usage under the patronage of the owner (White 1987: 152-153). For Ephesus itself, the evidence for synagogues relies heavily on Acts. The absence of any archaeological find could suggest the synagogues were either destroyed or taken over by Christians. If the latter, then it has to be possible that the majority of the Jewish community of that synagogue became Christian.

The fact that the translator Theodotion (mid-second century CE) comes from Ephesus may be a slight hint that Ephesian Jews were to the fore in Greek translation of the bible. It is also well known that Justin used the Septuagint for his Dialogue and that he possibly spent some years in Ephesus. Justin debates with Trypho the meaning of Is 7:14, for example. Trypho, the Jew (of Ephesus?), is aware of the questions of interpretation and translation of the text (Dial. 43, 56, 66, 67, 71, 75 and 86).

190

Paul among Jews

If finding evidence for synagogues in Ephesus is difficult, even more difficult is the question of what went on in those meetings; what were the interests and concerns of synagogues? Philo writes of an Egyptian perception that Jews sit in συναγωγίοι? reading holy books, expounding obscure points, and discussing at length their ancient philosophy (De somniis 2.127). The experiences of Paul in Acts suggest that debate and heated discussion were not unknown in synagogues. Borgen maintains that the debates and conflicts within each Jewish community are more crucial than the differences between Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaism (1983: 57). But ascertaining the subject matter of those debates is difficult. Georgi believes that exegesis of the law within the worship of the synagogue was the "medium for Jewish propaganda" to attract gentiles (1987: 84) and that it is even possible to recover the nature of that exegesis in Diaspora synagogues by reading Hellenistic-Jewish apologetics (89). By examining Philo, Josephus and the Jewish pseudepigraphal writings, Georgi maintains with some conviction that "the continuing dialogue with paganism was [then] at the heart of synagogue worship, in form as well as in content" (89). If this be true, then it makes the Lukan Paul's practice of going first into the synagogue the more understandable and not in tension or conflict with Paul's own stated desire to be "apostle to the gentiles". 2.2.5. The status and role of Jewish women in Asia Minor109 To conclude this general background to diaspora Jews, a comment on Jewish women in Asia Minor needs to be made. The presence of the Jewess Prisca (Priscilla) and her apparent status as teacher (Acts 18:26) and "fellow-worker" of Paul (Rom 16:3) within the Christian communities of Asia, Corinth and Rome, makes such comment necessary. In addition, if Romans 16 was directed to Ephesus, then it could be said that Jewish women played the major role in Ephesus since the list in that chapter mentions a number of such women including Junia who was Paul's "relative" (and so Jewish) and "prominent among the apostles" (16:7). The women of 1 and 2 Timothy are also most likely Jewish and obviously active in the Christian community which presumably was in Ephesus. So it is probable that Jewish women figured prominently in Pauline Ephesian communities. An earlier chapter has indicated the status and role of women in Ephesian cultic and civic life. Brooten provides evidence that women held similar status in the Jewish cultic and synagogal life of Asia Minor. Rufina of Smyrna, in the

For general study of Jewish women of the period, see Brooten (1982), and B. Witherington III (1988). For Asia Minor in particular, see Kraemer (1986) and Trebilco (1991, chapter 5).

Diaspora Jews

191

third or fourth century CE 110 , appears in an inscription as άρχισυνάγωγο? (Brooten 1982: 32-33). Kraemer emphasises the significant proportion of women (44.7%) listed in the burial inscriptions of Asia Minor Jews, and the strong evidence of women as donors to the synagogues (1986: 193). The epigraphical evidence from Asia Minor, especially that from burial sites, suggests that some Jewish women "played active roles both in the public affairs of their communities and in the public lives of their families"; were wealthy in their own right; and exercised their control of funds (1986: 194-195). Likewise, the size of some donations given to the synagogues is indicative of the substantial wealth of the women donating 111 . Once again, this fits the pattern that emerges from non-Jewish literature and epigraphy, and that of the Christian community addressed in 1 Timothy. Ramsay, who was very conscious of the evidence for strong female participation in both Jewish and non-Jewish cultures in Asia Minor, says "It would be strange if the women had not exercised some influence over St. Paul's fortunes" (1900: 68). This can be expected not only because in cities like Ephesus it was acceptable for women to hold positions and perform duties of authority and influence in their communities, but also because, as Levin (1968) has pointed out, Paul had the organising genius to see that leadership was not based on a person's social status, but on their particular χάρισμα. If there is not "male and female" (άρσεν καΐ θηλυ, Gal 3:28), then the door is open to women to take an active part in the Christian community.112 Kroeger (1992: 63) and Gritz (1991b: 304-305) have suggested that it was women coming out of the Artemis cult who caused problems among the Christians, but there are equally justifiable grounds for claiming these women came out of a Jewish tradition.

One of the problems with much of Kraemer's evidence is that it is dated around about this period. Evidence for the first Christian century is much harder to find. Tation erected the assembly hall and the enclosure of the open court from her own funds (Kraemer 1986: 195). Levin's article in fact argues that what was Paul's genius was his ability to attract bachelors! "He discovered how to capitalize on the widespread aversion to marriage and how to attract capable men, with no prejudice for or against them on account of their origin". Levin calls this "a major breakthrough in social engineering" (1968: 611). The bachelorhood of a significant number of men in Augustus' time led the emperor to offer rewards to those who married and punishments to those who did not (Dio 56.10. 2-10).

192

Paul among Jews

2.3. Jews in Ephesus 113 2.3.1. Some literary and epigraphical evidence The historical, epigraphical and literary data available to construct the situation of the Jews in Ephesus in the first century and a half of the Common era are very sparse 114 - surprisingly so, since the city probably had a substantial population of Jews already centuries before Paul set foot there. At least it is assumed to be so: "There must have lived so many Jews, especially in Ephesus, that the name of the town simply became the equivalent of 'Ionia' for the Jews in Palestine" (Mussies 1990: 186).115 Biirchner believes there were Jews in Ephesus already by 409 BCE (1905: 2799). That Antiochus ΠΙ in the third century BCE settled Babylonian Jews in areas like Phrygia is supported by the later evidence of strong Jewish communities in that area (Ramsay 1897) but there is no direct evidence that Jews were at that time also settled further west in cities like Ephesus.116 Philo does say that the Jews were so populous that no country could hold them and that they had spread into Europe and Asia and had been there for some generations so that they regarded the city in which they had been born and reared to be their patris (Flaccus 46) and one reasonably assumes that included Ephesus. There are very slight indications that Jews may not have been as prominent in Ephesus as they were elsewhere. In Sardis, where Jews were obviously very strong (van der Horst [1990]; Kraabel [1983]), Jews were granted their place of assembly (τόπο?) but such permission is not mentioned in the Ephesian decree (Compare Josephus Ant. 14. 259-261 [Sardis] with 14. 262-264 113

114

115

116

Scholarship is slowly increasing its understanding and knowledge of Jews (and Christians) in particular cities. For Ephesus, see Trebilco (1991) and Baugh (1990). Mussies is aware of little data: a menorah in the steps of the Celsus library; a few lamps with the same symbol; the references in Acts·, and a few funerary inscriptions which do little more than indicate the presence of some Jews in the city (1990: 187). For a closer examination of the inscriptional and archaeological evidence, see Baugh (1990: 81-87). It should be noted, as well, that all of this evidence covers quite some period of time and is not confined to the first century of a Christian presence in the city. For further epigraphical evidence, see New Documents 4 (1987) 116. 231. On the epigraphical data available, Horsley comments: "One of the surprises, a real disappointment, is how little Jewish material emerges among the 3750 inscriptions" (1992: 121). He cites as evidence the Targum of Chronicles, in the Table of Nations in 1 Chron 1:5, and the Palestinian Talmud j.Meggilah 1.11 (8), 71b, 56-63 (1990: 186). If significant numbers of Babylonian Jews were, in fact, settled also further west in Ephesus, then it would make some sense to look to Babylonian Jewish culture for an understanding of Jews in Ephesus rather than to Palestinian forms of Jewry.

Kraabel hints at this (1978: 16).

Jews in Ephesus

193

[Ephesus]). On the other hand, Revelation 2:5 (probably written contemporaneously with Josephus) speaks of the lamp being removed from its topos in Ephesus, which would suggest that Ephesus too was permitted such a place, assuming that it was legally granted. The very fact that Ephesus is threatened with the removal of its most sacred symbol from its topos may suggest the tendentious nature of Jewish claims to such freedom in the city. Ephesus is not mentioned in Cicero's letter to Flaccus regarding the prohibition on Jews sending gold to Jerusalem. The cities mentioned in that letter are Apamaea, Laodicea, Adramyttium and Pergamon, with the smallest amount sent by the most western-located city, Pergamon ("not much" probably less than the 20 lbs sent by Laodicea) while Apamaea and Adramyttium send 100 lbs of gold each. This hints, ever so slightly, that there were not many Jews in western Asia Minor and that the larger numbers were further east. 117 The little epigraphical evidence of Jews in Ephesus that has been uncovered suggests that some Jews, at some time, were active in the civic and political life of the city. An Ephesian family funerary inscription records a Jew of uncertain name who is called an άρχιατρό?, which suggests the man held some rank and status. Antoninus Pius ruled that every city should have ten such men on a board, and this inscription may suggest that Jews were not excluded and did not exclude themselves from acting in that official and civic capacity (Mussies 1990: 187-8; alsoBaugh 1990: 84-85). Thompson assumes that the Ephesian Jews were highly integrated into the city, being active members of guilds, gymnasia, theatres and the municipal, provincial and imperial offices (1990: 144; also Baugh 1990: 86-87). It may be a correct assumption, but the evidence is scanty, particularly in the first or second centuries CE. Thompson claims that the reason for the paucity of Jewish artifacts in Ephesus is that they were so well-integrated that such artifacts were buried in the local traditions (1990: 145). Two other explanations are possible: There were not many Jews in the city; or Jewish artifacts were adopted by Christians and so either Christianized or abolished altogether. It is likely that the majority of Jews were well integrated into the life of their cities. Kraemer examines Jewish burial inscriptions in Asia Minor and finds that one of the most interesting aspects of these inscriptions is the degree to which they resemble non-Jewish inscriptions, and indeed are often distinguishable only by extremely subtle indicators. In fact, the monuments and inscriptions of Anatolian Jews are often so similar to those of their non-Jewish neighbors that in many cases it is difficult to be sure of the religious identity of the deceased ... The difficulty is compounded by the fact that Jews, Christians and pagans appear to have The temple tax was half a shekel which weighed 0.2 ounces. If a shekel was of gold, a 100 lb of gold sent to the Temple would come from about 8,000 Jews.

194

Paul among Jews been buried side by side at some sites ... All this suggests that... in Asia Minor the degree of integration of Jews into non-Jewish society was extremely high, a conclusion reinforced by the contents not only of the burial inscriptions, but of synagogue and other inscriptions from this region (1986: 194).

But again, while this is almost certainly true of Jews inhabiting the inland of Asia Minor (Phrygia especially), the evidence is simply not available for coastal cities like Ephesus. The few inscriptions that are available from Ephesus explicitly show that some (if not all) Ephesians Jews buried their relatives as Jews (κήδονται ol èv Έφέσω Ίουδέοι, Robert 1960: 381). Two other points need to be made. The first is that nearly all of Kraemer's evidence is from the third century CE or later; and secondly, there is some suggestion that the degree and kind of integration was debated - and possibly quite fiercely - within Jewish communities. After all, there is literary evidence which suggests that some Jews were not integrated - in fact were opposed to integration - and did not share the "mutual rapprochement" assumed by Thompson and others. The Fourth Sibylline Oracle (especially 24-34; compare also Or. 5: 293-298) and Revelation (especially ch 18, but also the attitude towards the Nicolaitans in 2:5) hardly depicts those Jewish writers as wanting to live harmoniously in their pagan environment. Fourth Maccabees, which probably dates from the first century, and possibly has an Asian provenance (Charles 1913/1969: 2.373), is written to encourage Jews not to abandon ancestral law and not to share in the Greek style. Acts and Josephus provide the strongest evidence of Jewish status and numbers in Ephesus. There is at least one synagogue (Acts 18:19, 26; 19:8) and the episode with the artisans of the Artemis cult and the Jew, Alexander (19:23-41), indicates that Jews were known and recognised and had rights of speech in the demos. In addition, as will be shown, the evidence of Acts is that Ephesian Christians were Jewish in origin; and the letter to Ephesus in Revelation also points in that direction (2:1-5). Josephus has left significant records of Roman decrees regarding the Jews of Ephesus, and he refers to a "great multitude of Jews, who dwelt in their (Ionian) cities" (Ant. 16.27). His evidence deserves closer study. 2.3.2. The evidence from Josephus According to Josephus, Jews thought of Ionia as territory traditionally belonging to the Japhethites through a son of Japheth, Javan (Ant. 1.123-4). It would seem that the Hebrew ]V is related to the Greek ancestor of the Ionians "Ι ων, and that both Greece and Ionia formed Javan territory by the Hellenistic period (J. Scott 1994: 506 n 86). So the inhabitants of Javan territory are

Jews in Ephesus

195

known in the Septuagint as "Ελληνες- and the region as"EXXa? (Dan 11: 2-4; Isaiah 66:19). It is possible that what attracted Paul to Asia and Europe was his own tribal background and that of Jews living in those regions. Josephus makes an interesting comment on the tribal groupings of Jews in Asia. In his Antiquities, referring to the return from exile in the time of Ezra, he writes that there are δύο φυλαΐ έπΐ τη? 'Ασία? καΐ τη? Ευρώπη? while the other ten tribes are beyond the Euphrates in their countless myriads (11.133). Two things can be gleaned from this: First, that the numbers of Jews in Asia and Europe were not as great as those further east; and secondly, that the Jews of Asia were predominantly from the two tribes of Judaea: Judah and Benjamin (compare Ant. 11.8). While this is interesting in itself, the interest is heightened when it is remembered that Paul was "of the tribe of Benjamin" (Phil 3:5). Was Paul attracted to Asia and Europe because he felt he was with his own people?118 Did "the Jews of Asia" (Acts 21:27) have close ties with Jerusalem because it was located in their tribal territory (Ant. 5.82)? Josephus writes that Seleucus Nicator (312-280 BCE) gave citizen status (πολιτεία) to those Jews who had served the kings of Asia in war. He also allocated them cities which he built in Asia and gave them equal privileges (ίσοτίμοι) with the Macedonians and Greeks, privileges which still stood in Josephus' own time (Ant. 12.119). Such privileges do not mean that the Jews had exactly the same rights as the Greeks and others, but that they had the right to have their own laws and customs respected (Mussies 1990: 186). But Josephus is also aware that there were times when those privileges were attacked by local Ionians who thought the Jews ought to at least worship the gods (σεβεσθία του? ... θεού?) if they wanted to be in the same class (συγγενείς-) as the Ionians. The matter was raised from time to time before the Roman proconsuls, and according to Josephus, each time the status quo was reinforced (for example, Marcus Agrippa in 16-13 BCE guaranteed the Jews their rights [Ant. 12.125-126]). Such decrees would suggest that the majority of Jews did not participate in the civic cults, and that such action was not tolerated by many non-Jews.

For the significance of Paul's tribal background, see K. Cohen (1990). Little is known or explored as to how significant tribal groupings were in the first century CE. Tobit seems to deliberately identify himself as of the tribe of Naphtali (1:4) and encourages his son not to marry a "foreign" woman, but one of his own tribe (4:12). Did being a Benjaminite open some doors for Paul and close others? Interest in the twelve tribes of Israel may have been stronger in Luke (and Paul) than is realised. In Acts 26:6-7, Paul says he stands on trial "for hope in the promise made by God to our fathers, to which our twelve tribes (τό δωδεκάφυλον) hope to attain as they earnestly worship night and day". It is another slight indication that Luke sees Paul as the one to bring in the scattered of Israel, hence his interest in the diaspora.

196

Paul among Jews

Josephus mentions other instances in the period up to about sixty years before the death of Augustus. Dolabella, the prefect of Asia, wrote in 44 BCE especially concerning the Ephesians that the Jews be granted freedom from military service on account of their desire to maintain sabbath observances and because of the food and dietary problems they faced in such an environment. They were also permitted to continue their ancestral customs, assemblies, and oblations for sacrifices. It was an ambassador from Hyrcanus Alexander, the son of the highpriest and ethnarch of the Jews, who appealed to Dolabella for Jewish exemptions and rights, which indicates that the Jews in Ephesus had political links with Palestine (Ant. 14.225-227). The consul Lucius also decreed that those Jews who were πολιταΐ 'Ρωμαίων and lepà Ί ουδαικά έχοντα? καΐ ποιοδντα? έι> Έφέσω be released from military service and be confirmed in the rights granted them previously by Dolabella δεισιδαιμονία? 'ένεκα (Ant. 14.228; also 14.234, 240).119 In a further paragraph, Josephus relates that the Jews "that dwell in this city" (of Ephesus) petitioned once again to maintain their rights especially to observe sabbath and the laws of their fathers. They were again granted such freedom (Ant. 14.262-264). Josephus points out three times the "friendship we have had with the Romans" (14.266, 267). These frequent appeals by the Jews of Ephesus to be able to live according to the traditions of the fathers would suggest that such privileges were not automatic and were held somewhat tenuously at times. Josephus also records a number of embassies of the Jews that met with Roman officials in Ephesus in the time of Antony and later (Ant. 14.304; 16.12). Apparently, Cassius had captured some Jews (from Ephesus?) and now that Antony had defeated him, Hyrcanus sent an ambassador to Antony asking for them to be granted the liberties previously enjoyed. Antony was satisfied that the Jews were well-disposed towards him and because their "way of life was religious and constant I reckon you as our own" (14.308). Herod related well with Agrippa and the two met in Ionia when the Jews brought complaints to them about the injuries which they had suffered while they were not permitted to use their own laws but were compelled to prosecute their lawsuits, by the ill usage of the judges, upon their holy days, and were deprived of the money they used to lay up at Jerusalem, and were forced into the army, and upon such other offices that obliged them to spend their sacred money; from

119

Such freedom was not exceptional to the Jews of Ephesus. Other Jews elsewhere were granted similar concessions (Ant. 14.231-235). According to Josephus, the ancestors of Pergamum had friendly relations with Abraham (Ant. 14.255). It is more than likely that Josephus wishes to make the point of Jewish antiquity in the region rather than to claim historical accuracy.

Jews in Ephesus

197

which burdens they always used to be freed by the Romans, who had still permitted them to live according to their own laws (16.27-28).

It would also seem that Jews owned territories (χώραι) in Asia. Antony restored such property to the Jews after the wars with Cassius (Ant. 14.313), but the locals complained a generation later that the Jews "were spreading over their country" (νεμόμενοι. τήν χώραν αύτών). Josephus uses the verb νέμομαι elsewhere in reference to Jews working the soil or grazing animals (Ant. 17.193; C. Apion 1.60, 195). Possibly, then, many of the Jews around Ephesus and wider were herdsmen, cultivators of some kind, and owners of grazing territories. As such, they may well have had to pay grazing taxes (scriptum ) to Artemis. In reply to such complaints, through Nicolas of Damascus ol δε έγγενεΐς τε αυτού? έδείκνυσαν (Ant. 16.59). The Loeb edition translates: "proved that they were natives". More literally it means "those Jews who were natives [to Ephesus] revealed themselves". In other words, there were Jews who were natives (έγγενεΐ?) and there were Jews who were not. The issue was the important one of land, so those who could claim "native title" spoke up. Later, Josephus again records that "the cities ill-treated (έκάκουν) the Jews in Asia" and elsewhere. Such ill-treatment came at the hands of "the Greeks" (ol "Ελληνε?, presumably the Jewish way of talking about those in Javan territory) who took their sacred money and did them "mischief on other particular occasions" (16.160). The Jews again sent off appeals to Augustus who decreed in their favor (16.162-164). According to that decree, the Greeks were accused of stealing the holy books and sacred money out of the synagogue (σαββατείου) and άαρών (16.164). These episodes reported by Josephus make it clear that the liberties granted to the Jews were not always upheld and had to be confirmed regularly, at least in the period around the turn into the Common Era. Julius Antonius, the proconsul, refers the Ephesians to the decrees of Agrippa and Augustus which allowed the Jews to follow their own customs and particularly to send money to Jerusalem (16.172). The Jewish insistence on sending money outside the city did not make for good relations between them and their non-Jewish neighbors in Ephesus and elsewhere. But it suggests that there were sufficient numbers at Ephesus for such permission to be granted and for such concern to be raised by the locals. In the Acts 19 episode, it is not surprising that the artisans do not want to listen to Alexander when they recognise that he is a Jew. This Jewish practice put them under suspicion of interrupting the economy of the city, practice which in bad

198

Paul among Jews

economic times 1 2 0 would naturally have created bad blood. Special concessions to the Jews in the matter would not have alleviated such illfeelings, especially if in other regards Jews were of equal status in the city with the artisans. According to Josephus, the Jews in Babylon, at least, used the cities as banks for their sacred money which was then transferred to Jerusalem (Ani. 18.312-313). Whether or not Ephesian Jews banked with the temple of Artemis cannot be determined. Possibly they did, and there were then understandable objections to the removal of that money and its transfer to Jerusalem. Such an economic action also, of course, slighted the goddess whose temple provided the treasury of Ephesus. The evidence indicates that Ephesus was one city where Jewish traditions remained. Politically, most Jews were permanent residents (κατοικούντε?) who organised themselves as a politeuma with their own independent politela which was grounded on the right to maintain their ancestral laws and customs. This right enabled them to have certain freedom within the city, including access of appeal to the governor, but they were not dependent on the polis. Such status always left them open to charges of sedition and causing unrest on the one hand ("No one likes a privileged alien" [Bickerman 1988: 90]), and on the other, it enabled them to operate as a Jewish community with their own laws, magistrates and courts, and schools. Hemer believes some Ephesian Jews did hold citizenship status (1986: 38). He cites Josephus' statement that Jews in Ephesus and in other Ionian cities το is" αύθίγενέσι πολίται? όμωνυμοΰσιν, a right granted them by the Diadochoi in the third century BCE (C. Apion 2.39). Hemer maintains with "cautious acceptance of the evidence of Josephus" (1986: 39) that the Jewish appeals mentioned above and the implied tension with non-Jews can only be properly understood if citizenship is presupposed. The new Schürer believes the Ionian Jews, especially those of Ephesus, enjoyed the right of citizenship despite the contradictions involved in such a status (1986: 129-130).121 Hard Such bad times were frequent. Cicero reports of heavy taxation burdens carried by Asia in his proconsulship there; Petronius, writing around 50CE, also refers to tough economic times. Baugh thinks that one problem with Jews holding citizenship is that it also meant full participation in the cultic rites of the polis. He cites the passage in Josephus (Ani. 12.125-126) in which the Ionians complain that if the Jews want equality with them then they should acknowledge the same gods as the Ionians. Baugh assumes on that basis that Jewish residents would not have wanted or could not have possessed citizenship (1990: 79-80). Baugh may well be right - the possibility is that the Ionians knew they were on a winner in challenging the Jews that way. But it is an assumption that all Jews saw this as a problem! There is enough to suggest that in some cities some Jews were prepared to become citizens even at that cost. Baugh's three solutions to the problem do not include this latter point (1990: 80).

In Acts

199

evidence of the Ephesian citizenship of Jews in the first century is difficult to find and so it is safest to say that if Jews generally did not seek or obtain citizen status, they insisted on isonomia with other political groups within the polis, and on three areas of preferential treatment: The right of military exemption; the right to sabbath-observance and other customs; and the freedom to pay the Temple tax (Baugh 1990: 87-88). 2.4. Paul among Jews in Acts 2.4.1. The debate in scholarship It is not the intention to get involved in the debate as represented by Sanders on the one hand and Jervell on the other. 122 1 am inclined to support the claims of Jervell that in Acts Paul is predominantly a missionary among diaspora Jews (1979: 301). Jervell insists on the thoroughly Jewish nature of Paul who as a Christian lived as a practising Jew (1979: 303): There is no reason for doubting that Paul saw himself even primarily and at long sight as a missionary to the Jews. In his capacity as an apostle to the gentiles, he has the Jews in mind (1979: 303).

Jervell also claims that Luke in no way favors gentiles in Acts but insists that Luke's church consists primarily of Christian Jews. In fact, he maintains even further that "[f]or 'pure' gentiles - pagans - the church is not open" (1988: 12). Jervell's understanding of these issues is supported by the version of Paul's work in Ephesus presented in Acto. Liechtenhan (1946: 56) correctly notes that already in Paul's call, according to Acts, Paul is not simply to missionize the gentiles but also the Jews (the "sons of Israel") (9:15; compare also 13:46). "Die Arbeitsteilung ist also geographisch, nicht ethnographisch und auch nicht exklusiv gemeint" (Liechtenhan 1946: 58). He believes 1 Cor 9:20; 7:18; Rom 15:16 and especially Rom 9-11 indicate that Paul himself also saw his work including the Jews (58-59). "Trotz der Verwerfung Israels muss die Judenmission weitergehen" (1946: 61). This is true for both Paul (in Romans especially) and Luke/Acts.123

Most of the arguments are well-covered in Tyson (1988). This by no means exhausts the number of scholars who hold such an understanding of Paul and his own perception of his mission to the Jews. Many would agree with Jervell and Liechtenhan. Just to cite two others: Weiss says Paul "always remained bound by his obligation to Judaism (1 Cor 9:20)" and that Prisca, Aquila, and Apollos "beyond doubt kept themselves consecrated to the Jewish mission" (1937: 661). Weiss thought it was only the post-Pauline church that saw itself devoted exclusively to a gentile mission.

200

Paul among Jews

Jack Sanders, on the other hand, maintains that from Acts 9:22 onwards, the Jews are depicted by Luke as the enemies of Christianity with their increasing hostility to the gospel (1988: 71), and Luke pictures the Jews as "totalling reject[ing] Jesus, the church, and the message of salvation and as thereby bringing on themselves God's condemnation and punishment" (1988: 74). They are the villains, not the victims (75). And for Sanders, the Ephesian episodes "mark the finis to the mission to the Jews" (1987: 280). Munck thinks along Sander's line: It must, however, be emphasised that the fact that the Jews were preached to does not mean that they believed or that they joined the Christian church (1959: 202).

Munck cannot be referring to Acts, because that work clearly suggests just that. Munck obviously sees Jews excluded totally from Paul's work and left to others, so that he can also write: "On his way through the Gentile world Paul met with no resistance from Jewish Christianity" (278) and that Paul was "a missionary to the pagans" (278). Munck is patently wrong. In the first place, he (like others) equates Jewish Christianity with the Jerusalem church (279). 1 2 4 More importantly, he limits Jews to "Jewish Christianity". Why Clark may be on the right track: "Although Paul thought of himself especially as a missionary for gentiles, he was certainly a missionary within Judaism. He was not an alienated Jew" (1972: 167). It needs to be remembered in all this, that the perception of one's mission and one's actual behavior are not always the same! E.P. Sanders is right to acknowledge that the relation between Paul's attitude towards the Jews and that to the gentiles is a real problem. "We just do not know and we probably never shall" (1983: 188). Compare also Lietzmann who equates "Jewish Christianity" with the church of Jerusalem which "stood apart from the development of Christianity into a world religion" and which "died out quietly and in isolation. The church of the conquering, universal form of Christianity ... took no notice of the decease of her elder sister" (1963: 177, 190). This is far too narrow a concept of Jewish Christianity (see Taylor 1990) and it is also an inaccurate depiction of the relation between the "church" at Jerusalem and the Christian communities in the diaspora. It is a picture adopted also by Koester (1982: 87, 203). But Jerusalem remained important for many Christian communities well into the fourth century CE (Chadwick 1982: 8). As to the death of "Jewish Christianity" (in Lietzmann's use of the term), the evidence suggests Lietzmann (and Goguel 1953: 148) is wrong, as are all those who want to insist that Jews almost unanimously rejected the Christian message. Eusebius records that at the end of the first century CE, Justus, a Jew, was made bishop of Jerusalem and he was "one of the vast number of the circumcision who by then believed in Christ" (H.E. 3.35.1). Even allowing for hyperbole, this hardly suggests a quiet death! Up to 135 CE, all the bishops of Jerusalem were "Hebrews in origin" and "the whole church consisted of Hebrew believers" (4.3.5). Interesting also is the claim of the Basilideans that they were no longer Jews and not yet Christians (Irenaeus A.H. 1.24.6).

In Acts

201

should not a number of Jews have thought like Paul and become Christian without insisting on Torah-obedience for themselves or for others, Jew or gentile? More recently, Schwartz follows a similar line of thought that Paul (in Acts) does not want to give up on the Jews but he is forced into it until finally in Rome he reaches the end of his line and abandons the Jews wholly in favor of the gentiles (1990: 13). But Luke is interested in diaspora Jews and sees Paul as the apostle to them. In the very first chapter of Acts, the disciples of Jesus are told that they will be empowered to "be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth" (1:8 RSV). This is a geographical extension of the mission to Jews and not a break from Jew to gentile once the disciples move beyond Judea. And so Luke continues through the book: The Pentecost event is clearly the giving of the Spirit to diaspora Jews (2:5, 9-11); Stephen's speech begins with the reminder that Abraham was from Mesopotamia (7:2), and that his posterity would be "aliens in a land belonging to others" (7:6). He then concentrates on the Jews being in the diaspora of Egypt (7:9-42) and notes the threat that God would "remove you beyond Babylon" (7:43). Solomon may have built the Temple (in Jerusalem, of course), but "the Most High does not dwell in houses made by hands" (7:48) and by inference is "available" to those in the diaspora. Saul is told that he will "carry my name before the gentiles ...and the sons of Israel" (9:15) 125 which is what he proceeds to do, with mixed success, so that at Rome "some [Jews] were convinced by what he said, while others disbelieved" (28:24). As for Ephesus itself, if nothing else is said about the evidence of Acts regarding Paul's mission there, it is clear that Jews dominate the mission. Esler proposes that Luke's depiction (of all Christians being Jews first in one form or another and none coming from pure paganism) is a theological construction and not at all historical (1987: 42-44). That may be the case - it may have served Luke's theological ends; but there may also be historical accuracy in the construction. After all, even if Acts did not exist, it could still be reasonably constructed from Paul's own letters that he worked among Jews and that some of his disciples were Jews and that they caught on to his vision of going to the gentiles and including them within their eschatological communities of those "in Christ". There is little evidence of any Pauline community (or any other Christian community, for that matter) being composed totally or exclusively of gentiles. 126 The expression is strange when the simple "Jews" would have sufficed. In the light of Acts 26:6, it is possible that here too Luke sees Paul as gathering in the tribes ("sons o f ' ) of Israel, and not just "the Jews". Luke has very few converts coming into Pauline communities directly from "paganism". There are no mass conversions of such; the only mass conversions are of

202

Paul among Jews

The Ephesian reports which Luke transmits are all accounts involving Jews: From the first episode of Paul's arrival in the city where he spends time in the synagogue and is warmly received by Jews and is asked to return and to stay longer, through to the arrival of that Jew Apollos from Alexandria who is shifted onto Corinth where he has great success among the Jews of that city proving Jesus to be the Christ, to the twelve disciples who had only the baptism of John - another obviously Jewish grouping - to Paul's time of two years not divorced from the synagogue or certainly not from Jews, to the magical elements of 19:11-23 which also has a very strong Jewish flavor. Even within the very heart of the connection with Artemis it is Alexander the Jew who plays a central role and the episode is as much about Jewish civic rights and status as about Paul's anti-pagan successes. In Paul's farewell address to the elders at Miletus once again strong Jewish involvement is indicated. It is possible to argue that Luke is in fact claiming Paul for Christian Jews. He may have done that over against the claims of some gentile Christians that Paul was "their apostle". He may have even done that in the face of Paul himself! Two or three generations after reform movements, the line tends to be far more orthodox and rigid and conservative and the spirit and direction of the reformer is almost lost. The Didache, Epistle of Barnabas, and Clement confirm this, as do The Pastorals and Ignatius.127 The evidence of Paul himself is not abundant or clear, but what little there is shows that in Ephesus Paul maintained a clear Jewish connection, whether successful or not is not the point at this stage. Before continuing, the question of terminology needs some comment. Did Christians in the time of Paul see themselves as "non-Jews"? Koester is surely right: "One could with justification designate the whole first generation of Christians as 'Jewish Christian"' (1982: 198). Did they in fact all see themselves as "Christian"? The evidence suggests not. Just because those (some?) believers at Antioch were thus called (either by self-designation, which is not likely, or called such by others, which is more likely) does not imply that all believers everywhere were so called. In fact, since Luke was obviously aware of the term, one could assume that if he thought it a legitimate term and one which distinguished Christians from Jews that he would have used the term elsewhere as well. But he does not. And even those at Antioch may have been called "Christian" not in order to distinguish them from Jews but to distinguish them from Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, Zealots, Herodians and

127

Jews. At least the jailer at Philippi and his family can be presumed to come out of a gentile background directly (Acts 16:25-34). This factor must raise doubts about the claim that Luke wrote for Christian assemblies "dominated by Gentiles" (Stoops 1989: 89). A similar fate befell the reform of Luther. The Formula of Concord (1580) has to some degree lost the liberating and liberal spirit of Luther. The internal lines between the Reformers hardened as well as the lines over against Roman Catholicism.

In Acts

203

from other sects within Judaism. 128 Sloyan says rightly: "Jews brought the gospel to Jews freely, never suspecting that an attack on their peoplehood as Jews would be involved" (1985: 769). But he could have gone even one step further and said that such Jews also brought the gospel to non-Jews freely and still had no suspicion that their peoplehood was under attack. This view made Christians distinctive, but not separated from other Jews.129 The "Christians" were those who regarded Jesus to be the Christ and all that it implied. One of the implications, they thought, was that gentiles were also to be included as full members of Israel without full obedience to the Torah. The term "gentile-Christianity" also needs clarification. It could be justifiably claimed that there was no autonomous independent community of gentiles deliberately and consciously distinct either from the synagogue or from Christian Jews. Gentiles who came into Christian communities did so by their association with Christian Jews who saw "the kingdom of God", "the messianic time", "the gospel" (or whatever language they used) as including gentiles along with them and so they formed Christian communities of both Jews and gentiles. Koester claims the collection by Paul to Jerusalem was a gentile collection (1982: 199). If Koester is right, 130 then why is there no collection from Ephesus, if Ephesus was such a strong Pauline centre and especially if it was so strongly gentile? No decisive answer can be given, but it is possible that there were too few gentiles at Ephesus to contribute to the collection. On the contrary, it is more likely that being such a strong Jewish centre, Ephesus had already sent their collection and so Paul had nothing to collect from them. It is

Pace Meeks & Wilken who claim that this title made Christians stand out as a distinct sect from Judaism (1978: 15-16). Their equation of "Christian" with "gentile Christianity" (16) must be questionable. Liihrmann is another who thinks that the "Christians" (who were at Antioch a mixed Jewish-gentile community) were so named "because even for outsiders they were now clearly different from Jews" (1992: 23). Judge also believes the term could not have been employed by Jews "since it concedes the messiahship of Jesus" (1993: 89). But that need not be the case at all. Jews who did not think Jesus was the messiah could still use the term to refer to those who did, almost in ridicule. Of greater weight is his argument that the term was political and similar to that used of other groups - for example, Herodians (89). But again, why could the term "Herodian" (Matthew 22:16; Mark 2:3, 3:6) not refer to a Jewish group? See also Taylor (1994) who thinks that Acts 11:26 refers to a disturbance in Antioch mentioned by the Byzantine chronicler Malalas. Taylor believes that the Christians were Jews who preached the Messiah and thus stirred up accusations of sedition, so the Romans called them Χριστιανοί (94). In Revelation, one is either a Christian or a gentile. The collection may have been as much a display of the unity between Jerusalem and diaspora as between Jew and gentile.

204

Paul among Jews

also possible that Paul had no authority in Ephesus to collect such monies from Jews there. 2.4.2. The Ephesian episodes in Acis131 Luke's knowledge of the Ephesian episodes is heavily dependent on his sources. Ramsay thinks "the writer is here rather a picker-up of current gossip, like Herodotus, than a real historian" (1935: 273). J. Knox finds the whole Ephesian material in Ac« (18:18-19:9) "confused, obviously represent[ing] a confusion of probably conflicting traditions, and can hardly be understood, much less trusted" (1987: 65). Ephesus certainly is different from many other centres where there are mass (nearly totally Jewish) conversions (11:21; 13:43; 14:1; 17:4,10; 18:6,10) and often baptisms (2:41; 10:47; 16:33; 18:8) - neither of which are featured in Ephesus. Koester and Stegemann think that nearly all of the material in Acts dealing with Paul in Ephesus is legendary (1982: 114; 1991: 198). W. Knox finds the whole Ephesian section "outré and baffling" (1961: 44). Schille sees a conglomerate of reports creating a colorful but not conclusive picture; the tradition is no longer in tact for Luke (1983: 372). Duncan holds that "the Acts narrative of the ministry in Asia is peculiarly unsatisfactory; and its deficiencies are all the more glaring when we turn to it from a study of the Epistles of the period" (1956/7: 211). E.F. Scott thinks "no section of Acts, indeed, is more lacking in first hand knowledge than that which deals with events in Ephesus" (1930: 91). But a few things are clear: First, it would seem that Luke or his sources are very aware that "nach der Metropole der Asia mancherlei Wanderprediger und religiöse Gruppen strebten" (Schnackenburg 1991: 44); that it is very much a Jewish movement and that the gentile involvement or interaction is slight indeed; what interaction there is with gentiles is negative. Ephesus is a Jewish not gentile - centre for the Christian movement there. 2.4.3. Acts 18: 19-21132 ν 18: According to Luke, the arrival of Paul at Ephesus is almost incidental ("involuntary", Baumgarten 1854: 251) and certainly has no suggestion of a great plan on Paul's part to make Ephesus a centre of mission activity. In fact, an earlier passage (16:6) suggests that when Paul did wish to go to Asia, the Spirit had other plans and forbad them (κωλυθέντε?) from speaking the word of God there. 131 132

For biblical scholarship on the Ephesian episodes, see Pereira (1983: 8-29). Strangely, Pereira (1983) omits this episode in his study.

In Acts

205

Grundmann holds that Luke composes 18:19b-21a to fit the claim that Paul is the founder of the Christian community in Ephesus; but in fact, the Christian community existed there before Paul and was, significantly, of "judenchristlicher Art" and stood "in Verbindung zur Synagoge" (1964: 51; similarly, Haenchen 1971: 551). It is generally agreed that, on the evidence of Acts, Paul was not the first Christian missionary in Ephesus (Schnackenburg 1991: 43). ν 19: At this point in Luke's account of Paul's movements, Ephesus is merely a stopover on the way to Syria - just as it was to be by-passed later as Paul heads for Jerusalem (20:16, when Paul deliberately avoids Ephesus, it would seem). Ehrhardt suggests that Paul goes to Ephesus "apparently" because Prisca and Aquila are there (1969: 100).133 It appears rather that the couple are travelling with Paul and possibly already had accommodation/business in Ephesus and so Paul can leave them there. While it may be that Luke is preparing the way for Paul to be in Ephesus, it is also a way for him to introduce Prisca and Aquila into the Ephesian context. It is they who are there to support Apollos. Paul's own correspondence shows his awareness of the importance of their presence in Ephesus (1 Cor 16:19). It is rather strange that Paul should leave Prisca and Aquila (κάκείνου? κατέλιπεν αύτοΟ) while he goes to the synagogue,134 particularly when later it is in the synagogue that the couple meet up with Apollos (18:26). It might suggest that Paul himself has no plans of staying in Ephesus - he leaves his helpers there. It is also possible that Luke wishes to separate Paul even from Prisca and Aquila when it comes to Ephesus, just as he wishes to separate Apollos from Paul there. Κάκείνου? κατέλιπεν αυτού? is a very concise way of saying that Paul eventually leaves them (rather than on this particular occasion when he goes into the synagogue). It is possible to punctuate the sentence so it ends with this phrase. The new sentence then begins: αυτό? 8è ... That would mean that the leaving of Prisca and Aquila has nothing to do with Paul's going to synagogue. It is merely a general statement. They do not continue on with Paul who does not intend to stay in Ephesus but to go to Jerusalem. This practice of Paul, according to Acts, of going to synagogue on arrival in a town leads Meeks to doubt the trustworthiness of Acts: It is possible that Paul's movements generally were arranged around his friends, supporters and acquaintances in various places. Even the possibility that he often stayed with relatives (συγγενείς·) cannot be ruled out. Whenever Paul goes els' τήν συναγωγήν it need not be understood that there was just one synagogue in the city. It may be better to translate the phrase: "to synagogue" (compare the Christian practice of "going to church"). Assuming that there were thousands of Jews in Ephesus, there would undoubtedly have been more than one synagogue. Going to synagogue may also not mean the sabbath-attendance only, but other times during the week when Jews met together.

206

Paul among Jews

The pattern of beginning always in synagogues accords ill with Paul's own declaration that he saw his mission primarily or even exclusively to the gentiles [Gal 1:16; 2:7-9; Rom 1:5,13-15; 11:13-14; 15:15-21] (1983: 26).

Meeks position is questionable. In the first place, Paul wrote letters to communities of people who identified themselves (or, at least Paul identified them) as being already "in Christ". He is not reporting on the process he followed in establishing such communities. Luke appears to do just that. Secondly, Luke and Meeks need not be in contradiction. Paul may have originally begun at synagogues and then either voluntarily (as at Ephesus) or less voluntarily withdrew and formed new associations, probably in houses (although such house-communities do not automatically exclude synagogue association). It is possible that Ephesian Jews met in synagogue (not necessarily a building) outside the city. So Paul leaves Aquila and Prisca inside the city boundaries where they had a workshop/house, while he goes to the synagogue outside the city proper. Safrai says that in the Diaspora, synagogues were often - but by no means always - outside built-up areas, outside the towns, by the sea or by other bodies of water. He also cites Tannaitic tradition and the two laws for the siting of a synagogue: It must be built on the highest point of the town; and their door must face east (1976: 937; see also Schürer 1979: 2.441 η 65). Water in the hills around Ephesus would have been available for ritual washings, and no doubt the Jews would have preferred to wash upstream from their "unclean" gentile neighbors. It is not impossible that at least some Jews would not have wanted to live within the asylum of the temple, and even of the city itself because of their refusal to enter into the city through the gates which bore heavy Roman and pagan imagery. It has been seen that Jews may have been farmers/graziers around Ephesus. The cave of the Seven Sleepers which has many Jewish symbols in it, 135 was outside the city in the hills around Ephesus. John, according to the Acts of John (ch. I l l ) , died and was buried outside the city, as was Timothy according to the Acts bearing his name and reputedly written by Polycrates (10). Hengel refers to an inscription: έ π ί τόπου καθαρού δντο? πρό τ η ? πολέω? πρό? τω Σαμβαθείω which he holds indicates a synagogue outside of the city (1971: 176). Justin meets a Christian philosopher while on a walk along what appears to be an isolated beach. Philo holds that Moses received the Law out in the desert and not in any city primarily because "most cities are full of countless evils, both acts of impiety

"Curiously enough", says Foss (1979: 45). But why should it be so curious? It is a little hint that the Jewish traditions died hard in Ephesus. Is that because they were maintained by Christian Jews?

In Acts

207

towards God (των πρό? τό θείον άνοσιουργημάτων) and wrong-doing between man and man". In addition, in cities there is pride (τύφο?) and above all - from a Jewish perspective - there are the ever-present idols of stone and wood, sculptures and paintings enshrined in temples and shrines, all of which Philo happily ascribes - with Scriptural approval - to "the children of a harlot" (τοΐ? έκ πόρνη? γεγονόσιν) (The Decalogue 2-8). 136 The Essenes, too, according to Philo avoided cities "because of the iniquities (ανομία?) which have become inveterate among city-dwellers, for they know that their company would have a deadly effect upon their own souls" and lived in small communities or villages outside of cities (Quod Omnis 76). Friedländer says they avoided the cities because of the images and statues mounted on the gates (1936: 305). Revelation 18 calls Christians to come out of the city (those cities in Asia Minor which were inundated with the symbols of Rome's presence and power) and speaks judgement on those who carry on trade and business within and with the city. Conversely, in the new city "there shall no more be anything accursed" (κατάθεμα - the word primarily signifies that which is given over or devoted to a deity), "but the throne of God and the Lamb will be in it and his servants shall worship him" (22:3). The Fifth Sibylline Oracle, dating from the first century, gives a code for Ephesus (5.293-298). Some rabbis directed Jews not to do business in a city that had an idol unless that idol was outside the city area; and that no Jew should walk along a road which existed for the sole purpose of leading to the idol and its shrine (mAbodah 1.4). It is possible therefore that one Jewish synagogue, at least, stood (or met) outside of the city proper and in a surrounding chora. Conzelmann (1987: 155) like many others, translates διελέξατο (διελέγετο in D) as "argued". The verb is used frequently to describe the conversation between Paul and Jews in a synagogue (16:2; 17:17; 18:4) and may just as well be translated as "taught" because synagogue teaching, especially by rabbis and sages, was often based on the question and answer technique, on discussion and debate. 137 If one insists on translating the verb as "argue", then it must be understood that it was a typical Jewish technique of teaching and learning and that such arguing was always on the basis of tradition. Differences of opinion and controversies (npi'nn) clearly existed among the rabbis and sages on many The other three reasons Philo suggests are that when one wants to gain knowledge of the holy laws of God one needs to purify the self and the city is not the place for such preparation; that Moses wanted to practice the new laws out in the desert first before the people moved into city life; and that the barren desert indicated that it was God who was providing the laws not the inventions of humans (The Decalogue 10-17). All of these reasons Philo acknowledges are "but probable surmises" (18). For education in, and study of, the Torah, see Safrai 1976: 945-970 and Schürer 1979.2: 415-427. Safrai points out that many sages, while claiming only to be passing on what they had learned and heard from their own teachers, in fact were very innovative and established new interpretations in their teachings (1976: 960).

208

Paul among Jews

matters: "a plurality of opinions in almost every area" (Safrai 1987: 63). 138 What was common fundamental ground, according to Safrai, was the authority of the written Torah and the creativity of the oral Torah; prayer; the kingdom of heaven and an overriding ideal; repentance; the people of Israel; the expectation of redemption (1987: 63). Paul would have had much to discuss in these areas, but it is quite conceivable that many would have accepted his interpretation of many of these matters as being legitimate opinions if not ones they necessarily agreed with themselves. There are grounds, then, for understanding that here Paul was not in conflict or in hostile argument with his audience. To the contrary, judging by their appeal to him to stay longer (v 20), his teaching was well-received. There is no mention of god-fearers at Ephesus. Grundmann implies that there were such and claims that they were gentiles who were attracted to Judaism's monotheistic ideal and its ethical stance. As uncircumcised and not full observers of law they could not claim to belong to true Israel, something contradicted by the Christian community who accepted them as full members and thus attracted many of them. "In den Synagogen verkündete Paulus Jesus Christus als die Erfüllung der prophetischen Verheissung für alle Völker" (1964: 54). Grundmann also claims that the Jewish Christians at Ephesus opposed the gentile mission and wanted to insist on circumcision and obedience to law. "Möglicherweise sind unter ihnen (the opponents of Paul in Galatia, Philippi, Corinth, but also Ephesus) in grösserer Zahl Proselyten mit gnostizierender Lehrtendenz gewesen" (1964: 54). Grundmann has no evidence for such claims. The attraction for the godfearers of Paul's message is reasonable, but it assumes that Jews themselves were not attracted to Paul's message. Acts does not mention god-fearers or proselytes at Ephesus, but does at least implicitly, if not explicitly, state that Jews did join The Way. What Paul proclaimed in the synagogue(s) of Ephesus is also guesswork. Grundmann's suggestion again is reasonable, but assumes that Paul was aiming at gentiles associated with the synagogue. Again, the evidence that is available in Acts, says that Paul taught and discussed with the Jews the kingdom of God (19:8-9). Of course, this teaching may have included the promise to the gentiles, but need not have been at its centre. Finally, Grundmann's claim that Ephesian Jews opposed Paul's gentile mission stands on slighter better ground - the Asian (Ephesian) Jews who demonstrated against Paul in Jerusalem did so partly because he had been seen to take Trophimus, an Ephesian gentile, into the sacred courts of the Temple (21:29). Likewise, the objection from those same Jews that Paul was teaching Jews everywhere against the Law, the Temple and the people could indicate their An obvious example is the two schools of Shammai and Hillel who had differing views on a number of significant issues (see Safrai 1987: 185-194 for some of these issues).

In Acts

209

opposition to the gentile inclusion in the People of God without fulfillment of Torah-obligations, their liberty to enter the temple precincts, and the freedom of Jews to join with them in table-fellowship. But the suggestion that those Christian Jews who did follow Paul were in fact proselytes with gnosticising tendencies lacks hard evidence. Proselytes simply are not mentioned at Ephesus (even though known to Luke in other centres). Grundmann's reference to gnosticising Jews is presumably based on the false-teachers referred to in 1 and 2 Timothy and/or possibly the Miletus speech of Paul in Acts 20. At least Grundmann is aware that Paul was not so dominant in Ephesus (at least not as a gentile missionary) and that the Jewish dimension among Christians there was pervasive. "In Ephesus hat sich eine christliche Gemeinde gebildet, die judenchristlicher Art ist und in Verbindung zur Synagoge steht" (1964: 51). What access did Paul have to the synagogue? Luke depicts him as a sage/teacher with some persuasive ability and therefore of some status which enabled him to be heard. Was Paul known as a "Christian"? Probably not in that term, but as one who was convinced that the Jew, Jesus of Nazareth, crucified under Roman law, was raised by God in power to be Lord and Son, Christ and bringer of the kingdom. Synagogues were not uniform and allowed a variety of teaching and opinion, even if those opinions and teachings were in the end opposed. Paul was a Jew - that alone gave him initial access to any synagogue. ν 20: There are many curious things about Luke's collection of traditions of Paul at Ephesus, and this verse displays one of them. Contrary to Luke's general picture, Paul is welcomed by some Jews, who even ask him to stay for a longer period.139 There is no mention of gentiles at all up to this point. Is this simply part of Luke's theological construction - Paul goes to the Jews who ultimately reject him so he moves to the gentiles? But did they reject Paul? As suggested earlier, does Luke in fact want to claim Paul for the Christian Jews in the face of gentile claims on him and even in the face of Paul's own claims? There is little in Luke's episodes concerning Paul's work among gentiles - that is not to say he did not do such work, but rather curiously Luke does not write of it. What evidence there is (19:10,17,26), receives little emphasis from Luke who wishes to make other important points about the Christians at Ephesus, one such point being the conflict that existed between them and those of the

This cannot mean that Paul only stayed for one sabbath and then left because if he had stayed longer the Jews would have caught his drift and sent him packing, as Stokes implies (1892: 338). Such thinking is based on the explicit assumption that the Jews everywhere and in toto were opposed to Paul and his message. Nor is there any mention of sabbath in the text. Paul had access to the synagogue and to fellow-Jews not just on the sabbath.

210

Paul among Jews

Artemis cult (19:23-41) and another point being their mixed composition and character ("both Jews and Greeks" 19:10; 19:17; 20:21). ν 21: Paul promises to return "if God wills" - terminology which suggests Ephesus was not part of any plan on Paul's part. Paul's movements were subject to the plans and will of God (compare 16:6). There may be some irony in the fact that while it was not Paul's will to spend time in Ephesus, Luke saw it as God's will that he stay for at least two years in the city. The invitation comes from Jews, not from gentiles. In addition, Paul does not give as his reason for declining to stay longer the fact that he saw his mission as being gentile-directed. Codex D says the reason is the necessity (8ei) for him to go to Jerusalem, presumably for Passover. If so, Bruce claims, that would explain his haste since shipping was closed until March 10 and the Passover fell early in April in 52 CE (1988: 356). Paul's refusal in ν 20 (ούκ έπένευσεν) indicates there was quite some discussion - in other words, the request was a strong one, but Paul "voted against the motion". A number of things are reasonably clear from this little episode: In the first place, Luke had access to some concise yet quite detailed reports of Paul's visits to Ephesus; secondly, Luke appears to be aware of a hesitancy on the part of Paul when it came to Ephesus - there is certainly no suggestion of plans, of evangelistically choosing Ephesus as a centre for mission, at least not for himself, and not to gentiles. At best, it could be said that he left his co-workers Prisca and Aquila there with the intention of them staying while he moved on to other goals. And thirdly, Luke is aware that in Ephesus there were at least some Jews who were willing to receive Paul and his gospel. As will become increasingly apparent in all the Ephesus episodes, the strength of the evidence is that Christian Jews far outnumber gentile Christians. Ephesus was dominated by Christian Jews, and Luke knows that to be true also in the very origins of the Christian communities in the city; or, that the strength of Christian Jews in Ephesus at Luke's time can be accounted for by the telling of its origins. So far, there is no mention of people being "Christian". The connections are still very much within the synagogal context. There is no sign of an ecclesia in Ephesus as there is in Caesarea (18:22). 2.4.4. Acts 18: 24-28 As Norris states: "There is no doubt that another group was in Ephesus which Paul did not begin" (1982: 366). Many scholars agree with him. Grundmann says there were in Ephesus "verschiedene urchristliche Strömungen" (1964: 55), particularly on the basis of 18:26, although that verse need not imply that Apollos was in Ephesus before Paul and his helpers arrived there; it is not

In Acts

211

clear. Foakes-Jackson calls this episode "a remarkable section" because Paul does not feature as the principal character (1931: 173). Pereira likewise thinks it "seems a very enigmatic passage" and one which interrupts the flow of Paul's mission (1983: 39). ν 24: Apollos 140 is introduced in typical Lukan fashion: t l ? όνόματι Άπολλώ? (compare 5:1, 34; 8:9; 9:10, 11, 33, 36; 10:1; 13:6; 16:1; 18:2, 7). He is 'Ιουδαίο?. According to Schweizer, when that term is used (some 80 times) in Acts it indicates non-believing Jews who often stand in opposition to the Christian community; and while it is possible to understand Apollos as a Judenchrist, it is also possible that he is simply a Jew and not Christian (1955: 251). Schweizer thinks Apollos' apparent association with John the Baptist who did not proclaim Jesus as messiah and whose disciples did not all completely recognise Jesus - puts Apollos in the not-yet-Christian category. The procedure is the same as with those in 19:1-7: Lukas kann sich weder eine konkurrenzierende Täufergruppe noch eine erfolgreiche jüdische Mission, die ehrlich die Schrift predigt, denken. Beide werden zur Vorstufe der christlichen Gemeinde (252).

But Schweizer misunderstands Apollos, as does Haenchen who calls him "an evidently still imperfect Christian" (1971: 550 η 7). Pereira goes even further: "Apollos could not have been already a Christian when he first came to Ephesus" (1983: 59). But Apollos is a Christian in Luke's eyes (it is difficult to understand 18:25 in any other way), and there is nothing "imperfect" about him. His knowledge "only" (μόνον) of the baptism of John does not mean that he was associated with a Baptist group and shared their understandings. He has been taught and teaches "the things about Jesus" as a believer. He is also accepted into the circle of the Christians by Prisca and Aquila (ν 26). He teaches the Christ to be Jesus (v 28). But he comes to a more detailed understanding of "The Way" (to use the D reading of ν 26; Β, « and Sp74 read τήν όδόν του θεού). This need not suggest a change from imperfection to perfection, but simply an increase and sharpening in understanding and knowledge. While it is possible to understand ν 28 to mean that only now does Apollos know the Christ to be Jesus, if that was Luke's point, he surely could have made it more clearly, simply by stating that Aquila and Prisca taught him as much. Instead, Luke is saying that Apollos' perception of The Way is sharpened and detailed through his conversations with the two. My guess is that it was a sharpened understanding of who The Way is as the eschatological people of God. 140

On the name, see Lake and Cadbury 1933: 232. The name is non-Jewish as are Philo, Paul, and Josephus Flavius, so not at all unusual; Codex D reads 'Απολλώνιο?; there is some manuscript support for Άπέλλη?.

212

Paul among Jews

Luke's central point in these episodes is not to bring all peripheral Christians under the umbrella of the one Christian church which is "Pauline Christianity" (so Käsemann, Schweizer). His interest is in the Spirit and its relation to the Jesus who is "both Christ and Lord," and in the people of this Spirit-giving Christ. At the end of Peter's sermon in Acts 2, it appears that it this point - that Jesus has been made both Christ and Lord 141 - that cuts the hearts of the audience and they ask for direction and are told to repent and be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins and are promised the gift of the Holy Spirit (2:36-38). The point of these two Ephesian episodes is not so much baptism (by water or not; by the Spirit or not and the relation between the two), and not even the Spirit, but that Jesus is the Christ and Lord through whom the Spirit is given (2:33-36) to create a people for God. Apollos comes from Alexandria ( Άλεξανδρεύ? τω γένει). 1 4 2 Luke similarly identifies Barnabas and Aquila by their respective γένο? (4:36; 18:2). Munck suggests that "Apollos may well have grown up and been educated in places other than the city where his family had originally resided" (1967: 182). He may well have; Codex D clearly rules out that possibility, and the fact that Apollos arrives in Ephesus (v 24) means that suggesting any alternative place to Alexandria for Apollos' origins is pointless. Why Apollos goes to Ephesus is not known, but Wynne reasonably suggests that he came to teach rather than to learn (1912: 13). He was an itinerant preacher/teacher. 143 Did he also baptise? 1 Cor 1:11-17 faintly suggests that he did later in Corinth. It is often suggested that he was responsible for the "baptism of John" circle at Ephesus (19:1-7; so Bernard 1898: 124; Ramsay 1898: 724) but there is little to support that conjecture apart from the proximity of the two episodes in Acts.

141 142

143

An expression also used by Justin {Dial. 35). For Jews who were "Alexandrians" (that is, they did more than just reside in the city) see Josephus (C. Apiort. 2.38). Such Jews had honorary citizen rights (ή κατά δόσιυ π ο λ ι τ ε ί α , C. Apion. 2.41). In his Wars, Josephus says that Jews were allowed (έπετρέψαν) to be called (χρηματίζεις) Alexandrians and Macedonians (2.488). In 41 CE, the emperor Gaius issued a decree which threatened the liberty of the Jews in Alexandria, with the result that some left the city (Philo Fiacco 53-71). Did Apollos move to Ephesus already then? Bruce suggests he was a travelling merchant who gave welcome help in the synagogues he visited (1989: 358). This would not rule out his role as a teacher/preacher. Trade between Ephesus and Egypt was strong (see Wörrle, 1971) and Egypt had centuries earlier occupied Ephesus. In addition, the romantic novels of Xenophon and Achilles Tatius show close links between the two regions. Rackham calls Apollos a rabbi (1957: 343) which also would not prohibit the possibility he had some trade.

In Acts

213

Apollos was άνήρ λόγιο? 144 which is generally understood to mean that he was a learned or eloquent man (Wynne 1912: 12).145 Λόγιο? can also mean "versed in tales or stories" or "a chronicler" (LSJ 1056, Herodotus 1.1), which in this context might suggest that Apollos was well-versed in logia - either the logia of Jesus, that is, the oral stories about Jesus, or even the words of Jesus orally transmitted; or, and this seems the more likely, the oracles of Moses and the Torah. Apollos may have been some kind of "historian". Such a person would have interested Luke - Ernst rather fancifully suggests Luke may even have been a student of Apollos (1989: 152). However, what is more likely is that Apollos was like the two Jews described by Josephus as λογιώτατοι who are then said to be έξηγηται των πατρίων νόμων (Ant. 17.149). Apollos was an exegete of Jewish traditional law and custom, and as such, it is not surprising that he is also said to be δυνατό? èv ταΐ? γράφοι?. A close examination of what Luke says about Apollos leads to the conclusion that he might well have been one of those exegete-missionaries Georgi believes were so important and central in Jewish missionary activity. Georgi thinks that diaspora synagogues were centred around and grounded upon the exegesis of the scriptures for both their missionary propaganda to the gentiles and for "maintaining the stability and cohesion of the synagogue" (1987: 90). Apollos and others (both men and women) belonged to special, elite, small groups of missionary-exegetes many of whom were also pneumatic or charismatic (95-96). This latter characteristic of exegetes links this episode more tightly with that of Paul in the synagogue (Acts 19:8-10) and in contact with (other) wandering Jewish magicians and charismatics in Ephesus (19:1120).

It is the Jewish Scriptures146 in which Apollos was δυνατό?, "well-versed" (RSV\ also Conzelmann 1987: 157; Bruce 1988: 358; NIV: "a thorough knowledge of'). Haenchen thinks it involves the "gift of the Spirit by which a 144

145

146

Luke regularly describes men in this way: άι/ήρ + adjective. Besides this verse, see 2:5; 6:5; 8:2; 10:22; 11:24; 13:7; and 22:12. RSV "eloquent"; NIV "learned"; Haenchen suggests both (1975: 550) as do Conzelmann (1987: 157) and Johnson (1992: 331). Bruce translates: "a man of learning" (1988: 358). Hurst calls Apollos an "eloquent speaker ... with more than a little skill at debating" (1992: 301). Whether Apollos was skilled in the Septuagint or in the Hebrew scriptures (or both) is not possible to say. Coming from Alexandria, having a Greek name, and working with Paul would suggest the former, at least.

214

Paul among Jews

hidden Christian meaning of the Old Testament is uncovered" (1971: 550). While such translations and understandings are theoretically correct, they fail to convey the full sense that Luke intended by the word δυνατό?. The word suggests "authority"; in fact, authority of a quite singular kind. The word is used at 25:5 where "authority" is implied 147 and also at 11:17 and 2:24 where the word may well mean "authority" rather than "ability". More importantly, Luke describes both Jesus and Moses as δυνατό? έν έργω καΐ λόγω (Luke 24:19; Moses with plural nouns, Acts 7:22). Apollos has authority in the Scriptures. 1 4 8 To make the point even more firmly: Mary calls God à δυνατό? (Luke 1:49) and Jesus says παντά δυνατά with God (18:27). 149 So in Lukan usage, Apollos is in very good company indeed! He is more than capable, well-versed, and mighty. He is "empowered by God" with authority almost in the same way as Moses and Jesus. Paul's usage supports this interpretation. He uses δυνατό? frequently of God: Rom 4:21; 9:22; 11:23. It is God's strength that makes Paul δυνατό? (2 Cor 12:9-10). Paul also speaks of certain Christians as ol δυνατοί (Rom 15:1; also 2 Cor 13:9) but says that not many were δυνατοί (1 Cor 1:26). Because Apollos is from Alexandria, many scholars claim he had links with Philonic theology or some kind of gnostic philosophy with an allegorical interpretation of scriptures (MacGregor 1954: 247-8; Grundmann 1964: 55; Barton 1923: 208-212; Schneider 1982: 260). But these are unwarranted assumptions. Unfortunately, the history of the origins of the Christian movement in Egypt are still shrouded in mystery, but the tradition of Apollos is sufficient reason to suggest that one original Christian movement in Ephesus was from Egypt and not from Palestine, or at least that there were Egyptian influences in Ephesian Christian forms. Snape is partly correct: [I]t is safe to say that in Apollos and the twelve disciples there existed, at Ephesus, a nucleus of Christians whose faith derived from Alexandria and was found to differ substantially from that maintained by Paul (1954: 4).

There is reason to believe Ephesian Christians had some Alexandrian contact. What is not so certain is the Apollos-Twelve link made by Snape. It is also difficult to verify the claim that Apollos and Paul were substantially different, and therefore "Alexandrian Christianity" (if any such one form existed) something Luke regards as deficient, "an offence," and that Apollos 147 148

149

In fact, the RSV translates it so in that verse. Apollos is almost one of the προφήται καΐ σοφοί καΐ γραμματείς whom Jesus promised to send to "the scribes and Pharisees" (Matt 23:34). Apollos does not appear to have experienced the same fate. Some Jewish literature spoke of the Messiah as δυνατό? έυ ττνεΰματι άγίω (Pi. Sol. 17:37).

In Acts

215

"could not be permitted to operate in the churches he himself was associated with until his Christology had been brought to the required Pauline standard" (Brandon 1951: 210). Of greater interest (and of equal possibility) is the conjecture that Apollos was influenced not so much by Philo as by Mark. Pearson has recently suggested that the Eusebian tradition (H.E. 11.16) of Mark at Alexandria be taken more seriously (1986: 142; also Barnard 1964). The tradition suggests that Mark was in Alexandria already by 43 CE which certainly makes it possible for Apollos to be acquainted with him (and his Gospel?) and to be in Ephesus in the early fifties at the time of Paul. Klijn makes the interesting point that four early Christian writings from Egypt all have at least two things in common: They are interested in the life of Jesus (τα περί. του ΊησοΟ); and all four do not accept Paul.150 Was Luke aware of this background of Apollos? ν 25: Apollos had been instructed in the way of the Lord: ήν κατηχημένο? τήν όδόν κυρίου. Codex D reads τόν λόγον του κυρίου and adds èv τη πατρίδι which means Apollos was instructed in Alexandria. What is to be understood by "the way of the Lord" and its presumably synonymous expression "the way of God" in ν 26?151 One thing is clear: The term is used by Luke in an exclusively Jewish context, and so must be understood in the light of Jewish usage. Michaelis says the term "the way" summarises "the divine plan and work of salvation, the way which God took, as the γραφαί (18:24) teach and τά περί του ΊησοΟ (18:25) make plain" (TDNT 5 [1967] 89). Such a view reflects the heilsgeschichtlich understanding of Luke. Pesch and Haenchen think that Apollos' instruction in "the way of the Lord" means he knew some Christian teaching (1986: 161; 1971: 550), while Grundmann thinks the phrase is synonymous with "the things concerning Jesus" (1964: 56). The two are probably not synonymous. The first phrase has strong Isaianic and John the Baptist links (Luke 3:4/Isaiah 40:3), while the latter phrase indicates Apollos1 knowledge of the oral tradition (or even a written one) concerning Jesus. Pereira agrees with Michaelis (1983: 88) but later says the Way refers to "the mode of life which comes to expression in the Christian fellowship" (1983: 52). Hunter refers to "the way" as the ethics of the Sermon on the Mount, that is, Christian moral teaching (1975: 115). But that is too modern an understanding. "The way" is not a moral ethic alone, but it indicates the new action of God towards Israel for their blessing. It also carries a deep 150

151

The four writings are Epistola Apostolorum, The Sibylline Oracles, The Testament of Truth, and The Apocalypse of Peter. Their non-acceptance of Paul might give weight to Snape's argument that Apollos and Paul stood in different traditions. It is generally agreed that early Christians in Alexandria were Jewish (Pearson 1986 and Klijn 1986: 165). Probably, the reading of D (τήν όδόν without the qualifying genitive) is to be accepted in agreement with the usage at 9:2; 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:14, 22.

216

Paul among Jews

eschatological and crisis ethic, similar to that of the prophets. In that sense, Fitzmyer is right to point to Qumran as a parallel in order to understand its usage here (1966: 240-241). The phrase snsin γ π is found in 1QS 8:13, and Ί~π in CD 20:18. Both "Christians" and groups at Qumran saw themselves as communities of the end-time, awaiting the Messiah to come. Apollos has already been informed about "the way of the Lord" and becomes even more familiar with its implications by discussions with Prisca and Aquila. It is necessary at this point to differentiate between the expression "way of the Lord" and the absolute expression "The Way". When the latter is used in Acts it does not indicate primarily a "way of life" or Christian teaching, but it is the self-designation of the people themselves. When used absolutely, the term is not a mere abbreviation of "the way of the Lord", as Kosmala holds (1959: 333). The Christ-believers saw themselves, collectively, as "The Way" who learned from Jesus to walk "the way" in preparation for his coming.152 Völkel warns that the contention that the term is a self-designation should be handled with care, since it probably is meant to define Christian teaching as being distinct from other αίρέσει? (1991:492). But that a group of people is referred to rather than an ethic or teaching is made clearer in Acts 9:2 where Paul is described as seeking out Tiuas- τη? όδοΟ δυτα? which refers to a group of people, and in 24:14 where ή όδός is described as being an αΐρεσι? which again indicates a "sect" or grouping rather than [merely] a teaching. Fitzmyer says that in Acts "the primitive Palestinian Christian community is designated 'The Way"' (1981: 242). However, Acts 19:8 and 19:23 make it clear that the term was used outside of Palestine and that to Luke's knowledge it was used at Ephesus. It is only in these two regions that the term is used in Acts to describe the Christian community. If it is in fact a characteristically Palestinian term, its usage in Ephesus would suggest that the Ephesian Christian community had close links with the Palestinian community who also so designated themselves. It certainly implies that the Christians at Ephesus who belonged to 'The Way' were Jews. Luke is certainly aware of Asian Jews in Jerusalem (6:9; 21:27). Luke calls Apollos ζέων τω πνεύματι, a phrase generally understood to indicate Apollos was Holy Spirit-filled (Käsemann 1982: 143; Dunn 1970: 88; Bruce 1988: 359; Preisker 1931: 301; Ollrog 1979: 40). Rom 12:11 is the usual point of comparison.

The letter to the Ephesians (sic!) speaks this way. In the context of their walking (περιπατείν), Christians are asked whether "they so learned the Christ" (ούτω? έμάθετε τόν Χριστόν) if indeed they had heard him and been taught in him (έυ αύτφ). The truth (άλήθεια) is kv τω ΊησοΟ (4:20, 21). For an understanding of Acts 3:20 to mean Jesus will yet be sent as the Christ, see J.A.T. Robinson (1957).

In Acts

217

Norris is one who cautiously favors the opposite view, namely that it is a reference to Apollos' spirit and not the Holy Spirit (1982: 368). L.T. Johnson is also wary, believing that Luke deliberately avoids using his usual expression "full of the Holy Spirit" when describing Apollos (1992: 332). Hurst is the most forthright and does not think it refers to the Holy Spirit at all (1992: 301).!53

There are more than linguistic reasons why scholars have understood Apollos to be Holy Spirit-filled. Käsemann states: It is utterly inconceivable that anybody could be well informed of Christian origins without being aware of the line of demarcation between Jesus and his community and the Baptist and his baptism; that anybody could be 'inspired by the Holy Spirit' without seeing that the advantage of the Christian over the disciple of the Baptist lay precisely in his being endowed with the Spirit; that a primitive Christian teacher could differ from the whole New Testament in failing to connect the possession of the Spirit in the closest possible way with baptism; and, finally, that an evangelist could end his preaching without the call to Christian baptism (1982: 144). 154

Peñera believes that Apollos is not yet Christian but a Jew who is "still belonging to the Old Testament religion and Judaism" (1983: 63). He parallels Apollos with John the Baptist - the former prepared the way for Paul, the latter for Jesus (61). Pereira thinks that Apollos was a Jew who lived in the realm of the Old Testament, preaching the way of the Lord in the synagogues, and arguing with the Jews that Jesus is the Messiah, but knowing only John's baptism (1983: 63). None of this is convincing. Leaving aside the careless language ("Old Testament religion", "Judaism"), the characteristics which Pereira thinks distinguishes Apollos as an "Old Testament Jew" could also be said of Paul, apart (probably) from the reference to John's baptism. Arguing that Jesus is the Messiah surely distinguishes Apollos from any other "Old Theophylactus of Bulgaria would agree: "Αλλο Sè έστι τό ζέειν τώ Πνεύματι, καΐ άλλο τό σχείν Πνεύμα άγιον (PG 125.760). So it was a problem for earlier Christian commentators too. Ammonius of Alexandria (PG 85.1571), Oecumenius (PG 118. 246), and Theophylactus (PG 125. 760) all ask how Apollos had the Holy Spirit when he only knew the baptism of John. Ammonius thinks he did not have the Holy Spirit and explains the problem by resorting to "all things are possible with God" (1573-1575). Oecumenius thinks Apollos was in the same category as Cornelius who also received the Holy Spirit before being baptized (245). Theophylactus thought Apollos was one of the 120 with the apostles at Pentecost (Acts 1:15) although he has reservations since Apollos did not speak in tongues or prophesy. His conclusion is interesting: άλλ' ουν el καΐ ί ζ ε ε τψ Πνεύματι, Πνεύμα άγιοι/ οίικ ε ΐ χ ε ν (759-760). Haenchen takes the same view: "The possession of the Spirit by an evidently still imperfect Christian does not really seem conceivable" (1971: 550 η 7).

218

Paul among Jews

Testament Jew". If Apollos believed Jesus to be the Christ, then he is "Christian", no matter what his baptismal experience or teaching may have been. Dunn is another who insists that for Paul, if not for the whole New Testament, it is impossible for anyone to be classified as "Christian" without being aware of, let alone possessing, the Holy Spirit (1970: 88, for example). Apollos was not rebaptised because he already had the Spirit, says Dunn (88). He claims that πνεύμα must be understood as the Spirit and not as human spirit because it stands between two phrases which describe Apollos as a disciple of Jesus (88).'55 The question is: Did Apollos (or any other Christian who only knew John's baptism) possess the Holy Spirit? Some evidence would suggest no. The following episode (19:1-7) seems to be saying that those who knew John's baptism did not know the Holy Spirit which only came through baptism in the name of Jesus and/or through the laying on of authoritative hands. Likewise throughout Acts, the Holy Spirit comes only in association with baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and apostolic authority. Wolter is convinced that for Luke Apollos is deficient not only in his teaching, but also in any possession by the Holy Spirit, since for Luke "die Vollmacht der Übermittlung des Geistes exklusiv an Paulus als den Repräsentanten der Kontinuität der apostolischen Tradition gebunden bleibt" (1987: 73). But two important points are to be noted: First, Luke has no hesitation in ascribing the Holy Spirit (or, a holy spirit) to those who are not baptized, in fact to those who precede Jesus and his work. So Zechariah is promised that his son will be filled πνεύματος· αγίου (Luke 1:15). Elizabeth is likewise filled and prophesies (1:41) as does her husband, filled with a similar holy spirit (1:67). Mary is told that πνεύμα άγιον will come upon her (1:35). Simeon receives a revelation from του πνεύματος- του άγίου (2:26) while πνεύμα αγιον was on him (2:25); he then goes into the temple kv τω πνεύματι. (2:27)! This would seem to indicate that in Luke's terminology and therefore in his thinking, what happened at Pentecost, and what happens in Christian baptism is not so unique in terms of a/the holy Spirit.156

155

156

Curiously, Barton states that Apollos had belonged to the sect of John the Baptist before he became a Christian and cites Acts 18:25 as evidence (1924: 213). Barton even proposes that Apollos had a hand in composing Luke 1-2 which deal with the birth of John the Baptist (1924: 214). Apollos was its real author and Luke virtually borrowed it from him (219-222). Is there the possibility that all these instances involve Jews living in Israel, but what Pentecost and later events in Acts demonstrate is that that same Spirit is given in the diaspora and to gentiles as well as Jews there?

In Acts

219

Secondly, Luke frequently writes of the πνεύμα of a person (7:59; 17:16; 19:21; 23: 8, 9). 157 In Luke 1:17, John is prophesied to go before the Lord έν πνεύματι καΐ δυνάμει Ήλιου. In 1:80 Luke says of John: έκραταιοΰτο πνεύματι - something not said of Jesus (2:40). It is quite possible Luke uses the term in this way when speaking of Apollos. That is not to say Apollos does not have [a] holy spirit or the Holy Spirit, but that Luke is not concerned with that point here. Whether or not Apollos has any kind of Spirit is only the concern of those who wish to associate Apollos with the Twelve in the following episode, and/or who wish to see him as being inferior to Paul, (who alone can convey the Spirit) or even as being non-Christian. On the other hand, the fact that Apollos knows Jesus to be the Christ (v 28) would suggest, if the point is to be pursued at all, that he also had received πνεύμα άγιον since Jesus is the Christ - and Lord - who gives the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:33). Berger claims that the gift of biblical interpretation is a gift of the Holy Spirit, and therefore Apollos must be understood to be empowered by the Holy Spirit (1984: 181).158 But Berger, like most scholars, does not distinguish between the Spirit (who gives such gifts as interpretation) and the Holy Spirit whose gifts have to deal specifically with holiness. It is probably best to say that Apollos was bubbling over with the Spirit just like many other prophets of God had been and like others in Luke's Gospel. Whether that Spirit is understood to be the same as the Holy Spirit is another question.159 The imperfect tense of the verbs (έλάλει, έδ(δασκεν) makes it clear that Apollos was speaking and teaching "the things concerning Jesus" before he began to do so publicly in the synagogue at Ephesus. What is not clear is whether he was teaching in Ephesus or in Alexandria - the former is probably the intended meaning: Apollos was instructed in the "way of the Lord" in Alexandria and then began teaching and speaking in Ephesus "the things concerning Jesus". Apollos speaks and teaches160 - functions of the apostles and Paul in Acts 4:29,31; 16:32; 18:11; 28:31 - accurately (άκριβώς-). Accuracy appears to have been an attribute pursued by Luke in his own writing (Luke 1:3). Rather interestingly, Felix (obviously not a Christian) is described as άκριβέστερον Eph 4:23 and 5:18 are two further complex uses of the term πυεϋμα, where it is not impossible to understand both passages to be speaking of the (holy) spirit within people rather than of the Spirit of God. Likewise Georgi: "the exposition of scripture was understood as the point of contact between the divine power speaking from the text and encompassing the text" (1987: 141). Stählin is surely right: "das Wort π ν ε ύ μ α gehört zu den problemreichsten neutestamentlichen Vokablen und Begriffen" (1973: 230). Pereira says the two verbs are used by Luke to indicate "the Christian message of salvation" (1983: 55).

220

Paul among Jews

είδώ? τά περί τη? όδοΰ (Acts 24:22) and does so, it would seem, in a context not that of the synagogue, although his wife is Jewish (24:24). Paul himself learnt from Gamaliel κατά άκρίβειαν (Acts 22:3) and Paul describes the Pharisees as ή άκριβεστώτη αΐρησι? (26:5) which almost suggests that the adverb άκριβώ? reflects a style of learning. If Apollos is to be understood, then this adverb needs to be understood. It is often translated as "accurately" {RSV, NIV). Apollos was teaching accurately the things about Jesus, but he is then instructed "more accurately" (v 26). The implication often is that Apollos was corrected in his thinking and teaching. But the adverb also has other connotations. "Carefully", "precisely", "meticulously", even "fastidiously", are possible translations. To write, teach, or learn something άκριβώ? can mean to do so with precision and exact detail and with minute care. So, the chief priests kept a strict account of priestly marriages in order to keep marriages of the γένος- των Ιερέων pure (Josephus C. Apion 1.30-33), and records of the births and deaths of illustrious people were kept with πόλλη? ακρίβεια? (Josephus Ant. 1.82). The Pharisees were άκριβεΐ? του νόμου (Josephus Wars 1.111; 2.162; Life 38.191; Ant. 2.60; 4.309; 9.208); the Sophists were known for ά κ ρ ι β ο λ ο γ ί α ι and as άκριβολογούμενοι (Philo On Husbandry 136, 145) almost suggesting "hairsplitting". In fact, Philo regularly uses the words (άκριβ-) in the sense of "detail" and in the context of learning, teaching or discussing.161 Historians of the time liked to think that they were writing άκριβώ? and frequently used the adverb or a related form in the beginning of their writings (Josephus Wars 1.6, 9, 17; Philo De vita Mos. 1.4; Polybius 2.15). On that basis, it would seem that Apollos was accurate and correct in what he taught but he did not know all the fine details. The content of Apollos' proclamation and teaching is "thé things concerning Jesus" (τά περί του 'Ιησού). MacGregor thinks this means Apollos knew the story of Jesus and his teaching (1954: 248). Schwartz suggests on the basis of Acts 28:23; 24:14-15; 26:22-23 that it refers particularly to Jesus' resurrection (1990: 22). The phrase τά περί του... is common in Luke/Acts (Luke 24:19, 27; Acts 1:3; 13:29; 23:11; 24:22; 28:31) and in other writers: Philo can speak ofTÒ περί τελετά? καΐ μυστήρια (Spec. Laws I. 319); and Paul wants to know τά περί υμών (Phil 2:19-21). The phrase in Acts is meant to be general - Apollos knows the tradition and story of Jesus' life.

161

For example. On Dreams 1.59, 60, 204, 228; 2.17; De Abrah. 3, 167. Some things require "precise discussion" - άκρίβωθηναι (Quis Rerum Divinarum Heres 125). Philo claims to have a more detailed knowledge (άκριβώσαι) than others of τά περί TÒV βίο ν of Moses (De vita Mos. 1.4). It is a word he frequently uses at the beginning of a writing. Polybius the historian also writes in order to be "most clearly understood" - άκριβέστατα κατανοήσειε (2.15).

In Acts

221

There is further possible understanding. Apollos knew "the things concerning Jesus" from the Scriptures, that is, from what is called the Old Testament. That this is the more likely meaning is gathered from Luke 24:2627, where τά περί έαυτοΰ refers to things about the Christ in the Scriptures, especially the suffering of the Christ and his entrance into glory (v 26). If Luke 24:27 becomes the clue, then Apollos knew - and taught - the Christ to be Jesus on the basis of the Scriptures in which he was an authority. Verse 28 would support this understanding.162 But to complicate matters, there appears to be a connection between Apollos' teaching in some detail "the things concerning Jesus" and his "knowing only the baptism of John". Much depends on how the latter phrase is understood. What is the βάπτισμα Ιωάννου? According to Klijn, "we have no idea what is meant" (1986: 163-4). But there are some clues. It is a standard, even technical, expression (Acts 1:22; 19:3. Compare also Matt 21:25; Luke 7:29). The "baptism of John" survived beyond John himself and was practiced by others after him - Josephus towards the end of the first century knew living witnesses to that community. Snape claims that John's baptism was a rite of admission into a new society, maybe the "remnant which would form the new Israel to be ruled by the Messiah" (1954: 75; similarly, Oepke TDNT 1[1964] 536-537). In preparation, they fasted (Mark 2:18-22) and prayed (Luke 11:1). A number of scholars think that Apollos belonged to John's community and was "ein Täufling des Johannes" (Böcher 1988: 178), "one of his ardent disciples" (McCasland 1958: 229). But this is not self-evident from the text. Nor does Apollos' knowledge only of John's baptism necessarily mean he himself had been baptised with such a baptism. Luke is talking about Apollos' knowledge, not his experience or practice. The verb έπίστασθαι is used regularly in Acts (10:28; 15:7; 19:15, 25; 20:18; 22:19; 24:10; 26:26) in the sense of factual, practical knowledge. Apollos knows as fact the baptism of John, but he knows it as something outside of his own experience - he was not baptized with John's baptism. Luke thought very highly of John's baptism and there is no sense of reprimand concerning Apollos' knowledge. Μόνον, however, does suggest a limitation. 163 What was the limiting factor in Apollos' knowing only the baptism of John?

Pereira illustrates the logic that follows from the understanding that Apollos did not know or have the Holy Spirit. He claims that Apollos could not therefore have known of the Ascension or even the Resurrection. If he had, he would have also had the Holy Spirit since the latter is a gift of the risen and exalted Lord (1983: 45). Pereira is led to say even more: Apollos did not know of the passion of Jesus either (45-46). That it is not a reprehensible limitation is confirmed by the use of "only" (μόνον) in Acts 8:16 where certain believers had μόνον been baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus.

222

Paul among Jews

The expression "knowing only the baptism of John" needs to be understood in relation to the other ambiguous phrase "the things concerning Jesus". Luke may well be indicating that Apollos knew only "the things about Jesus" which began with John's baptism of Jesus. Apollos knew only Jesus' baptism by John - it is with that event that "the things concerning Jesus" begin. This understanding of the phrase is supported by its exact parallel usage in 1:22.164 There the apostle to replace Judas was to be one who had been with Jesus "from the baptism of John" (άπό του βαπτίσματος - Ιωάννου) until his ascension. Blass had suggested that Apollos was familiar with the Gospel of Mark in one form or another; but that suggestion is rejected - too easily - by Bruce on the grounds that κατηχουμένο? must indicate learning through hearing and not through reading (Bruce 1988: 359). But a large element of the Markan gospel could well have existed at some stage in oral form. If Apollos knew (only) Mark's Gospel, then it makes some sense that he knew only of Jesus' baptism by John and nothing prior to that event because that is where Mark begins his story. Luke, however, knows and relates much more prior to the baptism. In Luke's mind, there is more detail to be known by Apollos (and by implication, by Mark and Alexandria). In the early chapters of his gospel, Luke seems to be acutely aware of the family relationship between Jesus and John (1:36); of the priestly nature of John (1:5; 3:2) and the Davidic background of Jesus (1:27; 2:4). Above all, these early chapters have a "richness of Old Testament texture which pervades the account" (Goulder 1989: 1.215) and depict John and Jesus as fulfilling the eschatological promises of God. This is what Luke thinks Apollos does not know precisely enough, and since Apollos is already so familiar with the scriptures and had already learned the way of the Lord and the things about Jesus from the Old Testament scriptures, Prisca and Aquila make him an even more proficient and effective teacher with their knowledge (which is also Luke's). This understanding of Apollos' knowledge cuts away concern with whether or not he was baptised, whether or not he had the Holy Spirit, whether or not he was Christian, and whether or not he is meant to be understood in relation to the Twelve of the next episode. It also does away with any conflict or opposition between Paul and Apollos as so many scholars wish to see in Luke's episode. Luke is not interested in Paul or Apollos as such, and certainly not wishing to score points for one against the other. He is concerned primarily 164

It would also be possible to understand the phrase to mean Apollos knew things about Jesus beginning with John's baptism and ending, say, with the entry into Jerusalem, or at least up to some early stage of Jesus' ministry. Did he know the teachings and miracles of Jesus (the source Q ?) but not the passion and resurrection/ascension stories?

In Acts

223

with the Christness of Jesus and all its implications; and he is aware of the

vitality of that question in the Ephesian Christian communities of his own time. Luke was also aware of a 'John the Baptist following' in the area, a factor further supported by the interest of the Fourth Gospel in John's person, mission and status. Such a movement was a Jewish movement which interested Luke intensely, but it was not one which he saw as opposing his own understanding of Jesus. 165 But it was limited and stood in the shade of the Coming One. This is Luke's point also in the next episode (19:4). ν 26: Apollos began to speak freely and openly (παρρησιά£εσθαι) in the synagogue. Philo contrasted, with mild ridicule, the practice of gentiles who conduct their mysteries by night and with apparent secrecy with the public nature of Jewish worship, ritual and education (Spec. Laws I. 319-320).166 The verb παρρησιά£βσθαι may also have the connotation of "frankness" as the opposite of flattery. Plutarch understands the word in that way and says that παρρησία is φιλικόν καΐ σεμνόν (Moralia 59-60,66Β). Wynne sees a difficulty in that Apollos seems to have been in the confidence of the Jews of Ephesus... The difficulty is to explain how he had such free access to the synagogue to teach 'accurately' the things concerning Jesus (1912: 14).

This is a difficulty only if one assumes that Jews always rejected any preaching/teaching about Jesus. In Ephesus they did not - that is what Luke would have the reader believe. Apollos, like Paul, is well-received; in addition, the "Christians" Priscilla and Aquila are also present in the synagogue. Wynne suggests, quite reasonably, that Apollos came to Ephesus from Alexandria with the standard "letter of recommendation" from Jews of that city, which would mean, of course, that some Alexandrian Jews had also accepted Apollos' teaching "the things concerning Jesus" (Wynne 1912: 14). According to Codex Bezae, Apollos had been instructed in his own πατρίς· presumably by other Alexandrian Jews, followers of Jesus before him. Priscilla and Aquila "take Apollos aside" (so RSV ; Haenchen 1971: 549). The verb προσλαμβάνει^ can also mean "to accept into one's community or As far as Luke's version is concerned, Robinson is correct: there is no evidence that there was any opposition or antagonism between Jesus and John. "That these elements [concerning John the Baptist] constituted a rival group to Christianity in the first century, with a competing christology, is, I believe, without any foundation whatever" (1962: 49 n 49). Luke may be wanting to illustrate that the Christian cult is not like the mysteries which were forbidden and unspeakable (άπόρρητα καΐ άρρητα) and which, if told publicly, lost their significance (Burkert 1987: 9). A.R.R. Sheppard claims that παρρησία was a democratic virtue of dubious status and the tendency was to solve controversial business in secret (1984-6: 248).

224

Paul among Jews

circle" (Schneider 1982: 261 η 20. Compare Rom 14:1; 15:7; Acts 17:5). If the verb is understood this latter way, then it implies that Apollos and Priscilla and Aquila continue their discussions within the context of the synagogue and not outside of it as though the couple took him into their private home and corrected him, which is how it is often understood (NIV, Pathrapankal 1979: 537; Bruce 1988: 360; Hurst 1992: 301). Priscilla and Aquila belong to "The Way", that is, a circle of Christian Jews at this stage within the synagogue who so identified themselves, and they now take Apollos into that circle of "The Way". Priscilla and Aquila expound (έξέθεντο; compare 11:4; 28:23) to Apollos "more accurately still" (Bruce 1988: 360) the way of God. This is not Apollos' "Ephesian 'correction'" (J. Sanders 1987: 278). It is certainly not Apollos' conversion, as Harding understands it (1994: 11), a conversion which Georgi thinks to be "superficial" (1987: 169). Nor is Apollos taught like a pupil. The verb is not διδάσκειν, the usual verb to describe a master-pupil relation. Apollos is of equal status with Priscilla and Aquila - all three are accepted teachers and exegetes - and his knowledge is supplemented. Possibly, Prisca and Aquila had sufficient status within the synagogue (maybe as haberim) to be involved in scriptural halakhot and haggadot discussions within the beth midrash of the synagogue. They discussed and debated with Apollos, in traditional Jewish sage fashion, with the aim of reaching mutually acceptable positions if not total agreement. This discussion is based on the Scriptures, presumably centred around Isaiah 40 and Malachi 3, although other passages which do not readily come to the modern mind may well have been the basis for such discussion and exposition. Through discussion Apollos comes to a still more accurate (ακριβέστερο^) 167 understanding of The Way. 168 This is not downplaying the knowledge of Apollos or his status within the Christian communities. The judgment of Ernst, implied also by many other scholars, that Apollos "wohl noch kein vollwertiges Mitglied der Kirche war" (1989: 357) cannot pass unchallenged. The claim is that Apollos was deficient, his teaching "seriously defective" (Conybeare and Howson 1875: 367), and in need of "classes in Pauline theology" from Priscilla and Aquila before he could be regarded as a legitimate speaker/teacher in the Christian community. So, for example, L.T. Johnson Interestingly, the very same word is used to describe the knowledge that Felix has of the Way (24:22). This may suggest that too much should not be made of the word in this context, as if Apollos was being corrected. Josephus provides an helpful parallel to Luke usage of έκτΙΟημι ... Ακριβέστερου. In his Antiquities, Josephus promises at one stage: τόυ πάντα λόγον έκθήσομαι μετά πολλή? άκριβεία? - he will expound in more detail on the matter later (1. 214). This is what Prisca and Aquila do for Apollos - they expound to him in more detail the way of God.

In Acts

225

thinks Apollos was "a helpful but secondary participant... a teacher instructed by the Pauline school" (1992: 335; see also Schneider 1982: 260). This rests on the assumption that the two companions of Paul and his supporters were also Pauline in their theology! There is no need to see Paul as being so dominant that Priscilla and Aquila are simply his representatives or his mouthpiece. It is both patronizing and inaccurate to portray them as "the simple couple" or "the pious couple" (Pereira 1983: 42, 60). The suggestion is rather that they were reasonably autonomous co-workers of Paul, possibly even his teachers rather than being taught by him, as Bruce implies (1988: 360). The way Paul himself speaks of the couple leaves the impression that he was greatly in their debt, and that not just financially but also from the perspective of his mission. There is nothing to suggest that they were theologically dependent on Paul. Obsession with Pauline dominance 169 is also seen in the understanding of "the way of God" (ή δδός του θεοί); some variant readings omit του θεοΟ). The phrase has been understood by some to be shorthand for a full Pauline theology. So Pesch suggests that Priscilla and Aquila developed Pauline theology in Apollos and its view of the way of God for both Jew and gentile (1986: 161-2). But there is nothing in this episode (or in any other in the Ephesian context) which suggests that the relation between Jew and gentile was on the agenda for synagogal (whether Christian or not) discussion. This verse (28) may suggest that what Apollos now understood more accurately had something to do with the messiahship of Jesus. It is possible (in the light of the above understanding of "The Way") that Apollos learns even more precisely that the Christ is Jesus and that his believers are "The Way", that is, the people of God chosen to prepare his coming. Common thinking is that for Luke, Paul brings deviant forms of Christianity into line (Käsemann 1982; Bruce, citing Ehrhardt approvingly, 1988: 360). Wolter claims that Luke is clearly pro-Pauline, wanting to insist that Paul is dominant vis a vis Apollos. He constructs the difference between Paul's absence [18:24-28] and his presence [19:1-7] (1987: 71); Conzelmann notes Luke wants Paul to be the first preacher in Ephesus and avoids having Paul and Apollos there at same time (1987: 155, 158 (So also Baumgarten 1854: 269; Haenchen 1971: 547). The deficiency of Apollos is seen to be more than one of teaching - he did not have the Spirit which only comes via Paul. So Wolter writes:

Schoeps' comment bears repeating: "Paul and Pauline theology constituted at that time only one possibility, one direction among several, and perhaps not always the most important. The historians generally only see the historical outcome, that is, the forces in a conflict which emerge victorious" (1969: 57).

226

Paul among Jews Hier bringt Lukas unmissverständlich zum Ausdruck, wer nun wirklich und allein die Vollmacht hat und in der Lage ist, den heiligen Geist zu vermitteln - dies ist nicht Apollos, sondern Paulus (1987: 72).

Wolter says Paul is the one who continues the apostolic tradition which is demonstrated via his ability to call down the Spirit. Apollos is not in that tradition without Paul (73). But if Luke wished to show Apollos to be deficient, then why does not Apollos receive the Spirit at the hands of Paul (or his co-workers) just like the Twelve do in the following episode? Or why is not Apollos baptised by Paul or his co-workers? That would surely have shown up Paul and put Apollos in an inferior relation to him. If that was Luke's intention, it would also have served his purpose much better to have left Apollos in Ephesus and have him clearly associated with the Twelve of 19:1-7. The fact is that Apollos is an independent teacher - "more or less a free agent" (Meeks 1983: 61) and has little contact with Paul in Ephesus. Rather than constructing opposition or a theological gulf between Paul and Apollos, Luke describes Apollos as being of similar ilk to Paul. Both are diaspora Jews (21:39; 18:24), both are well-educated in the Jewish tradition (22:3; 18:24), both receive "Christian" instruction (9:10-19; 18:26), both work to convince their fellow-Jews that the Christ is Jesus (17:2-3; 18:28); both are obviously "gifted" men; both have Corinth-Ephesus links. A further note: Luke narrates this episode concerning Apollos not only in relation to Ephesus but also (especially?) to Corinth. The point of the episode is not that this Alexandrian Jew had come to Ephesus, but rather that he is now truly effective as a teacher/evangelist in Corinth. Luke is not trying to move Apollos out of the way so that Paul can come in - he simply wishes to conclude the Corinthian situation. 170 J. Sanders suggests that Apollos' function for Luke is "to conclude the portrait of Paul's Corinthian ministry" and to "complete Paul's job in Achaia" (1987: 278). Apollos is an independent and autonomous speaker and teacher of significant status at Ephesus briefly (possibly already in Alexandria) and then later in Corinth where he acts independently of Paul. Paul calls Apollos αδελφό? (1 Cor 16:12) which may suggest more than simply an acknowledgment of him as a fellow-Christian. Paul regarded him as one who had authority to teach. As Haenchen rightly notes that Apollos "was ... no Paulinist, but a missionary quite independent in his work and thought, whom Paul faced with considerable reserve" (1971: 556). That same verse, 1 Cor 16:12, makes it clear that

170

Acts 19:1 should so be understood, then. There is reason to argue that if Luke wants anyone out of the way in Ephesus it is Paul. Paul leaves and that creates the space for Apollos to arrive (18:21-23).

In Acts

227

Apollos was not under Paul's thumb in any way. Paul encourages Apollos to go to Corinth from Ephesus, but it was not Apollos' will (θέλημα) to do so.171 ν 27: This verse indicates the existence of a pre-Pauline Christian congregation of Jews (Haenchen 1971: 551; Conzelmann 1987: 158). Apollos wants to move on to Corinth. This again indicates his independence. He is not like Timothy "a child of Paul" (1 Cor 4:17), but an independent teacher who is free to make his own decisions, dependent only, as Paul himself and others were, on the recommendation of the community. The Western text reads differently at this verse, with the initiative for Apollos' move to Corinth coming from the Corinthians themselves. If Apollos was regarded in any sense to be unreliable or only newly-converted, then one wonders why the Corinthians would request him. Nor is there any reason to suppose that the troubles in Corinth for Paul were in some degree to be blamed on the unsteady theology of Apollos (Roberts 1915: 82). It appears that there were strong and frequent relations between the Corinthian and Ephesian Christian communities. Priscilla and Aquila had spent time there, as indeed had Paul himself. Paul's own letter reveals those good relations (1 Cor 16:12-19). So the brethren (ol άδελφοί) at Ephesus wrote letters of recommendation to the disciples (μαθηταί) at Corinth. Ephesian Jews, now Christian, write to the Christian community at Corinth and ask that they receive Apollos, the Christian Jew. The αδελφοί may be the equivalent of or the parallel to the tman, that is, that group in the synagogue who were regarded as authorities in matters of the faith and the way, as distinct from others within the synagogue community who were p a n Di) and ignorant of the Law. 172 Some usage of αδελφοί in Acts lends support to this understanding. When James, acting as "president", addresses those gathered to make decisions and to send advice to the diaspora regarding certain problems dealing with purity and halakhic observation, he calls the council ανδρε? αδελφοί (15:13). Such an understanding also makes sense of the reading in 15:23 where ol άπόστολοι καΐ ol πρεσβύτεροι αδελφοί give greetings to the άδελφοί? roí? έξ έθνών. If this is the case, Paul's use of αδελφό? when speaking of Apollos in 1 Cor 16:12 suggests that Paul regarded Apollos as a peer - a teacher, well-qualified to speak and teach on matters of the faith and "The Way". It is those in a position of status within the community who can then write letters of recommendation to the Corinthian Christians (μαθηταί) that they should 171 172

If it is God's will rather than Apollos' the point still remains. See the article of Neusner (1960). In Jewish terms, the nnan were a fellowship concerned with ritual purity and the Law. Women could belong to such an association (Jastrow, Dictionary 421-422). But see also Spiro (1980) who believes that originally the haberim may have been regular functionaries of the community connected with the collection of tithes and other offerings; their relation with matters of purity was a much later development.

228

Paul among Jews

welcome him. This may have even been a communication from synagogue to synagogue, or at least from "Christians" within one Jewish community to those in the other. If Priscilla and Aquila had status in the Ephesian synagogue, they would be in a position to recommend Apollos to Corinth, and there they could contact Krispos, the άρχισυνάγωγο?, since the latter was now Christian yet apparently retained his position (Acts 18:8).173 On arrival at Corinth, Apollos greatly helps or comes to the assistance of (συνεβάλετο) those who had become believers (toi? πεπιστευκόσιν, an expression also used at 19:18). Possibly, the phrase διά τη? χάριτος- is to be linked with the verb συνεβάλετο and describes the activity of Apollos (Conzelmann 1987: 158), but it probably speaks rather of the believers. The believers (v 27) are defined as Jews, ol Ί ουδαίοι (ν 28). It is likely that at least at an early date Ephesus and Corinth also had this is common - the majority of Christians in both places were Jews. J. Sanders cannot accept this possibility and so believes that Apollos goes to Corinth and "just shows them the error of their ways" since there is no point in trying to convert them (1987: 279). But the clear inference Luke gives in verses 27-28 is that Apollos had some success among the Jews of Corinth. They are the believers whom Apollos assists greatly, for (γαρ) he was arguing very convincingly (διακατηλέγχετο) with "the Jews". The impression is that the believers are still in the synagogue and there are those Jews who have opposed the identification of the Christ with Jesus, but Apollos supports the believers against that opposition by his arguments. In addition, it is quite likely that it was the Jews of Corinth who invited Apollos (a fellow-Jew) to come to visit them. 174 ν 28: The language here is very strong. Apollos is a persuasive and impressive man in Luke's eyes or according to his sources. The public nature (δημοσία) 175 of Apollos' teaching does not indicate a turn away from Jews to non-Jews. He is a teacher or sage. Safrai notes that many sages were not content to teach at their local school but wandered from town to town (so, Apollos from Alexandria to Ephesus to Corinth) and it was not uncommon for a sage to conduct discourses and discussions with his pupils in the town-square or in the market-place, with the townspeople

173

174

175

It is interesting that in later traditions, John the apostle was also associated with both Ephesus and Corinth. In The Teaching of the Apostles John, as bishop, ordains to the priesthood in both areas. That is following the Codex Bezae reading at this verse. The are quite a number of indications that Corinth-Ephesus links were very close. In fact, there are more known Corinthian Christians in Ephesus than Ephesian Christians. The word is used elsewhere in the New Testament only in Acts 5:18; 16:37; and 20:20.

In Acts

229

gathering around them and listening, irrespective of whether they were able to understand all or only part of the discussion (1976: 965).^

So Apollos adopts the common Jewish practice of teaching publicly, showing through the Scriptures (in which he was so qualified, and which was the only criterion those involved in the educational system of the synagogue would accept) the Christ to be Jesus. There is no need to assume that Apollos based his teaching on "Paul's own Christological exegesis of the Old Testament", as Hurst suggests (1992: 301). Apollos was capable of his own exegesis. Apollos' ability with the scriptures is what made him so attractive to Luke who is himself concerned to show that the Christ is Jesus δια των γραφών (Luke 24:27; Acts 2:14-36; 3:18-26). The claim that the Christ is Jesus dominates the preaching and teaching of Acts (for example, 2:36; 3:20; 5:42; 9:22); and it probably remained the touchstone of Christian relations with Jews at least into the middle of the second century as is evidenced by Justin in his dialogue with (the Ephesian?) Trypho. For Christians like Justin, the essential mark of salvation is the confession δτι αυτός έστιν ό Χριστό? (Día/. 47). Justin complains that in some synagogues "those that believe in Christ" are cursed and "this very Christ" is anathematized (DialA6, 47). Trypho himself has been warned by his teachers not to enter into debates with Christians, especially regarding the Christ (Dial. 38). In the ministry of Apollos gentiles do not come into the picture at all. Apollos, a Jew, on the basis of the Jewish scriptures shows to his fellow-Jews that the Christ is Jesus. So far, according to Luke, the only Christians in Ephesus are Jews, and they have maintained their connections with the synagogue. The contribution that these Ephesian Christian Jews make to their brothers in Corinth via Apollos is christological - to do with the Christness of Jesus; and their self-identity is centred in the understanding of "the way of the Lord". Some of these "Way" members know about and believe and teach certain things concerning Jesus, and they differ from other Jews (both Jesusbelievers and not) who lack the finer details in the area of christology, particularly on the question of the messiahship of Jesus. This seems to be the point of ν 28. 177

Philo makes the same point about Jewish teachers (Spec. Laws I. 321-322). Not surprisingly, some Ephesians later claimed the Fourth Gospel which includes such a strong christological message (20:31).

230

Paul among Jews

2.4.5. Acts 19: 1-7 It is best to interpret the "twelve disciples" of this passage as having little to do with Apollos from the previous episode, despite the common element of "the baptism of John" (Conzelmann 1987: 159). 178 What they have in common may have as much to do with the Luke's concern for "the kingdom" as it does with anything else. 'The twelve1 have bothered commentators and scholars for centuries. Already Oecumenius (PG 118: 247-248) and Theophylactus (PG 125: 761762) drew attention to the obvious problems. More recently, Ramsay could not understand the passage, saying it does not follow the Lukan pattern (1935: 270). Foakes-Jackson thinks it (and 19:11-20) is "comparatively so uninteresting to us" (1931: 174); Pereira calls it a "curious and apparently mysterious episode" (1083: 81). Käsemann brands it "the despair of the exegete" (1982: 136) and outlines the numerous problems: Are the μαθηταί Christians? Is it too simple to say that they were once John's disciples but have now become Christians? If they were already Christians before Paul arrives, then why does Paul explain the role of John the Baptist and his baptism? And why does Paul ask about the Holy Spirit since the New Testament is clear that what distinguishes the Baptist's baptism from Christian baptism is the Holy Spirit? (1982: 136-37). There are further problems: Why does Paul rebaptise them when there is no other evidence in the New Testament to suggest that the followers of John the Baptist were rebaptised with water on becoming Christian? Or does Paul not in fact baptise them, since ν 5 can be read as part of Paul's speech and not a description of his action? And what is "the baptism of John" anyway? Essential to the discussion is the fact that baptism, for many scholars, is very much a theological issue and it is difficult to keep a priori theological positions out of the interpretation of the passage. Schweizer holds that this passage be understood either as a reminiscence of a Christianity which went completely its own way without the experience of the Spirit and without a baptism in the name of Jesus; or, that Luke has 178

pace a ]] those scholars who think like Coneybeare & Howson that Apollos and these twelve were one and the same group (1875: 364). Ramsay says they were possibly converted by Apollos (1898: 724) as does Menzies (1991: 270); Bernard thinks they were probably disciples of Apollos (1898: 124) as does Kosmala (1959: 338); Lichtenberger also thinks the two passages are meant to be understood together (1987: 79); Wolter says that the twelve have no Christian baptism and no Holy Spirit and claims that these déficiences connect Apollos with the 12 (1987: 71). He thinks that the clear assumption is that if Paul had in fact met up with Apollos in Ephesus he would have baptised him and so been the channel of the Holy Spirit for him. Wolter believes Luke is making the point that it is not Apollos but Paul who has the authority (Vollmacht) and is in a position to mediate the Holy Spirit (1987: 72). The commonality between Apollos and the Twelve is "the baptism of John", but it is not clear that the expression means the same in both cases.

In Acts

231

reconstructed the tradition (1955: 247). He prefers the second option to the first because of a lack of evidence for the first. Luke simply wants to make all previous baptisms, including that of John, forerunners to that in Jesus' name (247-8). Like Käsemann, Schweizer compares 19:1-7 with 8:14-17 and sees both as Luke's attempt to bring outside peripheral Christians into the una sancta catholica (248). Like others, Schweizer thinks Luke wants to create a picture of a tension-free unity in the early church which stood in contrast to the situation in his own time as is shown in 20:17-38 (248). Luke also wants to make the point that the time of water-baptism only is over and the Spiritbaptism given through the ascended One and through baptism in his name is the only truly Christian baptism (249). Some of Schweizers points will be taken up in what follows, but generally it can be said that his opinion rests too much on an apologetic-polemical understanding of Acts, and therefore also of these Ephesian episodes. There is another way to read these episodes. Luke received a significant number of accounts of different events from Ephesus (Acts 18:18-21; 24-28; 19:1-7; 8-10; 11-20; 23-41; 20:17-38) which he strings together rather loosely. What holds these episodes together is his interest in three things: The mission to Jews and to gentiles in the city - with success among some of the first and virtually none among the second; the christological question; and Luke's interest in the relation between the Holy Spirit and the people of God. In studying these episodes, it is tempting to make Luke a consistent, logical, theological author in the Western scholarly mould a temptation which needs to be faced with caution. Luke's interest is in charismatic figures like Apollos who can show from the scriptures that the Christ is Jesus. He is particularly interested in Paul, who is the apostle to his people among whom God works some success, but who also suffers rejection as the prophet and teacher - rejection from Jews and gentiles alike, with the result that the Ephesians "will see his face no more". While not wishing to reject all the suggestions that have been made in order to understand 19:1-7, an attempt will be made to find another solution. Central to this endeavor is an understanding of [the] Holy Spirit ([το] πνεύμα [τό] αγιον), especially as that Spirit relates to the holy people (λαό?) of God. This despite Käsemann's discouraging judgment that the various attempts to make sense of these twelve, "has brought before us every even barely conceivable variety of naïveté, defeatism and fertile imagination which historical scholarship can display" (1982: 140). ν 1: Paul finds (compare 18:2) some disciples (τινα? μαθητά?). Käsemann thinks too much effort is given to discussing the twelve as a historical case instead of perceiving the intent of Luke: They are immature disciples of John the Baptist, and the Spirit is linked to the apostolically organised church through baptism and laying on of hands (1982: 141). In the

232

Paul among Jews

end, Käsemann does not regard them as Christian at all: "These disciples have naturally no contact with the Christian fellowship" (1982: 42). Luke complicates and obscures these Baptist followers because "the existence of a community owing allegiance to the Baptist could not be admitted without endangering gravely the Church's view of his function" (1982: 142). So, it is an anti-Baptist polemic. Such an opinion is typical of Käsemann who sees so much of the New Testament as polemical. Käsemann believes Luke makes the twelve an "odd species of Christian and thus he has radically eliminated any suggestion of real rivalry" (143). He also claims that "it is one of the basic convictions of Luke's day that schisms and heresy had been unknown in the very earliest days of Christianity" (145). This position of Käsemann is well-known and is followed by many scholars. But it is questionable as to whether such rivaliy existed and whether Luke is downplaying the divisions.179 However, Luke is fully aware that Ephesus, at least, was not founded by Paul but by various other Christian preachers and teachers who maintained their influence either alongside that of Paul or even in spite of it. In addition, Luke knows that while some at Ephesus received the Pauline tradition, it was always prone to heresy and schism. Luke, on this point, is in fundamental agreement with the letters of Paul himself: Both agree that Ephesus was a very difficult mission and one threatened by schism and heresy. Can the twelve be talked of as disciples of John the Baptist? Rengstorf says yes; he does not believe these disciples are Christian at all because to be a μαθητή? always has the "implication of supremely personal union" with the teacher, in this case, John the Baptist (TDNT 4 [1967] 457, 442). Bruce rightly says no; they are "Christian" (1988: 363). As Dunn says, just because they had received the baptism of John does not mean they were disciples of John the Baptist. "It is probably a generic name for the rite originated by John and taken over by others including Jesus and his disciples" (1970: 84; similarly Cadbury and Lake Beginnings 4 [1933] 238). Luke always signifies Christians when he writes of μαθηταί (Haenchen 1971: 553). But scholarly opinion is still divided. The dilemma for most is how can they be Christian without awareness of the Holy Spirit? Kistemaker says they are Christian, but their "faith (or, belief) without the Spirit is nothing more than nodding consent" (1990: 677, 678). Such thinking is too modern and too Protestant. Howard Marshall says they are not disciples but only "appeared" to be so (1980: 306); similarly Schneider (1982: 263), Ernst (1989: 147), and Schnackenburg (1991: 44). As mentioned, Käsemann claims that Luke thought of them as "semi-Christians, or rather as backward confessors of the name of Jesus or as representatives of an inferior or unapostolic brand of Christianity" (1982: 137-8). Grundmann calls them "unfertige Christen" 179

See Menzies comments on the positions of both Käsemann and Schweizer (1991: 268-269).

In Acts

233

(1964: 57). 180 Lichtenberger allows them not even embryonic traces of being Christian because their lack of knowledge of the Holy Spirit is a clear sign that Luke does not regard them as Christian: "Christentum ohne Taufe und Geist ist für Lukas nicht möglich (1987: 50 η 58). Conzelmann likewise: "It is doubtful that the Spirit-less 'Christianity' as described here existed anywhere" (1987: 159). Dunn argues that the use of τίνα? μαδητά? is deliberate on Luke's part to distinguish them from the actual disciples who are genuine Christians (1970: 84). So Dunn maintains they do not belong to the disciples of Ephesus (84) and "they are not yet Christians" (85) since Paul could not conceive of them as Christians without the Spirit (86). But this places too much weight on τίνα?, a weight which it cannot bear since the indefinite article is used frequently by Luke without it having any obvious import.181 One solution is to take this episode far less seriously from an historical perspective and to view it as a piece of Lukan fiction to prepare for ν 6 and the baptism by Paul whose "brand of Christianity" is the only one acceptable to Luke. But the more moderate understanding of recent scholars is also worth considering. Menzies, for example, writes: Perhaps Luke has been more faithful to tradition and history than is often assumed. Both accounts [18:24-28; 19:1-7] have undoubtedly been significantly shaped by Luke, but this does not necessitate a negative assessment of the traditional and historical character of the essential elements in the narrative. It is not improbable that there existed, predominantly in Galilee, groups of former disciples of John the Baptist who had come to believe in Jesus as the Coming One without receiving Christian baptism (i.e. in the name of Jesus) or instruction concerning the nature and availability of the Pentecostal gift (1991: 270).

But Menzies (and many others) cannot abandon the thought that the two episodes are connected 182 and so he sees the twelve as converts of Apollos who was himself converted by a member of the John the Baptist movement. Menzies, like others, believes that Luke wants to have Paul as "the principal character in the establishment of the church in Ephesus" (270-271). Of course, this is possible. But it is valid to understand Luke to be giving Apollos, Priscilla and Aquila equal status with Paul and not simply to be showing them to be his precursors or companions. They are the founders of a Christian community in Ephesus. And the twelve in 19:1-7 are believers and disciples before Paul lays his hands on them. Here again it is possible that Luke is not

Most German scholars before recent years held this view. It is a view held already in that tradition by Ferdinand Christian Baur (1876: 189). Luke introduces nearly all his characters with the indefinite τι?. Lichtenberger sees an "innere Zusammenhang" (1987: 49).

234

Paul among Jews

so interested in Paul as in the Holy Spirit and in trying to understand and communicate to his audience what a Christian community is. The text must stand despite the theological problems it raises. Norris, like Haenchen, is convinced that on the basis of the twenty-eight times the word μαθηταί is used in Acts, it is highly improbable that the phrase in 19:1 can mean anything but "certain Christians" because the word for "disciples" is technical designation for Christians everywhere else in Acts (1985/6: 101).

He concludes that the linguistic evidence indicates that "both Luke and Paul recognised these twelve as Christians even though they did not know of the Spirit and had not been immersed into Christ" (101).183 These disciples are "Christian" in the broad sense; they are believing disciples. As mentioned, the major obstacle for scholars is the absence of the Spirit in this community. This absence, according to some, excludes them from the name "Christian". But there have been those who debate that criterion. Cadbury and Lake hold that the term "baptism of John" does not refer to indirect or direct influence of the Baptist as if these disciples belong to a John the Baptist sect. Rather, they are Christians who practised water baptism without any idea of the Spirit (Beginnings 4 [1933] 238). Kosmala argues even further that one could be a "believer" without accepting Jesus as the Messiah, and without knowing the Holy Spirit. Repentance towards God and the expectation of the end was sufficient (1975: 106-107). Beasley-Murray is prepared to accept that there is "nothing improbable in the existence of groups of people baptised by followers of John the Baptist and standing at varying degrees of distance from (or nearness to) the Christian Church" (1962: 109).184 But in the end, he too calls them "half-Christians" (1962: 111). The use of the word "Christian" is important at this point. Tomson wisely advises that the term "must be used with care for earliest Christian (sic!) history, for as far as Paul is concerned it is an anachronism" (1990: 27). Luke

Norris uses the term "baptised into Christ" as if indiscriminate from "into Jesus", or "into the Lord Jesus". They may all be synonymous, but there is also the possibility that the first was thought to have different connotations to the other two, namely that the baptised was baptised into the messianic community. Baptism into the name of the Lord Jesus, or simply into Jesus may not have implied baptism into the community of the Messiah; baptism into Christ did. His term "Christian church" is surely an anachronism in this context.

In Acts

235

does not use the word here.185 In its original sense,186 it surely had to do with a group of believers in Jesus who saw him as the Christ, the Messiah, and with that conviction they held the belief that from him they had received (or would receive?) the eschatological and messianic Spirit. In that sense, there can be no "Christian" without the Spirit. In that sense, these twelve may not be "Christian". But even then, it depends on what "holy spirit" (πνεύμα άγιοι») it is that they have not been taught. The passage cited as evidence that for Paul there can be no Christian without the Spirit is Romans 8:9 (Kaiser 1977: 59; Dunn 1970: 66). That very passage speaks of "[the] Spirit of Christ "(πνεύμα Χριστού), in other words, the messianic Spirit.187 The lack in these twelve is that they were not aware of this messianic Spirit. This messianic Spirit, or "Spirit of Christ," gives the/a holy spirit, and the people "receive" it. 188 The "Spirit of Christ" calls out a new people to be "holy" and gives that new people "a holy spirit" (πνεύμα αγιον). This idea is inherent in Luke 3:17, where John the Baptist says the baptism of the coming "mightier One" will separate the chaff from the grain, separate the holy ones from the rest. It is this "holy spirit", given by the Holy Spirit of God or more precisely, the Christ, of which the twelve had not heard. This point will be taken up again shortly. Whoever these disciples are, the impression given is that they do not belong to the synagogue, although it is not clear. If they have left the synagogue, the question can then be asked: Why? since other Jewish Jesus-believers like Apollos, Priscilla and Aquila and Paul did not leave. Having been baptised into the baptism of John (19:3) suggests that they followed the Baptist's call to repent and to await the coming kingdom, and maybe they did so, not unlike the Qumran community, by abandoning the traditional places of their fellowJewish contemporaries and forming a new community of the crisis-time. Luke uses the word just twice (11:26; 26:28). He prefers other words, even though he obviously is aware of the term "Christian". The fact that he mentions the name being first (πρώτω?) at Antioch implies Luke knew of its usage elsewhere. That such believers were called "Christians" at Antioch does not mean that all believers everywhere were called or called themselves "Christians". For comments on the origin of the name, see the articles of Taylor (1994) and Judge (1993), and Brown & Meier (1983: 35 η 81). Both Judge and Brown & Meier (and also Lührmann [1992: 23]) think the name signifies the clear distinction between Jews and Christians. Tacitus implies that the crowds called the believers "Christians" (.Annals 15.44). It is interesting that Cerinthus (whom some traditions associate with Ephesus) called the Holy Spirit πνεύμα Χρίστου and identified that Spirit as the messiah, but as ό άνω Χριστό?. Jesus, on the other hand, he called ό κάτω Χριστό? (Neander 1851: 2.85). The verb λαμβάνειν is used frequently with Christians. The Spirit is not something one "has", but it is "received" (John 20:22; Acts 1:8; 2:33, 38; 8:15; 10:47; 19:2; 2 Cor 11:4).

236

Paul among Jews

Oepke believes that the baptism of John "is an initiatory rite for the gathering Messianic community" (TDNT 1 [1964] 537). The seemingly off-hand comment of Luke that the community numbered ώσεί δώδεκα becomes significant at this point. This community of twelve saw itself as the true Israel, the λαό?, but, unlike the Qumran community, it did not yet know of a/the holy spirit. 189 Luke emphasises that John the Baptist had a particular concern for "the people". He preaches good news to the people (εΰηγγελί£ετο τόν λαό ν, Luke 1:18) and a repentance for the people (μετάνοια τω λαω, Acts 19:4) based on being the true children of Abraham (Luke 3:8). The angel in Luke's birth narrative tells Zechariah that his son will go ahead "to make ready for the Lord a people prepared" (έτοιμάσαι. κυρίω λαόν κατεσκευασμένον, Luke 1:17). Ernst appears not to understand John's concern this way, claiming that he was more interested in giving the individual the possibility of escaping and being saved from the judgment which threatens Israel as a whole (1989: 340). So he claims that for John "nicht Sozialisation, sondern Individualisation ist das Kennzeichen" (1989: 351). But for Luke, this is not the case. John's ministry and mission is for the people, for Israel. According to Luke, the whole of Israel is expected to receive the baptism of John and not just some. Not to accept John's baptism is to reject the purposes (τήν βουλήν) of God (7:29). For him, it is obligatory since in that way Israel is prepared as a people ("The Way"), for the Lord. This cannot be emphasised enough since it removes any suggestion that for Luke in Acts those who had been baptised into John's baptism were incompatible with the "Christian" community. Luke does not reject the baptism of John; to the contrary, he regards it as essential for Israel as preparation for the Coming One. Of interest in this context of "The Way", "the baptism of John", "the Holy Spirit", and "the people" is Luke 1:17, just mentioned. It would appear from this verse that "to prepare the way " and "to prepare a people " are synonymous. Those Christians who called themselves "The Way" thought that as a people they were "the way for the Lord" (ή ôSàç κυρίω). The baptism of

1 QS 4:18-23, for example, speaks of a spirit of holiness which will purge the elect in the last days. If there is any connection between this group of Twelve and Apollos who comes from Alexandria, it is worth noting that the Therapeutae of Alexandria were also interested in being "holy", and like the Qumran community created substitutes for the Temple of Jerusalem (Bokser 1977: 7-10). This highly significant difference between Qumran and these Twelve virtually rules out the otherwise attractive proposition that after 70 CE some from Qumran arrived in Ephesus and this episode then deals with such a community (so Pokorny 1992: 22). Brown similarly suggests that the Fourth Gospel was written to counter the John the Baptist disciples who were familiar with Qumran/Essene thought (1958: 207).

In Acts

237

John prepared "The Way", that is, prepared a people. Or, at least Luke so understood it. 190 These twelve also saw themselves as The People to whom and even through whom the Christ would come. That is why Paul (Luke) is attracted to them and why he is keen to tell them the true understanding of being "The Way" and who the Coming One actually is. Luke is also interested in holiness and wants the readers to know that there is no holiness, no holy people (άγιοι), without a "holy spirit" which is given by the Holy Spirit. Holiness does not come now from preparation nor from segregation nor even from the baptism of John, as important as that is for Israel, but through a holy spirit given by the Lord and Christ who is Jesus. The claim on "holiness" in Israel often was debated between the prophets and the priests, with the argument for its locus being between the temple and the desert. John the Baptist was a priest who abandoned the holiness of the temple and called for it in the desert. 191 In some other traditions, the priesthood was the centre of such holiness and even the king was beneath the priest. So Judah (the royal line) is beneath Levi (the priestly) according to The Testament of Judah (21:1-4). But for Luke, holiness comes not through the priestly line (John the Baptist) but through the royal line of Judah/David (Jesus). ν 2: Paul recognises that the twelve are "believers" - that is, in Jesus.192 As ancient commentators already observed, the question is not: "Did you believe Pathrapankal almost, but not quite, says this of the Qumran community, claiming that they saw themselves as the Righteous Ones of Israel who separated themselves from the men of error by going out into the desert and there to prepare the way by their study of the law and the prophets (1975: 538). Radi says: "The preparation of the way of the Lord (compare Luke 1:76) means nothing other than the repentance of Israel" (1991: 67). It would seem that Ephesus had an interest in the priesthood. Luke records the presence of John the Baptist followers there; Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus towards the end of the second century, distinctively draws attention to John "who became a sacrificing priest wearing the mitre" (Eusebius Η.E. 3.31.5). Justin tells Trypho possibly at Ephesus that Christians are "the true highpriestly race of God" (Dial. 116) and 1 Peter addressing Christians of Asia Minor calls them "a royal priesthood" (2:9). Schwartz draws attention to the narrow and conservative view of priests at Qumran. "It was a characteristically priestly view to deny the possibility of conversion to Judaism" and 4Q Florilegium 1.4 looks forward to a temple not polluted by proselytes (1990: 165). If - there is no hard evidence - the John the Baptist Twelve at Ephesus thought along those lines, then they would not have been in tune with Paul until he comes and convinces them through the baptism into Jesus which breaks down such exclusive thinking. The letter To the Hebrews would, then, fit an Ephesian context concerned as it is with ideas of the priesthood. There is no need to suppose that they "must have been personal disciples of the 'earthly' Jesus" (Pereira 1983: 91).

238

Paul among Jews

in Jesus when you were baptised?" (Oecumenius PG 118: 247; Theophylactus PG 125: 761-762). That they so believed is taken for granted. Dunn says Paul's question is based on a mistaken but charitable assumption (1970: 84; also Howard Marshall 1980: 305-6). But that is unnecessary. The holy Spirit and believing are not automatically co-existent according to the rest of Acts. In the case of the Samaritans (8:4-24), there are baptised believers who had not yet received that Spirit, which only comes when the Jerusalem apostles, Peter and John, lay hands on them. On another occasion, Peter seems at one point to be a trifle uncertain about the holy Spirit's coming, and had to call to mind the word of Jesus that John baptised with water but "you will be baptised with the holy Spirit" (11:16). Like Peter, Paul (at least in the way Luke constructs the episode) is not quite certain as to the coexistence of believing and the holy Spirit - hence the question.193 It is a question consistent with Paul's own in his writing to the Galatians: "Did you receive the Spirit (TÒ πνεύμα è λάβετε) by doing the works of the law or by believing what you heard (έξ άκοή? πίστεως·)?" (3:2). While that question is rhetorical, this one is not. Reception of the Spirit (τό πνεύμα λαμβάνειν) is a common experience in Acts beginning with Jesus himself receiving the Spirit from the Father (2:33) and then it being received by groups of believers (2:38; 8:15, 17, 19; 10:47). Kaiser cannot be right in suggesting that these twelve had "simply drifted into the church ... and it was assumed that they were bona fide Christians". His aside: "a phenomenon not unfamiliar to us today, I might add!" (1977: 58) gives away the presuppositions he brings to the text. These twelve (and the number is not insignificant) do not belong to "the church" or to the synagogue, but are an independent group. Kaiser displays his irresistible urge to portray the situation here like that of a modern circumstance by describing Paul as having "commendable pastoral concern ... checking on their spiritual growth" (1977: 59). He believes the lack of Spirit-knowledge should be understood ultimately as "spiritual deadness", that is, Paul perceived no charismatic signs of the Spirit and so "he was interviewing all (!) of the members [at Ephesus], asking them whether they had received the Spirit, and, if so, why they were not manifesting it" (1977: 60). This is a forced and anachronistic reading of the episode. The twelve respond to Paul: "But194 we did not hear (ήκούσαμεν is aorist) that there is a holy spirit (πνεύμα αγιον)". The Western text and some other This is the only occasion in Acts in which Paul is involved with the reception of the holy Spirit among his contacts. It is also worth remembering that in Acts not every baptised believer reportedly received the holy Spirit in its manifestation of tongues and prophesy. This episode is the only direct mention of such in relation to Paul. Άλλά at the beginning of a sentence often indicates a strength of feeling. Almost "Well!" (Turner Grammar 3 [1963] 330).

In Acts

239

manuscripts attempt clarification by reading λαμβάνουσίν T i v e ? instead of £στιν. Meyer thinks the twelve knew there was such a thing as the Holy Spirit but did not know that the Spirit had in fact come, and he compares this with John 7:39 (1854: 343). Lake and Cadbury also suggest this interpretation (Beginnings 4 [1933] 237). But the text is clear and needs to be understood as it stands: In their instruction, these believers had not been told of a holy spirit. As noted, it is this response which has confused scholars. How could Christian disciples not have heard that there is such a thing as the Holy Spirit? It appears to fly in the face of all other New Testament experience and evidence. But it is possible that these believers, like many Jews before them, were well aware of the Spirit of God - that Spirit which entered into the prophets of the Scriptures and enabled them to speak and to prophesy; they were also well aware of the promise of God that he would pour out His Spirit on all flesh in the latter days (Joel 2) and that the shoot from the stump of Jesse shall have the Spirit of the Lord resting upon him (Isaiah 11:2). They were good Jews (possibly they even regarded themselves as "the" Israel). But they had not heard of a holy spirit,195 that spirit given by the Spirit which creates holiness in people and sets them apart to be the people of the new covenant. They knew about holiness - that is why they saw themselves as being baptised into John's baptism which called for repentance and a return to God through the washing of water. They presumably knew the message of John that the Coming One would baptise with the holy spirit. But they did not know that holiness in the "Christian" sense came as a gift of the Spirit which the Christ gives. Taken in this light, there may be some significance in the variation in Luke's vocabulary regarding the Spirit. This variation between the arthrous and anarthrous use of "holy spirit" is either ignored or rejected as unimportant by scholars - usually the latter. So Menzies says that the two forms "are equivalent" and no neat distinctions can be made (1991: 252). That is probably the case, but then the problems remain as to how these twelve cannot know of "holy spirit". In Paul's question and in the Ephesians' response, the anarthrous πνεύμα αγιον is used. The question then could be understood thus: When you became believers (in Jesus) did you receive a holy spirit which the [Holy] Spirit gives? 196 Did you receive that gift which marks you out as the holy people of

It is remarkable that the term "Holy Spirit" only occurs three times in the Old Testament and comparatively rarely in the apocryphal and pseudepigraphal writings, while it occurs frequently in the New Testament, especially in Acts. It it never used by either Philo or Josephus, but Qumran writings use the term frequently. How is ή δωρεά του άγΙου πνεύματος· (Acts 2:38) to be understood? Could it be the gift which the Holy Spirit gives? And is that gift "a spirit of holiness"? Compare also Acts 10:45.

240

Paul among Jews

God? The answer, then, would be: "We did not hear (in our instruction) that there is such a gift of the Spirit. 197 We know that there is the Spirit of God, but we did not learn that this Spirit gives his people a holy spirit. Our holiness is through repentance, awaiting the messiah and preparing the way for him as a people, as John taught". Turner notes the possibility of some such distinctions in Luke: "[Nevertheless] in Luke TÒ TTV. TÒ äy. tends to be the Pentecostal Spirit while άγιον πνεύμα is an unknown power, God's spirit as opposed to that of men or demons" (1963: 175; compare also Swete 1909: 396; Perry 1949: 332). Before continuing, it is worth stating again the two issues which dominate the episodes concerning the Christian Jews of Ephesus: The Christ is Jesus; and the Holy Spirit. Does this reflect the situation at the time of Luke's writing? The Gospel of John - claimed later to be of Ephesian provenance deals heavily with these two matters; the letter Ephesians also makes multiple references to the Spirit while its supposed companion letter Colossians mentions the Spirit just once. The Johannine letters deal with the Spirit and are concerned with holiness, as is the community of Revelation. There are these many hints that the Spirit and the associated holiness of the people of God were of concern to writers who addressed Ephesian Christians.198 ν 3: The narrative is frustratingly brief. The way it is told, Paul simply pursues the matter with another question, now based on the assumption that the believing disciples are baptised and that in Paul's mind baptism has something to do with creating a spirit of holiness. Is the expression el? TL part of a baptismal formula? Was it a question asked at baptism? Haenchen says that the more natural question would be els' τίνα and that Luke wants to avoid any suggestion that there was any baptism in the name of John (1971: 553). But the phrase as it stands may mean something other than to suggest "in the name of John" as an answer. It may mean "into what community", and so Paul receives the twelve's emphatic response: el? το του Ί ωάννου βάπτισμα. That is, the twelve men were bound together by

197

198

The Holy Spirit (τό πνεύμα τό äyiov) does "fall" on groups of people and can be "received" by people (Acts 10: 44, 45; 11:15). But no individual ever receives the Holy Spirit in Acts, nor is it ever said of anyone that s/he is πλήρη? του πνεύματος του άγίου; that is, πλήρη? is always used with the anarthrous noun and adjective (see Acts 4:8; 6:3, 5; 7:55; 9:17; 11:24; Compare also 10:38; 13:52). In other words, the Spirit of God is never "possessed" by a person, but a person can be full of a holy spirit. The fact that this "holy spirit" is received would suggest that someone gives it. It is a gift (δωρεά) of the Holy Spirit of God. The unusual phrase (κατά πνεύμα άγιωσύνη?) of Rom 1:4 may also reflect this understanding of "holy spirit". Of course, this thought gains much strength if it can be shown that Hebrews is addressed to Ephesian Christians.

In Acts

241

the baptism of John; they had heeded the call to repent and so prepared for the coming judgment of God and the end-time by concerning themselves with purification and the pursuit of holiness.199 In this they were similar to Qumran members who "entered into" (3) the community through washings, although washing alone was not sufficient - repentance was the greater requirement: "Let no one enter into the water (maa ΚΏ' ^k) in order to obtain the purity of holy men" (1QS 5:44). Gunther is on the right track. He suggests that these twelve had venerated Jesus as an inspired teacher "and prophet who had completed the work of John in preparing 'the people' for the eschaton" (1973: 232). They had heard about Christian prophecy and glossolalia (19:6) but did not understand that to be the fulfillment of prophecy and were looking for a different sort of eschatological spirit baptism - a messianic spiritual purification, focusing on Joel, Zechariah, and John the Baptist's apocalyptic expectations (264-265). Purification and holiness are Luke's concern here. 200 Such a spirit of holiness comes not through the baptism of John, but through the Holy Spirit which comes through the apostles and through their proclamation of the Lordship of Jesus who gives a holy spirit.201 These twelve have separated themselves and regarded themselves as the holy ones of the last days. As yet, these twelve do not know Jesus to be the Christ in the sense of being the Davidic Christ who gives the spirit of holiness to his messianic community. Paul corrects them and brings them into the synagogue and they then follow him in forming a new grouping (19:9), or as Luke would call them, ή όδό?, "The Way". ν 4: The construction with John's baptism is unusual: John "baptised a baptism". It may be a way of avoiding saying "baptism into the name of John" (so Conzelmann 1987: 159), but that was not the practice of John, whose baptism was one of and for repentance. It was a baptism of repentance for the people. Τφ λαω can be understood in relation to μετάνοια rather than with the following phrase (τω λαω λέγων). Acts 13:24, 11:18 and 5:31 are similar examples. In all cases, it is grammatically possible that the dative is governed by the verb (προκηρύξαντο? ... παντί τω 'Ισραήλ in 13:24; τοί? έθνεσιν ... έδωκεν in 11:18; and δούναι ... τω 'Ισραήλ in 5:31). But in all cases it is also possible that the nouns "people", "nations" and "Israel" are not governed directly by the verbs but by

John 3:25 has the disciples of John and "a Jew" discussing purification (καθαρισμό?). Luke's interest in John as priest is not irrelevant. Käsemann's thought is anachronistic when he says that Luke wishes to claim the Holy Spirit as coming only through baptism and the laying on of hands which were actions of the organised church (1972: 138) and "the living context of the passage is the reception of ecclesiastical outsiders into the una sancta catholica" (141).

242

Paul among Jews

the noun μετάνοια: βάπτισμα μετανοίας- in 13:24; τήν μετάνοιαν et? £ωήν in 11:18; and μετάνοίαν in 5:31. Repentance and forgiveness of sins is a very strong theme in Luke (Luke 1:72; 18:30; 19:8; 24:47; Acts 5:31; 11:18; 20:21; 26:20 for examples) and is seen by him as central to Christian preaching. As G. Lampe writes: it is far more strongly emphasised after Pentecost in the missionary preaching of the apostles. The time of repentance corresponds to the period of the Spirit's activity in the apostolic mission, and is determined by the coming judgment of the world through Christ (1957: 186).

Repentance together with baptism in the name of Jesus Christ offers forgiveness of sins and the promised gift of the holy Spirit (Acts 2:37-38). Acts 11:18 suggests that the repentance preached by John was limited. It was a baptism el? μετάνοιαν and even el? άφεσιν των άμαρτιών (2:38). But ή μετάνοια el? £ωήι> comes only with the Holy Spirit. John's call to repent stamped him in the tradition of prophets who called the people to return to Yahweh and to the covenant between Yahweh and Israel. The Baptist's call was to the people to repent as a people, and as a people to believe in the One coming after him. 202 The phrase el? τον έρχόμενον is very emphatic. The hearers of John, Paul says, were called not to believe in John as the bearer of the end-time, as the Spirit-possessed and Spirit-giving messiah, but in the One coming after him. The One coming after him is Jesus Luke adds this as an aside. He will gather his people and separate them as the holy ones from others (Luke 3:17). These twelve believed in Jesus, but they did not know that he was the Coming One who would bring in the end-time, that is, that he was the Spirit-giving messiah who was gathering his holy people. It is possible that this verse is the best key available for unlocking the mystery of these twelve. They were an eschatological community of believers in Jesus and by being baptized into his name, they now are included in the eschaton that the Coming One brings, as Luke understood it. Luke is interested in the new people of the end-time, and is convinced that believers from various communities throughout the diaspora go to make up that end-time community. Luke stresses that there is no forgiveness, no return to God on the part of the λαό?, without a holy spirit (2:38; 11:16-18). That holy spirit is the sign of the new covenant of God and is a gift of the Holy Spirit, and is only received through baptism into Jesus Christ who is the giver of the Spirit. ν 5: There is yet another complication to an understanding of this passage. M. Barth and Parratt suggest ν 5 is to be linked and understood with ν 4 as 202

The Synoptics do not have John calling on people to believe in the Coming One. The Fourth Gospel hints slightly in that direction.

In Acts

243

part of Paul's speech. This would suggest that there was a group of John the Baptist followers who baptised in the name of Jesus - a suggestion Barnes already knew from scholars previous yet to him. Barnes rejects it himself (1949: 275), as do Dunn (1970), Käsemann (1982) and Beasley-Murray who calls it an ingenious tour de force with not a shadow of probability. It is an artificial reading of the passage; it contradicts the basic contrast between John's baptism and Christian baptism as seen in the Gospels and Acts ... and it implies that in receiving John's baptism Jesus was baptized unto Himself! (1962: 111 η4).

The Barth/Parratt suggestion finds some support from Acts 8:14-17 (a passage which has parallels in Acts 19:1-7) where there are Samaritans who had not yet received the Holy Spirit (πνεύμα αγι,ον) but they had only (μόνον) been baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus. The Spirit comes only with the laying on of apostolic hands, as is also the case here. While the natural reading would seem to support Beasley-Murray, it still leaves some difficulties: It would be the only case of people being rebaptised in the New Testament; it would be the only direct reference to baptism by Paul in Acts,203 The latter difficulty may be removed by noting that the text does not explicitly state that Paul baptised these twelve - they were baptized (έβαπτίσθησαν). But the first problem remains. And it remains a serious problem when it is remembered that Luke holds such a positive view of John and his baptism. They are baptized el? τό δνομα του κυρίου ΊησοΟ. As just noted, the only other baptism in Acts with that exact formula is that of the Samaritans in 8:16. That case implies that such a baptism "in the name of the Lord Jesus" is inadequate (μόνον) and does not result in a holy spirit which comes only with the laying on of hands by Peter and John. ν 6: The Holy Spirit (τό πνεύμα τό άγιον) comes upon (έπί) 2 0 4 them έπιθέντο? αυτοί? του Παύλου χείρα? - the genitive absolute suggests this is not the point Luke particularly wishes to make. If Luke did want to make Paul the only means whereby anyone at Ephesus could claim to belong to the una sancta or to be in possession of the Spirit, then he could have made the point here grammatically. The point rather is that the Holy Spirit comes upon this group of believers/disciples who have been baptised into the name of the Lord Jesus. The laying on of hands, however, is a ritual known to convey a "spirit". In Deut 34:9 "a spirit of wisdom" is given to Joshua through Moses 1 Cor 1:17 suggests baptism was not Paul's practice. The Holy Spirit (τό πνεύμα τό δγιου) always "falls" or "comes" upon people (1:8; 2:3; 8:16; 10:44; 11:15), but never into them. Again, that Spirit of God cannot be possessed; but one can be έν ιτνεύματι άγΐψ.

244

Paul among Jews

(compare also Num 27:18) and 2 Tim 1:6 implies that the "spirit of power and love and self-control" was given Timothy through the laying on of hands. Here the twelve are given the "spirit" of speaking in tongues and of prophecy (the verbs are imperfect in tense) - signs of the promised Holy Spirit and the messianic age.205 The ability to prophesy and to speak in tongues is a sign to this community in Ephesus that they are now the people they had previously only anticipated being - that is, the people of the end time, the people of the Christ and his holy spirit. Prophecy and holiness were closely related in Jewish thought, and generally was a combined gift granted to individuals. Luke himself is very interested in prophets, as the opening chapters of his Gospel indicates, as does his interest in John the Baptist. Acts 11:27; 13:1; 15:22, 32; and 21:10 also show Luke's emphasis and awareness of prophecy among the saints. As Menzies says, Luke's understanding of the Spirit "is inextricably related to prophetic phenomena" (1991: 121). ν 7: "All the men 206 were about twelve". This is understood by many scholars to be an insignificant comment (Schneider 1982: 265; Conzelmann 1987: 160; Kistemaker 1990: 681). L.T. Johnson is one of very few who thinks otherwise: Luke "clearly intends this one [number] to symbolically represent a realization of 'Israel'" (1992: 338). The modifier ώσεί is typical of Luke (1:15; 2:41; 4:4; 5:7, 36; 10:3; 13:18, 20; 19:34). More importantly, the understanding of the people of God or Israel is too strong a theme with Luke for this number to be simply coincidental. The number 12 is also significant in the Qumran community, and John the Baptist's close proximity - at least in territory if not also in thought and practice - would suggest that this group also saw themselves as being the elect of Israel, the community of God. It is interesting that such a group should exist already in Paul's time (at least according to Luke) in a place like Ephesus or in its neighborhood. Links between these twelve at Ephesus and Qumran spring to mind and have been suggested by a few scholars.207 205

206

207

The Spirit-prophecy links are evident in Num 11:25, 26, 29; 24:2-9, for example. Joel 2:28 distinctly links the promised pouring out of the Spirit with prophecy; and similar links are made in Qumran writings (1 QS 8:15-16; CD 2:11-13). Zeph 3:9-10 is pertinent for the expectation of the peoples calling on the name of the Lord with "pure speech". Kosmala notes the possibility that the distinctive reference to males (àvôpe?) may suggest that they were not married (1959: 116 η 27). It is speculative. For Qumran water-baptisms were provisional until the messianic age when they would be superseded by the age of the Spirit (1QS 4.20; 9.10; CD 15.4). Pokorny thinks that after 70 CE, some members of Qumran may have come to Ephesus and this explains the Baptist presence there (1992: 22). Sandford la Sor writes: "It is entirely possible that the thoughts and terminology that had penetrated Qumran theology were in current usage in a stream of sectarian Judaism which also

In Acts

245

Whatever else, here again it is a group of Jews (they could hardly have been gentiles) 208 , who become/are Christian and Pauline according to Luke. "It is reasonable to infer that a good number of Ephesian Christians came to the Church via the Baptist movement, as Luke reports" (Schwartz 1988: 646).

2.4.6. Acts 19: 8-10 It is often understood that these verses indicate the break between Pauline Christians and the synagogue and the movement of Paul in Ephesus from working among Jews to gentiles (Haenchen 1971: 560; Grundmann 1964: 59; Ehrhardt 1969: 102; MacGregor 1954: 253). But a closer examination of the text indicates that such a view cannot be held categorically and that it is possible the verses indicate a Christian community of Jews who maintained synagogue links. Verse 10 is also held up as evidence for Paul's outstanding success not only in Ephesus but in the whole of Asia, and is believed to be supported by 1 Cor 16:8. Stegemann says the verse points to "the brilliant success of Paul's preaching among the Greeks" (1991: 197).209 Grundmann typically suggests that the scholê of Tyrannus gave rise to the churches addressed in Revelation and by Ignatius (1964: 60). ν 8: Paul speaks publicly (έπαρρησιάζετο) in the synagogue and does so for three months - "eine relativ lange Zeit, wenn man bedenkt, wie schnell es in anderen Städten zu einem Abbruch mit ungläubigen Juden kam" (Schnackenburg 1991: 44). The fact that Paul does spend so much time in the synagogue of Ephesus should alert the reader to Luke's awareness of the different situation at Ephesus. Schille thinks Paul's work among the Jews is

208 209

reached Asia Minor" (1972: 175) and that Paul devoted some energy in combating such ideas (178). Benoit thinks that Asia Minor and Ephesus in particular favored contact between Qumran and Christian communities and that the Fourth Gospel was completed at Ephesus is "confirmed by the existence of the islands of an essenizing Judaism or Judeo-Christianity" (1968: 17). Murphy-O'Connor also suggests that Paul came into contact with Qumran thought at Ephesus (1968: 198). Earlier, Holl saw Asia Minor as a centre of rigorous ascetic heretical movements (1928: 248). A very long shot would be to find some connection with these twelve in Japheth territory and the prediction in the Apocalypse of Adam (5.73) that the seed of Ham and Japheth "will form twelve kingdoms and their seed will enter into the kingdom of another people". Pace Baumgarten (1854: 271). It is surprising (to the point of being astounding) how easily glossed over is the fact that "both Jews and Greeks" are mentioned in 19:10! Why does not Stegemann then say that Paul's success was equally brilliant among the Jews on the basis of this verse?

246

Paul among Jews

merely "ein - sehr kurzer - Auftakt der Völkermission" (1983: 378). But Luke does not intend it to be that. The verb διαλέγβσθαι need not at all indicate opposition or aggression on either side. 210 Synagogues were used predominantly for the reading of the Law and the teaching of mizwot. Philo writes that the Egyptian perception of Jews was that they sit in synagogues (συναγωγίοι?) reading holy books, expounding obscure points, and discussing at length their ancient philosophy (De somniis 2.127). 211 This is also confirmed by Acts 13:5; Luke 4:16-22; and by Josephus (C. Apion 2.175). Safrai shows that the Pharisees, at least, saw the oral Torah as being important and "a living and growing reality which bears fruit to all those who labour and 'turn' in it" (1987: 52) - a view not so dissimilar to that of Paul (2 Cor 3:3, 6). Teaching in the beth midrash was done only orally (Safrai 1987:45) and according to Rabbi Yoshua of the third century CE a beth midrash "cannot exist without innovation", which Safrai believes was also the common opinion centuries earlier (1987: 53). So the presence of Paul and his teaching of new ideas did not automatically put him off-side with his audience. If anything, πείθων suggests Paul had some success in convincing some Jews. What is under discussion is the kingdom of God. 212 Why would that cause division? Grundmann says that Apollos' ahistorical-allegoricalphilosophical approach was acceptable, but Paul's eschatological-historical style was not because it advocated the disunity of the way of salvation through the Law with the eschatological saving event in Christ (1964: 59). Grundmann offers no support for the claim; he is probably wrong to force such a wedge between Paul and Apollos. Salvation (σωτηρία) in Luke is participation in the kingdom of God (Powell 1992: 7), and probably the most significant gift of salvation promised in Acts is related to forgiveness and repentance (Acts 2:40; 5:31; 13:38). That the kingdom was associated by Paul with Jesus (suggested in 28:23), and that the crucified Jesus is the resurrected Christ who offers this

Barnes noted the point well. He rejects "dispute" as "not a happy translation" because the word often denotes reasoning (Acts 17:2; 18:4, 19; 24:25) or even preaching (20:7, 9) (1949: 276). Philo also comments that the Scriptures were read and discussed by outsiders who generally ridiculed them. Jews and non-Jews also compared mythologies (De confusione linguarum 2). Just what Paul debated in the synagogues Luke unfortunately does not explain here or elsewhere. In Corinth, Gallio says the issues under debate were περί λόγου καΐ όνομάτων καΐ νόμου του καθ' ϋμά? (18:15). One can only guess what these may have been. The last is not difficult. The "names" may include "Israel". The λόγο? (is the singular significant?) could be anything, but might it be Χριστό?? In Jerusalem, the Asian Jews accuse Paul of teaching κατά του λαοΰ καΐ του νόμου καΐ του τόπου τούτου (21:28).

In Acts

247

eschatological saving gift would understandably have been a debatable - and divisive - point. Elsewhere in Acts, Paul creates division by his teaching/preaching concerning the resurrection. Acts 24:21 says Paul is on trial because of this question; and that it was often the point of dispute is clear from 23:6-9; 25:19; and 26:8 - it is also hinted at in 26:23-24, and implied in 13:16-45 and 17:3-5. At Athens, the resurrection is also the point at which the majority of his audience stumble (17:32). Further division is caused either by Paul's reference to Stephen or by his turning to the gentiles (22:20-22); his teaching against the law, the people, and "this place" (22:28); and his preaching that Jesus is the Christ (9:22-23; 17:3, 7; 18:5). That it was teaching on the resurrection that caused the division in Ephesus could possibly be implied from Acts 24:15 in which Paul says that one of the central beliefs of The Way is the resurrection of both the just and the unjust - a hope accepted (especially) by those who belong to that group called The Way. It would seem that whenever Paul comes into conflict with his (particularly Jewish) audience, it is over Jesus, especially his resurrection and/or his Messiahship. One can reasonably assume that the division at Ephesus concerning the kingdom was also associated with these two matters.213 ν 9: Some (τινέ?) - certainly not all, or necessarily even a majority - of the Jews disagreed strongly with Paul. 214 Schneider says that the use of tlv^s" "besagt nicht, dass es nur wenig waren" (1982: 268), but gives no reason for such an understanding. While acknowledging that for a while Paul had success among the influential Jews, Schnackenburg then proceeds to ignore the τινές and simply states: "Die Juden verhärteten sich" (1991: 44).215 Kistemaker is at least one who understands that the use of τινέ? suggests it was a minority who were in opposition to Paul (1990: 683). That view must be correct since Luke is not at all predisposed to speaking of ol Ί ουδαίοι generically as a group which opposes Paul (13:45, 50; 14:4 where there is a division between "the Jews" and the apostles in the πλήθος· of the city;216 14:19; 17:13). MacGregor There are implicit and explicit links in Acts between Jesus and the kingdom, the Christ, and the resurrection (for example, 1:3; 2:30-32; 8:12). The eschatological dimension of Paul's "kingdom-preaching" should also be remembered even if by Luke's time of writing it had lost some sharpness. Is this "hostile opposition" as J. Sanders describes it in his typical fashion (1987:

280)? Harding also writes: "The Jews, however, disbelieve..." and "The response of the Jews", "The belligerence of diaspora Jews", although he does once ask more accurately "Why do the majority of the Jews respond thus?" (1994: 11; emphasis mine). Kraabel is yet another who leaves no room for those Jews who are convinced by Paul (1985: 226, 229). On the other hand, it is again worth noting that it is not all the Jews who oppose Paul. Luke writes of ol Sè άπειθήσαντε? 'Ιουδαίοι which suggests there were others who took another stand over against Paul. Acts 14:1 states as much.

248

Paul among Jews

also sees "[i]t is worth noting that at Ephesus it was not the whole body of the Jews ... who rejected the new gospel, but only a few 'die-hards"' (1954: 253). Significantly, Luke does not use the terms ol Ί ουδαίοι or τά έθνη or speak of them at all in vv 8-9, which suggests that the division is not along Jewgentile lines, but is a synagogue split; that is, the division is internal to the synagogue. Some Jews agreed with Paul; others disagreed. Those who agreed with him were identified or identified themselves as belonging to "The Way". But they still all belong to the πλήθος-. The few hardened themselves (έσκληρύνοντο) and were unconvinced (ήπείθουν) 217 by Paul's arguments. The imperfect tenses suggest this was a gradual process, as one would reasonably expect and as the context implies. The more Paul discussed and debated, the more these few saw the distance between him and themselves. But it was not an instant recognition. Only after about three months did they begin to speak badly (κακολογοΰντε?) about the Way before the congregation (ένώπι,ον του πλήθους·). The fact that they speak against The Way suggests that their main bone of contention was with the claim that Paul and others were making, namely that they were The Way, the promised ones called to prepare for the coming kingdom. Hardness of heart was an ailment of Israel (Is 6:10), of Jesus' disciples (Mark 6:52), and of his opponents (Mark 10:5). Justin repeatedly speaks of the same condition among Jews of his day (Dial. 27, 39, 43, 44, 46, 68). It is an inability to see or understand rather than a conscious rejection of something (compare Mark 8:17; Matt 13:10-17). With Justin it is the inability of Jews to understood what Christians were saying and to understand the prophets. Theophrastus defines κακολογία as back-biting, slander or maligning - all actions internal to a group.218 Stegemann (1991: 96) observes that disciplinary powers of the synagogue in the Diaspora may not have been as great as those in Judaea, since the attacks on Paul are verbal (as here) and not physical. The use of πλήθος· indicates that the matter is brought before the whole meeting of the community and that the opposition has not just occurred during a sabbath meeting. "The Way" here is understood to be used as a name for "Christianity", a name which Cadbury says is "the most unusual of the names for Christianity found in Acts" (Beginnings 4 [1933] 391). For Luke, Paul does not shape or determine "The Way". He had been opposed to those τη? όδοΰ δντε? (Acts 9:2) which implies "The Way" predated him. As noted earlier, the term speaks as much about the people as a group as about their teachings/practices. The people saw themselves as being The Way. What the opposition here speaks 217

218

One has to be careful. Is Harding correct to say: "In Corinth and Ephesus they simply disbelieve" (1994: 11). Was it so "simple"? Josephus also uses the common word to describe an internal Jewish dispute (Ant. 20.180). For the rhetoric of slander and polemic, see L.T. Johnson 1989.

In Acts

249

evilly about is not only the teachings but also the people and their claim to be The Way. The complaints brought before the πλήθος· are about them and the claims they made concerning the relation between themselves and "the kingdom". Paul had been speaking and discussing the matters more than likely within a limited circle at first - possibly within the haberim, that is, those responsible for the maintenance of the Torah and its observances, particularly in the matter of ritual purity - but now the matter is brought before the whole Jewish community (πλήθος-. Compare the use of the word in 13:2; 14:1, 4; 15:12; 17:4). When differences are irreconcilable, Paul takes the initiative (Pesch 1986: 168) and separates his disciples from them (απ' αυτών), that is, from those who rejected his arguments, not from the whole assembly. The progression is to be noted: άποστά? ... άφόρισεν του? μαθητά?. Paul himself withdraws from them (the group of "some" who opposed him) and then separates the disciples (from the larger community). The impression is that Paul is in debate with the few who then bring it to the general assembly. Paul withdraws from the group with whom he has been holding discussions and then separates the disciples (that is, those of "The Way"). 219 This need not be understood to be a separation from the Jewish community nor even from their synagogues. The Spirit requests Paul and Barnabas to be "set apart" (άφορίσατε) in Acts 13:2 (compare also Rom 1:1) for a special purpose, but they are still part of the community. Paul sets his disciples apart from the rest of the group because they hold a different opinion in much the same way as Peter separates himself (άφορί£ειν έαυτόν) from Gentile Christians (Gal 2:12). This was not an uncommon step for Paul to take and one which would have been accepted by other Jews without a great deal of concern on their part. 220 They would have expected Paul to take such a step. A later technical term for those who separated themselves was D'ttfns. Possibly, the term "Pharisees" (of whom Paul was one) is derived from such terminology. Such groups were not 219

220

Theoretically, it is possible that they include or are the same disciples as those with whom Paul dealt in 19:1-7. J. Sanders thinks so (1987: 391 n 36) as do Menzies (1991: 276) and Pereira (1983: 112). It is possible that others were sympathetic to what Paul was saying but for reasons did not or could not join "The Way". A "secret" sympathy for Jesus as the Christ is known already in the Fourth Gospel (12:42). The Arabic History of the Patriarchs of the Coptic Church of Alexandria tells of a certain Theodosius, a Syrian living in the time of Julian and a Jewish priest, who was secretly a believer in Jesus as the Messiah. Theodosius reputedly claimed that there were many such Jews but they were not attracted by Christian behavior and so remained within the synagogue. He would not be baptised because it would mean giving up his status and honor. He was in fact baptised, so the story goes (1.121-122). The story probably has little historical value, but the possibility that some Jews secretly agreed with the "Christians" but did not cross over to them because of things like status and honor is plausible.

250

Paul among Jews

excommunicated from the nation, nor even from the synagogue. They may have formed their own synagogue, but there was nothing unusual about that. Tannehill acknowledges that there is no announcement of Paul turning his back on the Jews and his going to the gentiles instead. "Nevertheless, Paul ends his preaching and discussing in the synagogue" and so Luke implies that the synagogue can no longer be the place of Christian preaching (1988: 91). The great majority of scholars, if not all, agree with Tannehill. To mention but a few: Foakes-Jackson calls this action of Paul "a formal separation from the synagogue" (1931: 177); Ehrhardt sees this as the point at which the "separation of the Church from the synagogue at Ephesus" took place (1969: 102). Schneider also says Paul leaves the synagogue (1982: 268). Schille calls it "schematische Widerspruch" (1983: 378). Stählin sees the hardening of the some "zum Signal für die Trennung von den Juden und die Wendung zu den Heiden" (1975: 255). J. Sanders goes even further and says it spells "finis to the mission to the Jews" for Luke (1987: 280). Goguel is one of few who acknowledge that Paul's movement from the synagogue to the scholê does not necessarily indicate a break with Jews (1953: 485). Pereira also acknowledges, at least, that Paul does not go to the gentiles. "Paul did not want a breach with the Jews a such. But he wanted to break completely with the SYNAGOGUE" (1983: 132). The argument that Ephesus is "the last straw" (at least for Luke) in terms of Paul's mission to Jews (as J. Sanders implies) or that Paul was finished with the synagogue (as Pereira states) is not convincing when one reads Acts 20-28. The subject matter of those chapters is not Paul's diaspora mission journeys, but his trip to Jerusalem and his various court appearances which ultimately see him in Rome. If Ephesus is meant in any way to symbolise the conclusion of Paul's attempts to convince Jews, then it can only be said that it stands as a symbol of some Pauline success among them and some failure. Finally, Acts 28:17-24 reports that while in Rome, Paul still gathers Jews together, including leaders who have not received any letters from Jerusalem warning them of him, nor has TL? των άδελφών who arrived in Rome said anything evil against him (v 21). Jews in great numbers gather to hear what Paul has to say (v 23). As in Ephesus, so in Rome he speaks about the kingdom and about Jesus (v 23) and in both places - as elsewhere; and as one would well expect - the response is mixed. Some are convinced, others are not (v 24). All of which Paul (or Luke) sees as being what Isaiah had prophesied (vv 26-28). To return to Ephesus: The assumption often is that the Jews were hostile to Paul and forced him to leave the synagogue. While that may have been true in other circumstances it is not the case at Ephesus where Paul takes the initiative and he leaves. He is not expelled. Jews frequently had debates and discussions and strong differences of opinion in the understanding of the scriptures, and occasionally that may have meant the breaking into various sects (αίρέσει?)

In Acts

251

within the Jewish community. But they still remained within Judaism and were understood as such. At Corinth and Ephesus, if not elsewhere, Luke understands Paul and his fellow-Christians to have kept reasonably close alliance with the synagogue. This fact may help explain the liaison between Christians in Corinth and Ephesus - both came out of the synagogue context and both saw themselves as remaining in it. The next verse (10) supports this understanding. Paul takes Jews with him and continues to attract Jews to his group. Tannehill believes that the Jews who went with Paul and who were part of those who heard the word of the Lord in Asia were "a much wider circle of Jews than those who attended the synagogue of Ephesus" (1988: 99). That may have been the case as has been argued earlier, but it need not be completely so. Why should some orthodox traditional Ephesian Jews (whatever those terms may mean) have not agreed with Paul's interpretation of the scriptures?221 And it is possible that there was more than one synagogue in Ephesus. 222 Cohen says that a synagogue had three parts: a house of prayer (rfrsn ra), a house of study (tönin m ) and house of assembly (non na), with each probably being a separate institution (1987: 111). 223 Urman also thinks the house of assembly and the house of study were separate structures probably in the Second Temple period and in Israel at least (1993: 245). If that were also the case in cities like Ephesus, could it not be that Paul and the disciples left one of these institutions, but continued in the other one or two? Possibly Paul If Corinth is an example, it is the άρχισυνάγωγο? Krispos who goes with Paul. He is hardly a fringe member! As an aside: Tajra is completely wrong in describing Paul's move from the synagogue at Corinth into the house of Titius Justus next door as "a constant and visible provocation to the synagogue authorities" (1989: 50). There is nothing to suggest that Krispos did not retain his position. Tajra goes on to make a statement which illustrates yet again the conclusions many scholars reached: "The success of Paul's mission to Corinth ... lay almost entirely with the Gentile population and not with the Jews" and then he cites Acts 18:8b as evidence (1989: 51). Acts 18:8b does indicate that "many of the Corinthians believed" but it does not state clearly their ethnicity. Moreover, 18:8a does say clearly: "Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed in the Lord, together with all his household". Surely the Jews could claim at least significant membership in the Pauline community of Corinth, both numerically and status-wise. For the relation between the early church and the hellenistic synagogue, see Borgen (1983). Borgen unfortunately speaks as though there were uniformity in the relationship between Christian communities and synagogues (so, "the Early Church" and "the Hellenistic synagogue" in the very title and also throughout his paper). He concludes that there was antagonism between Christian community and Jewish synagogue "which frequently took the form of various degrees of persecution", but then makes the important point: "These conflicts, however, should be seen as intramural controversies within the Jewish communities in which Paul and other Christian Jews were regarded as threats to institutional stability" (1989: 71-72). The ρ ra could also be added (Harding 1994: 1).

252

Paul among Jews

left the teaching institution and set up his own with Tyrannus' permission; or maybe they left the prayer assemblies and stayed within the study. Many synagogues in the diaspora were private and existed more as collegia (Cohen 1987: 116). Krauss believes Tyrannus had "a private synagogue" (1903: 185). It may be that Paul left one synagogue but simply joined or formed another. This assumes that what Paul left was a synagogue building. The possibility must exist that there was no such structure in Paul's time. Another possibility is that the Jews had one room within a larger building or complex, as at Caesarea where they had a synagogue next door to land owned by a Greek who, to spite the Jews, built workshops which left only a narrow passage for the Jews to access their synagogue (Josephus Wars 2.285-6). Possibly Tyrannus was a more sympathetic Greek in Ephesus and allowed Paul to use his space for teaching, but Paul still worshipped within the synagogue.224 What did the synagogues make of Paul? Luke clearly states that Paul excludes himself and that he is not disciplined by the authority of the synagogal judicial system. Paul is under no ban, neither the Niddui ('Π3) which was expulsion for thirty days; nor the Cherem (Din) which was applied if there was still no repentance after those thirty days, and placed one under a curse; nor the Shammatha (κηοο) which made reconciliation impossible and placed one outside of the nation. Paul himself says that in some places he did come under synagogue jurisdiction and suffered punishment at its hands (2 Cor 11:24). The very fact that Paul submitted to (or at least received) such punishment indicates that he did not place himself outside its authority.225 A related question: If Christians separated themselves or were separated from the synagogue, what did that do to their status and rights within cities such as Ephesus? Thompson claims that on the face of it, there would probably be no legal ramifications for them because they could still claim Jewish rights as long as other Jews did not dispute those rights and their claims to belong to the synagogue (1990: 130). And undoubtedly that is correct. Questions arise, however, concerning the status and rights of Christians who left the synagogue and formed their own specifically Christian associations and house-churches. Thompson says such Jews could no longer claim special Jewish privilege because the very visible Jewish synagogues in the cities of Asia Minor belied the claim of the Christians to be the true Jewish community (1990:130). But it is highly unlikely that such a claim was ever made by Christians. Rev 2:9 certainly need not indicate such claims. And even if they did make such claims, they would hardly have done so in a political sense or in the public domain. As far as the rest of Ephesian society was concerned, Jews were Jews - no matter 224

225

When Paul uses words like οΙκία and οίκο? he need not be referring to a community outside of a synagogue, as if Christians abandoned synagogues for houses. Some synagogues met in houses. For crimes punished by flogging, see the Mishnah Makkot 3:2-3.

In Acts

253

whether they called themselves "Christian" or not, no matter whether they met in synagogue or private home. Christians were simply a sect of Jews. Each day Paul continues to dialogue (διαλεγόμενο? - the same verb as in ν 8 and should be understood similarly) with disciples in the scholê of Tyrannus. Who Tyrannus is and what the scholê is depends heavily on what is understood to have happened. For those who see this as a separation from the synagogue, Tyrannus is a gentile and the scholê is his lecture hall - used in the siesta time - and the disciples are gentiles. So Tannehill sees this as a shift to "a Gentile location" (1988: 91; also Baumgarten 1854: 2.279). But for those who consider that Paul maintained synagogue links, Tyrannus is seen to be a Jewish teacher and his scholê is associated with the synagogue. He was a teacher in a t í n ü ra. So believes Meyer (1854: 347), while Knowling at least allows the possibility of this understanding (1974: 404). 226 If the scholê was not attached to the synagogue, it could have been a guild-hall, but one where Jews met for study (Radin 1915: 65). The Torah was taught and studied in such a scholê (Safrai 1987: 60-61). The word σχολή can also mean a meeting place for a pagan cultic club. Weizsäcker rules out that interpretation here on the grounds that Paul himself forms such a scholê (1902: 331). But it need not be ruled out on those grounds. Tyrannus may have been a gentile artisan who had some business contact with Paul and so allowed his building to be used for Paul's purposes. Those more interested in Paul's social status than in his theological intentions understand his scholê to be such a guild hall. So Malherbe, who believes Paul worked there as a tradesman rather than as a philosopher (1977: 90); and Thompson believes Paul moved into a guild hall rather than a lecture room (1990: 119). 227 Weizsäcker, on the other hand, prefers to understand Paul as going to a sophists' school and thinks that wir hätten dann hierin den ältesten Beleg für diese Art der Missionsthätigkeit, welche späterhin eine wichtige Stelle in der Verbreitung des Christentums und zugleich für die Erklärung der Duldung derselben einnimmt (1902: 331).

It is worth noting that at Ceasarea the Jews had a synagogue that was owned by a Ceasarean Greek non-Jew. The Jews made him frequent but unsuccessful generous offers to purchase the building from him. The owner, instead, built other buildings workshops - on the site and made it very difficult for the Jews to get to their synagogue (Josephus Wars 2.14.4). So, it is possible that at Ephesus a synagogue building was owned by Tyrannus a gentile, and Paul used one of the surrounding rooms for his σχολή. To add to the possibilities, Dill says a schola (Latin) was a club-room and the name given to the lounging room of the public baths (1911: 271).

254

Paul among Jews

Kistemaker similarly holds that "Paul opened a school of theology to train future leaders for the developing church in the province of Asia" (1990: 684). Such language reflects the desire to make Paul a scholar or missionary in the image of modern scholars or Protestant missionaries. Cadbury more moderately sees it as a lecture hall (Beginnings 4 [1933] 239), but Grundmann joins the common opinion which wants to see Paul as a sophist in the Greek tradition. So the scholê is "eine Art Akademie mit Hörsälen (1964: 59, 60. Also Pokorny 1992: 15).228 Tyrannus as a name helps little since many Jews adopted gentile names.229 Grundmann among others calls him a gentile (1964: 59); but Barnes thinks it is "probable that he was a Jew" (1949: 276). Paul did not simply debate every sabbath - that is, in times of synagogue worship - but every day (καθ' ήμέραν) in a guild hall or some other room/time probably directly associated with the synagogue. According to Paul, a church (έκκλησία) existed in the house of Priscilla and Aquila (1 Cor 16:19).230 Why does Paul not go into their house, since he uses the houses of friends in other towns (Acts 16:15; 17:5-9; 18:2-4,7)?231 It is difficult to say. It could be that Luke was aware that by the time of his writing even the followers of Paul still had contact, at least in the learning time, with the Jewish community. Or, it suits Luke's theological schema to have Paul still associated with the synagogue - but then why not also in the other places mentioned above? ν 10: Paul works in this scholê for two years, with the result that "all those living in Asia heard 232 the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks". Obviously, this is hyperbole, but it is also patently clear that this is not a Conzelmann (1979) and Pearson (1975) believe there was a Pauline school based in Ephesus. They cite Acts 19:9 as evidence, understanding the σχολή there to refer to a school in which Paul methodically taught and the discussed the wisdom tradition. "Paul is thus the founder of Christendom's first school of theology" (Pearson 1975: 44). Pearson is prepared to acknowledge that Paul was not primarily a teacher (59) but still held to a school being at Ephesus. Conzelmann believes Paul to be "ein geschulter jüdischer Theologe" (1979: 85) who set up a school at Ephesus and developed it along the lines of the Jewish wisdom tradition as is reflected in Colossians and Ephesians (89). While agreeing with Conzelmann that the Jewish element in the Pauline tradition increased - probably beyond the limits of Paul himself - there is very little evidence that a "school" as such existed or that it existed in Ephesus. 229 230 231 232

The name appears in some late first century Ephesian inscriptions including in a list of curetes (I.Eph. IV.1012, 1029). The phrase in 1 Cor 16:19 may be understood to mean that all the various housechurches met as an ecclesia in the house of Prisca and Aquila. In the Acts of Paul Paul preaches in Priscilla and Aquila's house. Munck makes the point that "heard" is different from "received" as in Corinth (1967: 190). The point is strained but the former expression does give an impression that is general rather than one of Paul's real effect.

In Acts

255

rejection of Jews and a turning to the gentiles, as in some other cities and towns. Paul maintained links with the Jewish community in Ephesus and taught "both Jews and Greeks". Nor in this verse is Luke using chronology to make a theological point: Paul works for only three months among Jews, but for two years among gentiles, therefore the Jews are not so important for Luke or reject Paul, while his major interest is in the gentiles, who in turn accept his message (Schille 1983: 378). Presumably "Jews and Greeks" (a phrase which is found only in Paul and in Acts) is meant to be understood ethnically, but could they be understood to be cultural terms? It may simply be a general term meaning "everyone".233 Could it mean that Paul communicated with Jews, 234 that is, those who were in origin from Judea, and with Jews who did not claim origins there and so were "Greeks"? Or, are "Jews" those who lived within the boundaries of some form of Judaism; but there were also those "Jews" who had crossed the boundaries and were to all intents and purposes "Greeks" ? Windisch indicates that the term "Jew" may refer to the law observer, while "Greeks" indicates apostates (TDNT2 [1964] 504-5) - Josephus indeed calls apostate Jews "Greeks" (Ant. 12.240). According to Windisch, Philo never uses the term "Ελληνε? to indicate gentiles (2.508) and says there is "no suggestion" that Greek-speaking Jews used words like "Ελληνες- in the sense of 'heathen' (508). On the other hand, Windisch thinks that Acts 19:17 describes non-Jews and that generally in Αΰίβ'ΈλΧηνε? refers to non-Jews/Gentiles (511). Jervell claims that"EX\T)ves· "can only mean God-fearers" (1988: 16). The phrase "both Jews and Greeks" occurs frequently, if not always, in the context of a synagogue (14:1; 18:4; 19:10, 19:17 may be so understood; 20:21). Josephus reports that in Syria, Jews were very much intermingled with others and were granted "the most undisturbed tranquillity" and "enjoyment of the equal privileges of citizens with Greeks themselves" and that they "also made proselytes of a great many of the Greeks perpetually, and thereby, after sort, brought them to be a portion of their own body" ( Wars 7.43-45). The phrase probably is meant to be understood extremely broadly: "everyone". But there Compare the usage of coupling opposites in Hebrew (merismos) with the meaning of "everyone, everything": For example, Prov 22:2. Even that term is not self-explanatory. According to Josephus, Jews were so-called after the exile and return to Jerusalem (Ant. 11.5.7). It is clear that not every Jew is an Israelite, even if every Israelite is a Jew (Cohen 1987: 21). And it is known that some "Jews" called themselves "Hebrews" (so Trypho, in Justin Dial. 1.2 refers to himself as Εβραίο? έκ περιτομή?). Murray suggests ol 'Ιουδαίοι refers to those who looked to Jerusalem as their focus of identity and devotion (1982: 199). In the Fourth Gospel, the term may indicate residents of Judaea or alien residents of Judaea in the diaspora (Meeks 1985: 96). Kraabel has argued that the phrase ol ποτέ Ί ουδαίοι found in an inscription in Asia refers to Jews who had come from Judaea (1982: 455).

256

Paul among Jews

are some grounds for maintaining that out-and-out pagans are not indicated by the term "Greeks" here. 235 At least it is worth underlining that in all the Ephesian episodes it is both Jews and Greeks who are involved. Interestingly, the report of "success" is very general. There are no names, nor is there any mention of specific numbers. J.T. Sanders is partly correct in believing that 19:8-10 is evidence of no success in Ephesus because there are no conversions or baptisms. But that does not mean Luke is being deliberately ambiguous, as Sanders claims (1987: 279). Sanders simply cannot believe Paul had any success among Jews. But if Paul has any success at all (and 19:10 says as much), it includes success among some Jews. What is more important is that this verse is held up to be the proof of Paul's "intensive Tätigkeit" (Stählin 1975: 255) and success among gentiles in Ephesus. It is also widely held that this verse indicates Pauline congregations established in Colossae, Laodicea, and Hierapolis (Grundmann 1964: 60; Schneider 1982: 268). Grundmann even claims that possibly it was the time when all those churches addressed in Revelation and by Ignatius were founded by Paul (1964: 60). The evidence for this conjecture is not strong. The letter called Colossians indicates that Paul himself had not visited the community (1:9; 2:1,5) but had contact with fellow-workers there; however, the churches addressed by John in Revelation show no indication of having known Paul let alone any knowledge that they had been founded by him. Grundmann fails to consider the independence and local nature of Christian communities in the first century. They were not a unified "church". He also says this verse is confirmed by 1 Cor 16:8 (60; also Schneider 1982: 268). But as suggested in the previous chapter, this places far more weight on this verse than it can legitimately carry. Jervell repeatedly points out that in Acts there are frequent references to mass conversions (11:21; 13:43; 14:1; 17:4; 18:6,10; but not at Ephesus (1988: 18) and that the vast majority of mass conversions in Acts are of Jews (1984: 15; 1988: 18). Salmon agrees with Jervell and claims that Luke's distinction is not between Jew and non-Jew but between believer and non-believer; "All are

In many places, the term Έλληνες was used to denote a distinct grouping of people, and usually a group that was (at least originally) foreign to that locality. So, for example, in many inscriptions of Ephesus, ol έπΐ τ η ? 'Ασία? ΈΧΧηνε? are a distinct political grouping in Ephesus (OGIS 2.458.2; 2.470.2). And in Egypt under the Ptolemies, "all immigrants, of whatever origin, were assigned to the class 'Hellenes' in order to distinguish them from native Egyptians. 'Hellenes' were aliens residing in Egypt" (Bickerman 1988: 83). Theoretically, then, there must have been Jews in Egypt who were labelled "Hellenes". On the other hand, when the term is used in conjunction with "Jew" it would be logical to understand it as a reference to aliens, that is, non-Jews.

In Acts

257

Jews", she claims (1988: 81). 236 Conversely, Cook supports Sanders' view that Luke is a gentile and his Christianity is gentile (1988: 119). As already noted, J. Sanders claims that for Luke the Jews totally reject Paul and the gospel and become after 9:22 the enemies of Christianity (1988: 51-75). Munck also thinks people have been misled in their reading of Luke: It must, however, be emphasised that the fact that the Jews were preached to does not mean that they believed or that they joined the Christian church (1959: 202).

Such a statement flies in the face of the evidence of Acts at least in Ephesus.

2.4.7. Acts 19: 11-20 This is another episode that Luke has picked up out of a collection of Ephesian traditions. It, like others of them, is difficult exegetically and historically. Grundmann says that Luke presents the miracles depicted in this passage to show that any opposition to Paul is useless - Paul and his mission is unstoppable: "Lukas will die aussergewöhnliche Krafterfülltheit des Paulus darstellen" (1964: 61). Fitzmyer also holds that Luke's point in this section is to show that Paul is so powerful that the Jewish exorcists had to take on his and Jesus' name to remain competitive; but that is not possible, says Luke, because "[T]he Jesus that Paul preaches cannot be taken over by outsiders" (1992: 304). Garrett likewise believes the episode is told to "advance the theme of the ongoing Christian triumph over Satan, and, consequently, over magic" (1989: 90). While in essence there is truth in this, Garrett uses terms such as "Satan" and "magic" without enough care (as do a seemingly increasing number of modern scholars of Protestant persuasion like C. Arnold, Gritz, Kroeger). Evil spirits (πονηρά πνεύματα) are indeed not of God and are subordinate to the power of God and the Lord Jesus, but Luke does not picture them as being part of Satan's domain. They are autonomous, independent beings who harm (or protect) and occupy the created world (not only humans). The term "magic" is more complex and is best avoided in this context. The seven sons are exorcists, not "magicians" (μάγοι). How closely does Luke intend this episode to parallel that of Philip and Simon in chapter 8 as Garrett suggests (1989: 91)? Simon is not an exorcist - rather he wants that power and thinks it can be bought. Instead, Simon practises μαγεία (μαγεύων ... τ α ΐ ? μαγΐαι?, Acts 8:9, 11). The Jews in this episode are exorcists - not μάγοι. While the episodes are quite different, they do have in common Luke's interest Her point that "gentile" is a word used by an insider about an outsider, that is, by a Jew about a non-Jew is also significant (1988: 80).

258

Paul among Jews

in "power". This latter episode is framed by the δυνάμει? worked by God through Paul (19:11) which result in κατά κράτος- του? κυρίου ό λόγο? ηΰξανεν καΐ Ισχυεν (19:20). Paul is not at all dominant in this episode. In ν 11, Luke mentions that miracles are done by God through the hands of Paul - it is the kingdom of God that interests Luke (19:8) not the hands of Paul per se. In verses 13 and 15, the exorcists claim to operate in Paul's name, and no doubt this suggests that Paul was perceived to be of some status and power. But Paul does not confront the exorcists himself; nor does he have anything to do with the burning of the magical books in ν 19. In that verse, the believers do not expressly "come to Paul and his fellow-missionaries" as Bruce would have it (1988: 369). In fact, Paul is remarkably silent and absent in an episode which proclaims not so much his power and status but that of the word (λόγο?) and power (κράτο?) of the Lord (v 20). It is not the name of Paul that is magnified but that of the Lord Jesus (v 17). Paul is at most a vehicle of God, and has become lost in much the same way as he does in the Demetrius episode which follows. This rather intriguing removal of Paul from the spotlight in these two Ephesian episodes gives credibility to the possibility that they are reports of events experienced closer to Luke's time of writing and retrojected into the time of Paul for the sake of the narrative. vv 11-12: Through Paul's hands God performs δυνάμει? ού τα? τυχούσα? which appear to be deeds of healing the sick and exorcising evil spirits (v 12). This is a very rare portrait of Paul and appears to contradict the impression given by the apostle himself. So Conzelmann says this is "a picture from a later time" (1987: 163) and it is true that the dynamic healing miracleworking Paul stands in line with the Paul of the less historically accurate Acts of Paul, which in turn is consistent with the acts told of many other apostles. But it is also consistent with the portrait of Peter and Philip in these Acts of the Apostles. Is there a contradiction between this portrayal of Paul and that in Paul's own writings "as Käsemann has irrefutably proven" (Haenchen 1971: 563)? There is something very "primitive" about Luke's picture of things here, and it is a mistake to think that Paul and his followers were theologians holding learned discourses in an ivory tower. Paul lived and worked in the market-place, in the workshops of Ephesus, among the ordinary people of the city who thought that "the chief business of religion ... was to make the sick well" (Macmullen 1981: 49). They could not have cared about the finer theological points, but they recognised "power" when they saw it, and it was healing power they saw in the person (literally) of Paul. Significantly, Paul does not charge for the healings - it is not his "business". This stands in contrast with other local healers and conveyors of

In Acts

259

"power", and even with the wandering exorcists of the next verse (v 13), who also want to gain access to power wherever they find it, and possibly also to make profit from it. How the healings occur is not said - there is no mention of the "name of the Lord Jesus". Does Luke here depict an apostle "already delivered from weakness [who] lives no longer in the sphere of the cross but in that of glory", as Haenchen claims (1971: 563)? There is no claim here by Luke that Paul made it a practise to exorcise or to heal. And even if Luke does wish to convey that impression, then he does so in just the way Paul himself would have described it: It is not Paul who performs these deeds but God working through him (v 11). As noted above, Paul is absent from this episode as an active participant. Luke purpose is not to portray "another Paul", but to contrast the healing power of God (whether through Paul or through anyone else is almost immaterial for Luke) with the healing power of those who operate without the power God which is only available to those who belong to the Lord Jesus. God works not only through Paul's hands but also through his workclothes. 2 3 7 To a neutral observer, there would have been no difference between the "miracles" of Paul and the "power" of the exorcists or any magician. All operated through the power of a god or demon. The Christian maintained the greater power of the name of the Lord Jesus to which Paul had legitimate and authoritative access and the Jewish exorcists did not. ν 13: What is significant and pertinent is that Paul comes across Jewish exorcists. Once again, Paul's contacts in Ephesus are with Jews. This is surprising especially in a place like Ephesus which was supposedly renowned for magic and other such crafts practised by gentiles. If Luke really wanted to portray Paul as the defeater of pagan magic, then surely he could have chosen Ephesus as the place for that power to have been demonstrated. But there are no gentile practitioners of magic here - only sons of a Jewish priest whom Lightfoot suggests may have been Essenes (1904: 66). The point is that they are strangers to Ephesus. If this episode reflects any historical tradition at all, Luke wishes to claim that "the Jesus whom Paul proclaims" provides a power which is greater than that of the Jewish exorcists. The authority of Jesus is greater than that of the sons of a Jewish highpriest. This point is no different to that made by the gospels, especially by Mark.238

Bruce translates σουδάρια ή σιμικίνθια as "sweat-rags and aprons" (1988: 366). If these are associated with Paul's work, this verse may support the argument of Malherbe that the scholê of ν 9 is meant to be associated with his work place. Paul's workplace and his teaching place were one and the same (1977: 90). Garrett makes the plausible suggestion that some exorcists considered Christians to be using the power of "the restless daimon of one killed violently" (1989: 92). Luke's point would then be that Jesus is no demon but in fact κύριο?.

260

Paul among Jews

These wandering Jewish exorcists (τινές· implies there were others) attempted (έπεχείρησαν) 239 to pronounce the name of the Lord Jesus over those possessed with evil spirits, saying "I adjure you in the name of the Jesus whom Paul preaches". This modification of the name of Jesus indicates that the exorcists themselves are outside of those who preach Jesus, in the same way as exorcists who adjured "by Jesus, the God of the Hebrews" (PGM 4.30193020) did not believe Jesus to be their god. The role of the exorcist was to adjure the demons by the power of a greater name - something Luke clearly knows, as his use of όρκί£ω and τό όνομα indicates. The verb appears in only one Gospel account of an exorcism (and then not in the mouth of Jesus, but in that of the demon itself Mark 5:7) and Garrett is probably correct that Luke's usage of the word aligns the exorcists with "magic" - a power that Paul and the Christians did not use (1989: 92). 240 It is well-attested in Jewish, Christian, and other religious cults that power rests in "the name". So some Jewish practitioners were called atí ^ m (Clarke 1836: 872). Bruce notes that the use of Jesus' name by Jews was sternly denounced by some rabbis, which suggests that it was, in fact, practised by some (1988: 368 n 32). The power and repute of Jewish "magicians" is well-documented by Bruce (1988: 368), Schille (1983: 379-380) and others. Tierney claims that Antiochus the Great settled a colony of Jews in Ephesus and "many of these were practitioners of arts of healing and incantation akin to the magic for which Ephesus was famous" (1929: 463) but he does not offer evidence for his claim. Nor does the episode imply that Ephesian Jews were known for their magic - they are wandering, visiting exorcists, probably not locals. Paul meets opposition from some Jewish exorcists - that is all that can be said. They do not "represent" Judaism in any particular form, nor are they "official" or even necessarily "priests". They are only identified as "sons of a certain (τίνος·) Scaeva, a Jewish highpriest". Lightstone points out that the use of the names of Paul and Jesus does not put the Judaic status of these men at risk (1985: 136). Jewish practitioners had access to the power of the names of angels and other heavenly creative beings (Lightstone 1986: 120-121). It is also well known that exorcists and workers in such crafts took into their repertoire the names of powers foreign to them and the people with whom they worked including the names of the God of the Jews {PGM 14.784; 21); but 239

240

So NRSV, RSV: "undertook". Maybe a more literal sense of the word is meant here: "They put their hands on" - to parallel the action of Paul (ν 11) which Luke sees not as Paul's action at all but God's. The aorist suggests that it was a once-only attempt, as does ν 15. It would not have been their common practice. Verse 14 however says differently. As long as Garrett does not identify "magic" with the magos. It would be misleading to do so.

In Acts

261

Jewish workers also used the names of powers foreign to Jews (Bonner 1950: 30). Nock claims that Luke's description of the exorcists is "very contemptuous" (1933: 182). Lightstone rightly stresses that they were not outside or marginal to the Jewish community but within it and acceptable to it. As travelling exorcists, they were no more or less marginal than was the itinerant Paul himself (1984: 20-21). Josephus records that God enabled Solomon to learn that skill which expels demons, which is a science useful and sanitive to men. He composed such incantations also by which distempers are alleviated. And he left behind him the manner of using exorcisms, by which they drive away demons, so that they never return, and this method of cure is of great force unto this day (Ant. 8.2.5).

Josephus then proceeds to give the example of a certain Eleazar who exorcized demons in the presence of Vespasian, and he gives the procedure which included calling on the name of Solomon and reciting his incantations. For Josephus, this Eleazar was of impressive status.241 It affects the understanding of the episode 19:11-20 if all the events described are meant to be understood as occuring within the context of a Jewish community and/or the community gathered around Paul, and not in the wider Ephesian context. ν 14: Scaeva is a highpriest (άρχιερευ?). Grundmann rejects that translation because a highpriest by this name is unknown (1964: 61). Fitzmyer accepts it as the original reading on the principle of lector dijficilior and suggests that Scaeva was possibly a Jew who was highpriest in a pagan cult or in that of the emperor, although there is no evidence that this was the case (1992: 303; also Mastin 1976: 406). Bruce thinks Scaeva possibly did belong to a chief-priestly family, but that he probably used this title as a selfdesignation. Since the highpriest "was the one man who was authorized to pronounce the otherwise ineffable name ... such a person would therefore enjoy high prestige among magicians" (1988: 368). Conzelmann calls him "a purely legendary figure" (1987: 164). Strange claims that Scaeva is not a highpriest and follows the Codex Bezae text which suggests he was a gentile rather than a Jew (1987: 97-106). However, Luke calls him not only a

It is worth observing in passing that magicians had very close connections with the court. So here, Eleazar appears before Vespasian; Joseph is called, after the local magicians, to Pharaoh's court (Gen 41); Moses engages the Egyptian magicians before Pharaoh (Ex 7); Daniel appears wiser than the local magicians of Babylon before Nebuchadnezzar (Dan 2); the magos Elymas was shamed by Paul before Sergius Paulus, the proconsul on Paphos (Acts 13: 6-12). Does the title dpxiepeú? used of Scaeva in this episode indicate some similar association of his with the Roman authorities in Ephesus?

262

Paul among Jews

highpriest but specifically a Jew. There is no debating his ethnic background (v 13 also states clearly that these exorcists are Jews), but the question of what kind of priest he is, is not so clear. On the other hand, Josephus cites Hecateus who mentions an άρχιερεύ? Ezechias who was prepared to emigrate to Egypt under Ptolemy (C. Apion 1.187). Both Josephus and the New Testament speak of "highpriests" (Wars 1.31 speaks of Onias, el? των άρχιερέων; compare also 2.318; Mark 14:1; Matt 27:1). In addition, some Qumran writings refer to a hierarchy of priests which included twelve chief priests. Was Scaeva from that community? There is some evidence that the Essenes were regarded as having particular healing powers (Josephus Wars 2.8.6). The text does not explicitly say that Scaeva himself was in Ephesus; and even if he were, he was itinerant and not resident. Nor is Scaeva himself named as one of the exorcists - his seven sons had that profession.242 Finally, Sanders' view needs comment. Consistent with his belief that Luke wishes the Jews to be wiped off the face of the earth, Sanders thinks Scaeva represents the "evil magic of Judaism" and he is depicted as a priest to show the "solidarity between Diaspora Jews and the Jerusalem priestly leadership" (1987: 280-281). It is difficult to read this episode that way. The more obvious reading is that Luke wishes to demonstrate that the power of God and the name of the Lord Jesus are channeled through Paul and that power and name is greater "magic" than that of Jewish exorcists and other practitioners. Luke has comes across the episode in relation to Ephesus and uses it in connection with Paul. ν 15: The evil spirit 243 does not know these exorcists whereas it does know Jesus and Paul. This can be compared with exorcisms in the gospels where the spirits know who Jesus is (Luke 4:34/Mark 1:24). To know the name is to acknowledge the power of the name; the demon here knows and acknowledges the power of the names of Jesus and Paul (Garrett 1989: 92). The evil spirit knows the names Paul and Jesus, but has to ask "ΰμεΐ? δέ t í ve? έστέ;" of the exorcists who are unnamed and unknown and therefore powerless. ν 16: The verb άφάλλομαι is used three times in the Septuagint in reference to the Spirit of the Lord (1 Sam 10:6; 11:6; and 16:13). Unlike those spirits who come in contact with Paul, the power of the spiritpossessed man here is greater than the power of the exorcists who are forced to 242

243

Having seven sons is quite common in the intertestamental literature (compare 2 Macc 7:20; 4 Macc. 15 & 16; Ass. Mos. 9:1). Baumgarten's suggestion that the seven sons here represent the seven rejected nations of Canaan (1854: 2.290) is interesting but fanciful. There is some confusion here, as Luke had referred to the spirits in the plural but now uses the singular. It might indicate Luke is using his source loosely. However, it is possible to understand ν 14 as a general comment and the sons of Scaeva as a particular instance.

In Acts

263

flee out of that house (εκ του οίκου ¿κείνου). As Lightstone rightly says, these exorcists suffer not because they did not have the right technique but because they did not have the authority to invoke such a powerful name as that of Jesus (1984:41). The truly holy man is one who is totally free from demons - these are not holy men because the demons have power over them. The noun οίκο? may refer to a type of building, including a synagogue, or it may refer to the [Christian] community or household. If the latter is meant here, it would suggest that the Jewish exorcists tried to operate within the Christian community but failed because they do not possess the power of the Lord Jesus which comes through the Holy Spirit. If a synagogue is meant, the power of the evil spirit is depicted as being still great there. Lightstone implies something similar: By associating with the synagogue, diaspora Christians were putting themselves under the influence of the demons there - an opinion later expressed by Chrysostom against Christians who were attracted to the synagogues (1984: 42). However, Luke did not have such negative opinions of the synagogues. The use of άμφοτέροι makes it unclear as to how many exorcists there are, although the word can refer to more than two. ν 17: This event became known to πασιν Ί ουδαΐοι? τε καΐ Έλλησιν TOL? κατοικοΰσιν τήν Έφεσον. Who are "Jews and Greeks"? Is the whole population of Ephesus meant (Garrett 1989: 94), or does the phrase refer only to Jews (Christians?) of both Jewish and Greek cultures? Probably it refers to those Jews and non-Jews who made up the synagogue communities, as also the term does in 19:10 and elsewhere. The action of "those who have believed" in ν 18 could suggest that it is among Christians that great fear fell and the name of the Lord Jesus was being praised (έμαγαλύνετο: imperfect tense) 244 . The use of the title κύριος- for Jesus denotes the superiority of Jesus over the power of demons. For a Jew, the title was reserved for God, and it was generally known that demons were less powerful than the gods. The Jewish exorcists have even less power than the demons, while the power of Paul is equal to that of the κύριο? because it is God who works through his hands (v 11). vv 18-19: The resulting confession and disclosure of (secret) acts on the part of the believers was on-going rather than a once-only effect of the power of God. That is the force of ήρχοντο. The same is true with the subsequent burning of books and amulets (v 19). The imperfect κατέκαιον ("they kept on

Luke's use of μέγα? and related words for "great" or "greatness" deserve a detailed study. There is certainly more than size or influence involved! Divine authority and divine revelation appear to lurk in Luke's usage. The word(s) are a feature of the Simon episode in chapter 8, and in the episode following this one at Ephesus, Artemis is three times referred to in mega terms!

264

Paul among Jews

burning", or "they began to burn") implies that there was more than one bonfire! 245 The phrase τά περίεργα πράσσειν is a euphemism for magic (Haenchen 1971: 567) although the expression appears to be negative in connotation and used by an outsider and not by a practitioner. Those practising such things gather together their βίβλοι which probably refers then to books of magic. In the context, it can be assumed that the "magic" had to do with the use of spells, herbs, plants, and concoctions for healing and health. Were those who burnt the books Jews or gentiles or both? Certainly there is no reason for insisting that they were exclusively gentiles. Jews were known to burn books regarded as harmful, and Jews were also in possession of such magical material. The overall context suggests that that they were both Jewish and Greek (19:17). Howard Marshall however holds that this section is talking of pagans (1980: 312), and others imply the books refer to the "bekannten ephesischen Zauberbücher" (Grundmann 1964: 62), namely the Ephesia grommata (Bruce 1988: 369; Conzelmann 1987: 164; Haenchen 1971: 567 η 2) and that therefore the owners are pagan. Kistemaker at least acknowledges that they are Christians, but he thinks "possibly a number of Gentiles also added their parchments and scrolls to the fire" (1990: 691). Possibly, but why? - unless these gentiles had now wished to join the Christians. But it cannot be argued that the burners were gentile because they burnt the famous Ephesian magical charms since those magic words are not mentioned specifically and, as has been said, Jews also knew of and possessed magic books. Theoretically, it is possible that ν 18 refers to believers and ν 19 to nonbelievers, but the context does not suggest this. Like the episode vv 8-10, the conflict between Paul and the Lord Jesus on the one hand, and the demons and magic on the other, is more likely to have been internal between Jewish groups than external involving the whole city. When Paul does face the wider gentile community in the ensuing Demetrius episode (19:23-41), the results are not so dramatic or impressive. Paul decisively wins the battle against the Jewish exorcists, but the struggle with Artemis which follows results in no such overwhelming victory. ν 20: * Pesch sees ν 20 as a summary indication that Paul's mission in Ephesus was successful "durch die innere Konsolidierung der Gemeinde" (1986: 174). On the other hand, this general summary is typical of Luke (compare 6:7; 9:31; 12:24; 16:5; 28:31) and need not refer only to Paul. In Ephesus, at least, Luke appears to be interested not only in Paul, but in

245

Bruce is inaccurate then in speaking of "On the present occasion ... 50,000 drachmae went up in smoke" (1988: 370). Most scholars imply that this was a single event and it reflects the notion that Luke sees the Christian message as spectacularly triumphant - a notion that needs some modification.

In Acts

265

Apollos and Prisca and Aquila, and above all, in the power of "the name of the Lord Jesus". So far, the only reasonable and even legitimate conclusion that can be reached concerning Paul's mission in Ephesus is that there is very little direct evidence of gentile success; on the contrary, the episodes are dominated by Jews, some of whom receive Paul favorably, although there is also tension and strong opposition from others. The only suggestion of success among gentiles comes in the general phrase "both Jews and Greeks" (19:8, 17), a phrase which clearly states that Paul's "success" is among both Jews and gentiles (with the latter having synagogue associations). In all the Ephesian episodes Luke narrates, the only other suggestion of gentile success is in 19:26, where the chief artisan complains that Paul has persuaded a great number of (pagan) people to his way of thinking. 246 On the other hand, as has been shown, nearly all the episodes demonstrate the "successes" of Paul were among Jews, and that Christian communities tended to stay within the context of the synagogue(s) although relations were most likely quite strained. 2.4.8. Acts 20: 16-38 247 Brandon believes this Miletus speech reflects "a truly amazing situation, to which Luke's account of Paul's fortunes up to this point fails to correspond" (1951: 133). But that is only true if one reads Acts - as is so often done - as if Luke is blindly pro-Paul, portraying a successful, non-struggling Paul, and as if Luke is unashamedly favorable to gentiles and antagonistic towards the Jews. The literary or rhetorical structure or form of Paul's speech is not the interest here. Most scholars acknowledge that Luke uses language which is typically Pauline in character, even if he has touched it with his own style (Munck 1975: 203-205; Lambrecht 1979: 322-323; Pesch 1986: 11.201-206). The use of αύται (ν 34) implies a gesture with the hands and adds weight to the idea that this is a record of a genuine speech, as does the οϋτω? of ν 35 (Lake and Cadbury Beginnings 4 [1933] 263). Donelson suggests that the episode is based on an Ephesian tradition which claimed that Paul had bestowed his testament on them, so giving them authority and responsibility. He parallels it with 2 Timothy. Such claims are not necessarily historical, he says (1987: 1114, 21). It is a commonly held view that the elders represent not Ephesus in particular but Asia in general or even all Pauline communities (Schnackenburg 1991: 51). On the other hand, the letters to Timothy and that to the Ephesians,

But see the comments at that verse in the previous chapter. The verse need not be claiming "conversions". For a survey of studies on this passage, see Lambrecht 1979: 307-337.

266

Paul among Jews

so-called, also indicate that there was at a later stage at least one Christian community in Ephesus which claimed Pauline authority. How strong and influential that authority was is another question altogether. The Timothy letters, in particular, and this very testament in Acts, would suggest that it was only slight in Ephesus. The speech is examined here with a view to discovering the relation of Paul to the Ephesian Jews, and to see whether there is any evidence that Jews were in Paul's Christian community to any great degree or whether his addressees are predominantly gentile. Secondly, the speech will be examined to see what clues it gives as to whether or not the Pauline authority was maintained in Ephesus. Luke seems to be aware that by his own time the influence of Paul in Ephesus had virtually been supplanted by other influences and that Paul's influence lay instead in Rome and the west. ν 16: Paul does not go to Ephesus but instead calls the presbyters to him at Miletus. Luke's stated reason is that Paul was in a hurry to get to Jerusalem for the feast of Pentecost. Lambrecht accepts this reason (1979: 307). Others believe it implausible (Budesheim 1976: 19). It appears to be a strange reason since Paul then proceeds to send messengers to Ephesus to bring elders from that city to meet him in Miletus, a process which would have taken at least a couple of days. 248 Budesheim believes that Luke knew the tradition of a speech of Paul at Ephesus - a tradition which conflicted with Paul's known itinerary (1976: 19). Others suggest that Paul had been banned or exiled from Ephesus. Grundmann, for one, believes "Paul kann Ephesus nicht betreten", and he then raises the question as to whether this was an official banning - a question not answered by Acts, he says, but possibly 2 Cor 1:3-11 gives the clue that in fact Paul was in serious danger as a result of his stay in Ephesus (1964: 72. Likewise Haenchen 1971: 588, Conzelmann 1987: 171, and Johnson 1992: 352). If this be the case - and the elders' sadness that "they will see his face no more" (v 38) may reflect this situation - then it is difficult to maintain that Paul was successful in Ephesus at the religio-political level (something the Demetrius episode also implies), and it would imply that it was the gentile political leadership which made the decision against him and his mission. Paul's concern in the speech, however, is not with the political situation but with the situation within and in relation to the Christian community. ν 17: Little need be said about the "elders of the church" (πρεσβύτεροι τη? έκκλησία?) apart from noting the possibility that they included women.249 The next verse says they had been with Paul from his very first day in the city, 248

249

Conzelmann, in fact, suggests just the one-way trip would have taken at least five days. The distance between Miletus and Ephesus is about 50 kilometres by air, "the distance by land was considerably greater" (1987: 171). For evidence of women as elders in Jewish communities, see Brooten (1982: 41-46).

In Acts

267

which implies that they were Christians before Paul arrived. If that were the case, they would most likely have been Jews since Luke's awareness of Christians before Paul is of those who were in synagogues (18:26), and because the term "elder" in the New Testament so often is used in a JewishChristian context (Brooten 1982:47). vv 18-19: Paul indicates (or Luke is aware of the tradition) that Ephesus has not been an easy or successful place for him, even though he had spent all of his time in Asia in Ephesus itself. 250 This struggle is indicated clearly in the letters of Paul himself (1 Cor 15:31-32; 16:9; 2 Cor 1:8-11), but it is also stated here in Acts. It remains remarkable that any scholar can still make the claim for a successful, triumphant mission of Paul at Ephesus when the internal evidence of both Acts and Paul's own writings speaks against it. The mention of humility, tears, and testings are part of the rhetoric of this testament, but it also reflects the actual experiences of Paul. Likewise, the "Jewish plots" (αϊ έπιβουλαί των Ιουδαίων) may refer to particular occasions, even though Luke has not referred to them previously in any of his Ephesian episodes. Elsewhere in Acts, "plots" against Paul are hatched by Jews (9:24; 20:3; 23:30) and all are life-endangering plots, so it can be assumed that Paul's dangers were real in Ephesus. vv 20-21: Whatever the plots were, they did not stop Paul from teaching the Jews both publicly and privately (δημοσία καΐ κατ'οίκου?). Never, in Ephesus, did Paul abandon the Jews, according to Luke. Paul very solemnly testified (διαμαρτυρόμενο?) 2 5 1 to "both Jews and Greeks" (that familiar Lukan phrase) the repentance towards God (τήν el? Oeòv μετάνοιαν) and (the) faith towards the Lord Jesus [Christ] (πίστιν el? TÒV κύριον... ΊησοΟν [χριστόν]). MacGregor sees a chiasmus here and so thinks the former phrase was testified to the Jews and the latter to the Greeks (1954: 272). But this is unnecessary. Repentance and faith were proclaimed to and for both, and in early Christian preaching were not separated. 252 Repentance and faith go hand in hand with the announcement of the kingdom

In this speech, one must allow the possibility of slight hyperbole and rhetorical licence on the part of Paul. Paul's frequent use of έγώ and his constant reference to himself is typical of appeals by leaders when they review their past and when they wish to gently shame those who come later (who are rhetorically often referred to directly: ύμά?, ΰμΐυ). Paul would have been allowed to say what he wanted, the elders would have listened in silence and with the body-language of respect, even if they disagreed with him! The verb is common in Acts: See 2:40; 8:25; 10:42; 18:5; 20:23-24; 23:11; 28:23. So Jews are clearly called to repentance in Luke's gospel (Luke 3:3; 5:22; 15:7; 24:47) and in Acts (5:31). On the other hand, Acts 11:18 clearly refers to the gentiles experiencing repentance. Crispus, the Jew of Corinth, believed the Lord (18:8) and the jailer at Philippi is called on to do the same (16:31).

268

Paul among Jews

(κηρύσσων τήν βασιλείαν ν 25). Regardless, the point of interest is that the Jews are not excluded from Paul's mission in Ephesus. ν 25: The language of Luke in describing Paul's message would have made sense to Jewish ears. There is no doubting the strong "Jewish flavoring" of this speech which "preserves something from a (Hellenistic) Jewish Christian Community" (Budesheim 1976: 28, 29). It is this Jewish flavoring which is of interest, because it suggests (and only that) that Paul's audience the elders of Ephesus (or even of wider Asia) were Jewish. Much Jewish terminology is used in this speech - for example, "proclaiming the kingdom" (v 25) and the function of the Spirit (v 23) - is "strongly influenced by the Jewish understanding" (Budesheim 1976: 28). Michel has drawn attention to the Septuagintal language of the speech (1973: 33). Here is a Jewish audience hearing this testament from a fellow-Jew in their own language-world. Lake and Cadbury claim that the phrase "the gospel of the grace of God" (v 24) is [P]erhaps the most completely Hellenized summary of the Christian message to be found in Acts ... [the idea of the grace of God] almost obliterates the Jewish nature of the original preaching of the Kingdom, Judgment, and Repentance (Beginnings 4 [1933] 261).

But two comments can be made. First, Lake and Cadbury make an unjustifiable distinction between what is Hellenistic and what is Jewish; secondly, it is obvious that Luke (Paul) did not see "the gospel of the grace of God" as obliterating the preaching of the kingdom. The very next verse (25) states that Paul went around "proclaiming the kingdom". The gospel of the grace of God and the proclamation of the kingdom are synonymous in Luke's mind. It is not that one is a Jewish expression and the other a hellenized (implying gentile) notion.253 ν 26: Paul is their teacher and he sees the dangers ahead. He warns those who are to take his place of the dangers. If they do not listen to him, then before God he is not responsible: "I am clean from the blood of all". God will judge them. It is the language of the court (compare Lev 19:16-18; 20:16-18; Test. Levi 10:2; 14:2; Matt 27:24). Luke is claiming that Paul is not responsible for the difficulties facing the church at Ephesus (and in Asia Minor generally). It indicates that in Luke's opinion the communities of Ephesus have moved away from the authority and possibly also the teaching of Paul.

253

Lake & Cadbury's alternatives for understanding βασιλεία here are far too limited. They suggest either it be understood as "the Church" or "the coming Judgment" and recommend the former understanding (261). But βασιλεία in Acts almost never is meant to indicate "the Church", but retains the Gospels' sense of God's rule, God's actions to bring in the new aeon, the messianic time.

In Acts

269

The expression πάσα βουλή του θεου (ν 27) is Jewish, and the sheep/shepherd analogy for the Christian community also would have been very familiar to Jews. That such a community (έκκλησία του θεού) was made God's own possession (περιεποιήσατο; compare 1 Pet 2:9; LXX Mai 3:17) 254 through blood (v 28) also was familiar Jewish language. 255 Paul's reference to λύκοι βαρά? (ν 29) recalls Deut 31:29, Test. Joseph 20:1, Ezek 22:27, and Zeph 3:3. The expression δούναι τήν κληρονομίαν èv TOÎ? ήγιασμένοι? πάσιν (ν 32) recalls the claims of Israel, the consecrated people of God, to the inheritance promised by God to Abraham and his descendants. Two final examples, while probably not exclusively Jewish, certainly were familiar to Jewish audiences. The body-language in the farewell ("falling on the neck of Paul, they kissed him" [v 37]) repeats the action of Esau and Jacob (Gen 33:4), Joseph and Benjamin (Gen 45:14), of Joseph and his father (Gen 46:29), and of Raguel with his relatives (Tobit 7:6-7). On all these occasions, the action is that shared between members of a Jewish family. Finally, the use of TÒ πρόσωπον αυτού (ν 38) to signify the whole person is typical in Jewish thought. So, this speech is consistent with Luke's portrayal of Paul and his association with Ephesus. His audience is predominantly Jewish and in the emotional and serious context of a final testament, Paul uses language close to both his own heart and that of his hearers. A second aspect of this speech is that Luke is well aware that Paul's influence did not long survive him in Ephesus (and/or in wider Asia). In this, Luke is in harmony with the picture created by 2 Tim 1:15. Verse 26 is the first hint that things did not go as Paul had hoped in Ephesus and that many Christians chose another path to his. Πάντων implies the majority of Jews/Christians chose not to go along with his understanding of the kingdom and of the will/plan (βουλή) of God. The context indicates that Paul is speaking not of non-believers, but of believers. Paul will not take responsibility for those believers who do not follow his proclamation and teaching. The use of ΰμεΐ? and ύμΐν in ν 25 and ν 27 make this clear. Paul cannot be blamed for the origins of the difficulties in the Ephesian church (Schille 1983: 403).

Translations and commentators seem to miss this point. RSV: "obtained"; ΝIV "bought"; KJV "purchased"; MacGregor prefers "save alive" or "rescue from destruction", claiming that "Paul's doctrine of redemption through the death of Christ is clearly in view" (1954: 273). There is some doubt about whose blood is meant in this verse, although the strong manuscript evidence (at least « a Β) identifies it as God's own blood. This would not have been so acceptable to Jewish ears.

270

Paul among Jews

ν 28: Barrett notes that in this verse the work of the elders is pastoral and not evangelistic and finds that the absence of any such evangelistic group in Acts is "a remarkable paradox in a work which is in other respects the foundation document of Christian evangelism" (1977: 117). But anachronisms need to be avoided. The work of elders was pastoral and not evangelistic. It was apostles who were given the task of evangelism in the sense of being sent by one community into another with the express task of announcing the gospel. Both apostles and elders were known within the structure of Jewish communities. vv 29-30: These verses indicate the divisions and heresies that existed in Luke's time at Ephesus and are here foretold by Paul. The problems are both external and internal. G. Lampe claims that the early church was "faced with a powerful counter-attack from the side of Judaism which ... concentrated its onslaught on the Church's claim to be the authentic Israel" (1973: 255). Lampe understands άποσπάν to mean to "pull away" and "this suggests that preachers or teachers from outside the Church, non-Christian missionaries, are persuading members to apostasize" (255). But is this what Paul predicts or is it rather dangers from within the church? Was there really a Jewish countermission at this stage? Lampe himself admits there is "little direct evidence of organised counter-missionary activity from the side of Judaism" (262). But he persists, and concludes that the grievous wolves were judaizing countermissionary activities (268). Lampe's understanding that the teachers were persuading Christians to apostasize is also unlikely if these teachers are "judaizers". It is not likely that Luke would have thought an insistence on circumcision and other practices of Judaism to be apostasy. Apostasy is the abandonment of the faith and practice. The wolves speak (teach) perverse things (διεστραμμένα) - is it moral depravity or doctrinal? Would Luke think an insistence on Jewish practices was perverse? Probably not. It seems that these wolves must have taught something other than a judaizing of the gospel. Van Unnik calls them anti-God forces: false prophets, false messiahs, magicians (1967: 243). Haenchen suggests the teachers are Gnostics (1971: 596) as does Schnackenburg (1991: 51). Possibly some Christians were encouraging practices which associated them with the gentile world around them (such as apparently the Nicolaitans of Revelation 2). Barrett suggests of the false teachers: "We must think of inadequately Christianized representatives of pagan religions, or possibly ... of those who attacked with the weapons of persecution" (1977: 115). This is not likely. The dangers come from within (έξ υμών) and the context infers that it is Jewish teachers who are involved. Jewish teachers gathered μαθηταί and attracted them to follow όπίσω αυτών. The preposition όπίσω is part of discipleship language. The verb διαστρέφειν is used by Moses in his final testament to

In Acts

271

Israel (LXX Deut 32:5) as he prophesies concerning his people that they will "go off the rails". It is also used occasionally in the gospels to describe the generation of Jesus (Matt 17:17; Luke 9:41; 23:2). ν 31: Paul experienced great difficulties in his Ephesian ministry. It is those within the community (even those very elders he is addressing) that Paul had admonished every day with tears, and that for three years. vv 33-34: Paul apparently had no patron of any kind at Ephesus. He worked with his own hands and supported himself. At a wider social and political level, Ephesian civic and cultic positions were held in great respect and were vied for with money and envy. Paul encourages the leaders not to go that way, as he had not gone that way. Being a leader in a Christian community at Ephesus was not a prestigious position at all. Hence the encouragement with an otherwise unknown word of Jesus that it is better to give than to receive.256 These verses indirectly support the suggestion I am making that Paul found Ephesus a very difficult place to work in partly because it did not have the means to support him and also because he was not being supported from elsewhere such as from Corinth. I will elaborate on this in the next chapter. But for now, this passage supports the version Paul himself gives of his stay in Ephesus. He had to work with his own hands and so was not a strain or a drain on the very meagre resources of the Ephesian Christians. The ones Paul leaves behind in Ephesus as overseers are to follow his example because many Ephesian Christians are "weak" (άσθενούντοι) and themselves need support. This hardly gives the impression of a strong, substantial Christian community in Ephesus by the time Paul finished his ministry there. This speech demonstrates that for Luke Paul's goals are elsewhere and not Ephesus. Paul must be in Rome. It also indicates that Luke knew well that Asia Minor was not a strong Pauline centre - that strength was in the west. 2.4.9. Acts 21: 27-29 There remains one further passage in Acts to consider. Paul is in Jerusalem and meets with opposition which comes from Asian Jews (ol άπό τη? 'Ασία? Ί ουδαΐοι). Asia is often used to denote Ephesus, so these Jews may well have been Ephesian (Haenchen 1971: 615). This does not mean, however, that they were merely visitors in Jerusalem, but rather that their origins were in Asia. The phrase parallels ol έττΐ της· 'Ασία? Έλληνες* found in many inscriptions of Asia Minor and referring to Greeks originally from Greece but now living permanently in Asia. The Jews of this verse lived permanently in Jerusalem,

For the significance of almsgiving and welfare in the Christian communities of Asia Minor, see Countryman, 1979.

272

Paul among Jews

but originally were from Asia and presumably still maintained links with that region. If this is the case, the claim of Harding (and others) that this passage and 6:9 indicate diaspora Jews were "zealous for the law ... for Moses and Jewish privilege" (1994: 8, 11) would need to be modified. Both passages refer to "Jews of Asia", but to those who were members of the synagogue in Jerusalem. It does not automatically follow that their fellow-Jews still residing in Asia thought the same way. Their call is to the "men of Israel", an address which in the context may have been of some significance since Paul is charged with teaching κατά του λαού καΐ του ι/όμου καΐ του τόπου πάντα? πανταχη. These are strong words! Stegemann reasonably suggests that these were the charges commonly made in the synagogues against Christians in Luke's time (1991: 184). J. Sanders likewise believes that the criticism by Christians of the temple and the Mosaic traditions "was one of the most likely causes of bitter conflict between Jewish Christians and non-Christian Jews which goes almost unnoticed in the scholarly discussion about 'the break'" (1993: 95). The brethren from Jerusalem had accepted Paul but were also wary of the response he might receive there since, even though μυριάδες- among the Jews have believed (21:20), they also know that Paul has been telling those Jews who live among the gentiles (τού? κατά τά έθνη πάντα? Ί ουδαίου?)257 to forsake Moses, not to circumcise their children and not to follow the customs (21:21). In order to allay fears, Paul is advised (and accedes) to join in with four others who are under a vow which includes purification and an offering in the temple (21:26). These four are Jews and are contrasted in ν 25 with gentiles who are not under such obligations. Paul is charged with taking Greeks into the temple and so making the temple unclean. Luke suggests that this assumption of those Asian Jews was wrong (v 29). Paul had been in the temple (whether with the four men under the vow or not is not entirely clear from ν 26) but Trophimus had only been seen with him in the city (v 29). Paul neither clearly confirms nor denies the charge, but the suggestion is he denies it. If Trophimus is a gentile but is known by some Asian Jews, that would suggest that Christian-synagogue contacts in Ephesus were still close. The opposition comes from Jews in Jerusalem who had either at first hand or via reports knew of Paul's activities in Ephesian synagogues.

257

Does κατά τά Ιθνη mean "living among the gentiles" or "living in the fashion of the gentiles"?

Summary

273

2.5. Summary The Acts version of Paul's mission in Ephesus portrays an element of success among Jews in the city but little success among the gentiles. It can even be said that there was a Pauline Christian Jewish community in Ephesus - a community which probably also included a few gentiles. However, Luke is painfully aware that such a community existed only with great anxiety and concern for its future. Luke knows that by his own time, other teachers had come in and the authority of Paul was diminished, and that these events happened very shortly after Paul had left the city or at least very shortly after his death. More than likely, Ephesian Christian communities were dominated by Jews who took a harder line than Paul on various issues. Finally, the Christian community at Ephesus, as Luke knew it either in history or in his own time or both, struggled as a financially viable centre. The tradition was that Paul had supported himself and his companions while he worked there and that was expected to be the model followed by his successors. This hardly conjures up visions of a successful and strong Christian centre in the first century.

3. The Evidence from Paul 3.1. Introduction While many scholars have taken Acts as a reliable source for a construction of the Pauline mission at Ephesus, a significant number insist that Acts cannot be credited with historical reliability because Luke's theological Tendenzen dominate and determine any interest he might have in "history", and because it depicts a Paul inconsistent with the Paul of his own correspondence. Knox (1987) is representative of those who reject using Acts as the primary document and insist on the primacy of the Pauline correspondence.258 It would obviously be important for such scholars to examine the Pauline correspondence for any evaluation of the effect of Paul's work in Ephesus and 258

Goodenough & Kraabel have quite vehemently insisted on the primacy of Paul over against Acts, especially when there is contradiction between them: it is sheer perversity to go from Acts to Paul's letters, from a second-hand account to a man's own exposition of his thought. We must work the other way (1970: 25). But autobiographical evidence is not a priori reliable evidence. If one is so sceptical about Luke's historical reliability, then one ought also to be at least somewhat sceptical of Paul's. Jervell has more confidence in Acts and sees it as complementary rather than contradictory to Paul: "That which lies in the shadow in Paul's letters, Luke has placed in the sun in Acts" (1979: 300).

274

Evidence from Paul

the composition of the Christian community in that city which accepted his authority in some way. Knox believes that Ephesus was absolutely central and crucial to Paul's whole mission. It is very difficult to see how that can be maintained on the basis of the Pauline correspondence which mentions so very little about Paul's thoughts towards Ephesus and the Ephesians, let alone his activities there. In a proposed chronology of Paul's life, Knox claims that Paul spent twelve years off and on at Ephesus - a period which included a visit to Jerusalem for the Conference and one or more visits to Corinth plus other missions (1987: 63). Knox speaks of Paul's relation to the churches of Asia Minor as "warm and close" and believes that "there is nothing to indicate that they had altered for the worse when he left Ephesus finally (as far as we know) for Troas, Macedonia and Corinth" (1987: 64). That there is no letter of Paul to the Ephesians is attributed to the the fact that he had his base or headquarters there (64). In addition, Knox finds in Ignatius and the anti-Marcionite prologues "impressive evidences" that Paul's relations with Ephesus "were close and cordial" (64). The only evidence from Paul himself cited by Knox is 1 Cor 16:19 where "cordial relations with that church [Ephesus] are unmistakeably reflected" (64). Knox mentions this verse in the context of the question as to why Asia did not contribute to the Jerusalem collection. Lüdemann claims that there was no Asian collection because "the apostle could not (any longer?) gain a foothold there" (1984: 86), an opinion disputed by Knox on the basis of 1 Cor 16:19. That verse will be examined later, but it can now be noted that it says little about Paul's relation with the Ephesian church in particular. It does indicate a strong relation between Corinth and Ephesus, since the immediately preceding verses have spoken of Corinthian visitors being at Ephesus (vv 15-18). Such a relationship is confirmed by the common link in Prisca and Aquila. 259 The apparent interest that some Corinthian Christians have in Ephesus allows the possibility that they sent "apostles" to Ephesus to establish a community there. Prisca and Aquila, Apollos, Paul (and Barnabas? see 1 Cor 9:6), Fortunatus,

One could mount an argument that it is these two who founded the church and established it in Ephesus rather than Paul. The evidence of both Paul and Acts indicates that they preceded Paul in Ephesus, and since the έκκλησία was in their house they could also have had control or authority over it, particularly since they were teachers. Latourette has a necessary word of caution regarding the impact of Paul in his own time. He comments that Paul may not have had as important a part in creating it [Christianity] as we usually suppose. [And] It is entirely possible ... that Paul did not have as prominent a part in the propagation of Hellenistic Christianity as the space devoted in the New Testament to his letters would lead us to expect (1938: 63, 69). These thoughts were not developed, however.

Introduction

275

Stephanus, Achaicus, Timothy, and possibly Chloe, all have Corinth and Ephesus in common in one way or another. If so much of Paul's correspondence did, in fact, emanate from Ephesus, it is surprising that such a prominent church - and one for whom Paul is supposed to have had such warm affection - should not be held up to the receivers of those epistles, particularly the Corinthians, as an example of what a church ought to be like, or praised at least to some degree. Instead, not a kind word is said about Ephesus. To the contrary, Paul, if he says anything at all, complains about the hardships and the problems there or in Asia generally. This is clearly so in the Corinthian correspondence which can be said to be of Ephesian origin with some certainty; but it can also be said of the correspondence with Philippi (1:15-17) and of Romans 16 (16:17-18) should these two writings either originate from or be directed to Ephesus. If the Christians at Ephesus were as pro-Paul as scholars have maintained, and since there is evidence to suggest relations between Corinthian and Ephesian Christians were strong, it could be expected that Paul would appeal to the Corinthians, who caused him tears and heartache, to follow the example of the Ephesians whom they knew well. But Paul cannot do that because things are no better for him but rather worse at Ephesus than at Corinth. Instead, he can only appeal to the Corinthians for their prayers because of the sufferings and rejection he experiences èv 'Aaíq. of which Ephesus presumably is representative (2 Cor 1:8-11). When Paul experiences these hardships, it is from Macedonia and Philippi that his support comes, financially and otherwise, (2 Cor 11:9; Phil 4:15). There is not a mention of support from Ephesus; nor is there any Jerusalem collection expected from Ephesus. The silence is surprising from a church which is believed to be so supportive of Paul and which later shows signs of wealth (1 Tim 2:9; 6:17; see also Acts 19:19). It is generally acknowledged that Paul's extant letters give very little information about the Ephesian situation, a fact which has caused some scholars to express surprise and disappointment, especially since Ephesus is seen as being so pivotal and so successful from the Pauline viewpoint.260 Such surprise can be eliminated and such regret lessened were one to assume that Paul never had great influence among the Ephesian Christian groups; or at least to say that there were only some who held to Paul as their "father" and saw themselves under his authority and in his tradition, while others had their origins and hence found their authorities elsewhere. The evidence that can be 260

MacGiffert says it is to be regretted that we possess no such elaborate epistle [like to the Galatians]... from which we may learn the origin of the church at Ephesus and of Paul's long and important work there (1897: 275). And Goguel says "it is the more curious" that we know so little of Christian origins in Ephesus since it became such an important Christian centre at the end of the first century (1953: 485).

276

Evidence from Paul

extracted from the Pauline letters is very slight, but if the thesis that Paul's own letters ought to be given greater weight than Luke's account has merit, then what evidence there is must be examined closely.261 3.2. The Corinthian Correspondence Bornkamm claims that from 2 Cor 11 and 1 Cor 15, we can infer not only the immense amount of work with which Paul had to cope in the growing church in Ephesus, but also the scale of missionary and pastoral activity in the surrounding country and in his churches elsewhere (1975: 82).

Such inference from these chapters is very slight. What passages in 1 Cor 15 can Bornkamm be referring to? 1 Cor 15:10 speaks of Paul claiming to "work harder than any of them [the apostles, so-called]" but this means not in Ephesus - unless Bornkamm believes other apostles worked there. The known presence in Corinth of claimed apostolic authority (of Cephas and Apollos, at least: 1 Cor 1:12; and of "the superapostles" of 2 Cor 11:5, 13) suggests Paul refers to that city rather than to Ephesus. Bornkamm can only be referring to 15:31-32, but that hardly supports his claim. Paul is faced with death "every day", and it is only the hope of resurrection that sustains him. These verses cannot support the claim that Paul had an "immense amount of work" in a "growing church" with the pressures of missionary and pastoral demands. It is just as likely that the constant threat of death stultified and prevented such furious activity on Paul's part. Second Corinthians 11 speaks of Paul's hardships (vv 23-29) - trials which Bornkamm claims must refer to "a considerable part" of Paul's stay in Ephesus (1975: 81). If these hardships do refer to events at Ephesus, they certainly give weight to the argument that Paul found the going extremely tough in that city and was not claiming success for his work there. The hard work is not so much in pastoral and missionary activity as in staying alive, or at least out of danger's way. If Ephesus is where the majority of the hardships occurred then those hardships also come from within the Christian community as well as from without. Assuming that the "Jews" who administer punishment (11:24) are not

How much greater the merit is debatable. Scholars often seem to forget that Paul wrote letters and not an autobiography. What is said or planned in letters is not necessarily the way things in fact work out. Similarly, what is said in a letter may not necessarily reflect the writer's more considered opinion.

The Corinthian Correspondence

277

part of a Christian community, 262 the mention of false brethren (ψευδαδελφοί, 2 Cor 11:26) can only refer to those claiming to be Christian. And if Paul experienced hunger and thirst and cold and exposure (11:27) in Ephesus - or even more widely, "in Asia" - then where were those Ephesian Christians with whom Paul had such "warm and close" relations? Both Acts and Paul's correspondence reveal that close links existed between Corinth and Ephesus. Paul lived and worked in both cities, as did Apollos, and Priscilla and Aquila. Paul visited Corinth from Ephesus, and received visitors from Corinth (1 Cor 16:17). But in his letter, Paul's interest is only in Corinth. He reveals only little about the Ephesian situation. What is revealed has to be studied carefully for any narrow beam of light it might throw onto the Ephesian scene.

3.2.1. 1 Corinthians 1:11 Paul (in Ephesus) was kept informed of events and the situation in Corinth. According to 1:11, he learns "by those of Chloe" (υπό των Χλόη?) of έριδες· in Corinth. Opinion is divided as to where Chloe lived. Theissen (1982: 57), the editors of EDNT (3 [1993] 469), and Conzelmann (1975: 32) think she lived in Corinth. Moffat calls her "a local business woman" presumably from Corinth, but who traded between there and Ephesus (1938: 8). They are probably correct. However, Plummer and Robinson prefer to see her in Ephesus (1911: 10) as does Morris, "but we do not know" (1958: 39). Fee, however, is almost certain. He argues that Chloe was from Ephesus and that members of her household (whether family or business or both) had visited Corinth and reported back to Paul in Ephesus on the problems in Corinth. But these "of Chloe" were not Corinthians. If they were, they would have belonged to those who were "of Paul", but Paul is not pleased with this slogan. So if they did belong to that group in Corinth, Paul's own interests would hardly have been served by his quoting them as his source of information. Most likely, therefore, says Fee, "Chloe was a wealthy Asian whether a Christian or not cannot be known - whose business interests caused her agents to travel between Ephesus and Corinth" (1987: 54). 263 Of course, that raises a very significant question in itself as to why Paul still submitted to such Jewish authority if he regarded himself as no longer belonging to the synagogue and to "the Jews". It is possible to understand the "Jews" to be within the Christian community, or even more precisely and likely, the Christians to be still within the Jewish community. If Chloe was in fact a Corinthian, it reduces even more the tiny information we have of any Ephesian Christians. Trophimus (Acts 21:29), Onesiphorus (2 Tim 1:18; 4:19), and possibly Epainetus (Rom 16:5) are the only ones named (unless Romans 16 is addressed to Ephesus; then the picture changes dramatically). On the other hand,

278

Evidence from Paul

If Chloe is from Ephesus, then the inference is that she was of some status within a Christian community, either as a patron or benefactor of some kind, or as one whose household contained some Christians whom she permitted or allowed to participate in Christian gatherings. Chloe would offer a glimpse of a Christian community in Ephesus if it could be shown that she was herself Christian, something not possible to determine. However, the fact that she is assumed to be known by the Corinthian Christians might imply that she was Christian. If the grammatical form used here (definite article + genitive) is meant to refer to a "household" of Christians (Robertson and Plummer 1911: 10; KJV) it is not the form adopted by Paul elsewhere when speaking of such groupings of Christians. Paul greets some Roman Christians as ol έκ των 'Αριστοβούλου (Rom 16:10) and ol έκ των Ναρκίσσου (16:11). The preposition έκ is used by Paul in relation to οΙκία in Phil 4:22: οι έκ τη? Καίσαρος- οίκία?; and along similar lines, Epaphras, ό έξ υμών, sends greetings to the Colossians (Col 4:12). The absence of that preposition in relation to Chloe may suggest that Christians did not meet in her house or did not belong to her household as is generally understood. In John 21:2, some disciples are referred to as ol του Ζεβεδαίου which indicates "the sons of Zebedee". 264 So ol Χλόη? may mean Chloe's biological family. 265 However, Theissen believes they could not have been members of a family "since members of a family would have used their father's name" (1982: 57).2.303 Paul is not suggesting that there are only gentile Christians in Rome or that he is only interested in gathering fruit from gentile Christians - both Jews and gentiles are included among "the nations".304 Irenaeus also makes an interesting distinction. He says οϋτε Ί ουδαίοι? OÜTÉ ΈΧΧησιι/ άλλά τοις έξ έθνών (Α.Η. 3.12.14). Irenaeus has just stated that the apostles preached one message to the Jews (that the crucified Jesus is the Son of God, the Judge, and the receiver from the Father of the kingdom for Israel) and another to the Greeks (that there is one God and his Son is Jesus Christ). Then he goes on to say that in Acts 15, the apostles sent a letter not to Jews nor to Greeks but "to those out of [the] gentiles".305 Irenaeus may simply be including both Jews and gentiles in the term έθνη or he may be referring to all those, whether Jew or Greek, who act like gentiles or live among "the nations". When Clement of Alexandria describes the work of John at Ephesus, he says that the apostle used to go to τά πλησιόχωρα των έθνών to appoint bishops and regulate the churches (The Rich Man's Salvation, 42). It would appear that Clement is using the word in the "provincial" sense -John went outside of Ephesus into the neighboring areas. He almost certainly is not speaking about ethnic groups. Acts 26:7 is relevant. Paul claims that the twelve tribes "hope to attain the promise made by God to our fathers as they earnestly worship and night". Why does Paul use the term "the twelve tribes" (δωδεκάφυλον)? It is a rare term, found only elsewhere in the Sibylline Oracles (2.171; 3.249) and in 1 Clem 55:6. It does not appear in Josephus, Philo, nor in the Septuagint. Does it suggest Paul was conscious that Israel was made up of tribes? Did he see it as his work to gather the ten non-Judean tribes and bring them to that hope? Acts 26:17 also must be considered. Λαό? in Luke/Acts refers to Israel, but does it refer only to those living in Israel? In this verse, then, is Paul sent not to Israel, but to the Nations, that is, to those living outside of Israel? Verses 1920 hint in that direction: Paul says he has preached the gospel in Damascus, Jerusalem, throughout Judaea - that is, in Israel, and also to the gentiles, that is, those peoples (including Jews) in the geographical areas beyond Israel.

Compare the almost identical expression in an Ephesus inscription which informs the readers that the Artemision is to be celebrated for the whole month in Ephesus and in Macedonia and TOÎÇ λοιποί? Ιθνεσιν TOÎÇ Ελληνικοί? (CIG 2954). Interesting also is Rom 2:14 where Ιθι/η is used anarthrously. Is there a difference between this form and its more usual arthrous form? See also Acts 22:21 for anarthrous use: Paul is sent far away et? ?θνη. Acts 15:23 says the letter was sent to τ ο ι ? ... ά δ ε λ φ ο ΐ ? τ ο ί ? έ ξ έθνών in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia - quite a narrow group of people. Once again, the anarthrous use of Ιθνη raises a question (compare Luke 21:24 also anarthrous). And what is the relation between such brethren and those άπό των έθνών (15:19)?

306

Appendices

Paul's aim then in going to the έθνη (those Jews living in those areas outside of Judea, or outside of Israel) was to proclaim to them the good news that they need no longer look to Jerusalem but they are called to join the community of those in-Christ; and more importantly, that observance of the Law (best observed in Israel) was not the decisive factor in belonging to the people of God. Such a gospel would have been attractive to those Jews who had abandoned the strict observance of the Law, even those who had abandoned circumcision. His gospel, obviously, would also have been attractive to those gentiles who had come under the sway of the Jewish communities, but who never felt they truly belonged. Finally, a closer study of the arthrous/anarthrous use of the word έθνη may be helpful in any endeavor to discover its precise meaning. In Acts the ratio is about 3:1.

Appendix 2

The survival of Jewish thought and practise in Ephesus The fact that "John" dominates the traditions of Ephesus is an indication that Jewish rather than gentile views and practices remained strong in some, if not all, Ephesian Christian communities. The Fourth Gospel deals predominantly with Christian-synagogue relations and has scant interest in gentiles and any mission to them. 306 There is little reason to deny that such close synagogue relations and interest in "Jewish" themes are there in the Johannine tradition because many of the readers (and the author himself) were Jews either by birth or by extraction. Bauer notices that this "Jewish Christian element" was strong in Ephesus, as it was in Corinth, "from the very beginning" but received added impetus with the emigration from Palestine after 70 CE (1971: 86). A number of others have also noted this characteristic in Asia Minor generally. Daniélou writes: There was a very strong Jewish element in Asia, which influenced the Christian communities and kept alive, even among Jews converted to Christianity, the hope of a temporal reign of the Messiah. This messianic fever was never so lively as between AD 50 and 70 (1964: 385).

While the time period is probably determined for Daniélou by when he thinks Revelation was written, the point is valid beyond that time, and there is some evidence outside of the canonical data that Christian communities in Ephesus continued to be marked by Jewish ways of thinking and practice well into the 306

pace

okure (1988) who argues that the Gospel is very interested in gentile mission.

Appendix 2

307

second century. Justin, 307 who probably had close Ephesus connections, speaks of the millenium as times which included the essentially Jewish hope of a rebuilt Jerusalem: I, and all other entirely orthodox Christians, know that there will be a resurrection of the flesh for a period of a thousand years in a Jerusalem rebuilt, adorned and enlarged (Dial. 80.4; see also 81.3-4).

Not all other Christians shared Justin's judgment which reflects a characteristically Asian teaching (Strecker 1986: 35). Cerinthus (the rather enigmatic heretic whom some traditions associated with Ephesus)308 also was a millenarianist as well as insisting on other decidedly Jewish practices like circumcision and sabbath observance (Hilgenfeld 1966: 418). Millenarian hopes were revived later in the century in Asia by the Montanists. 309 Apollinaris of Hierapolis makes a relevant and interesting comment in his attack on the Montanists. He asks rhetorically: Is there one person among those from Montanus and the women onwards who started the chatter, who was persecuted by the Jews or killed by the wicked? Not one.... Was one of the women ever whipped in Jewish synagogues or stoned? Never anywhere (Eusebius Η.E. 5.16.12).

This implies that the "orthodox" can claim such treatment. But why would any Christian - orthodox or not - be subject to whippings in Jewish synagogues unless they were either Jews and/or still maintained association with the synagogue and were under its jurisdiction? The Pascha controversy of the mid-to-late second century is further indication of Jewish influences surviving. The Ephesians (and Asians generally) observed the Passover according to the dating of John's gospel and according to the Jewish calendar. One might legitimately suppose that was the case because many in the community were Jews (by birth or descent) and did not see this custom as in any way compromising their understanding of being "Christian". Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus, was involved in the controversy so one can assume Ephesian Christians under his bishopric at least, held similar views to his. It is clear from Polycrates' correspondence to Victor of Rome (H.E. The fact that he dialogues with the Jew, Trypho, indicates close Jew-Christian relations possibly in Ephesus. Later writings were "Against the Jews". The apostle John is said to have fled from the bath house because he heard Cerinthus was present (Irenaeus A.H. 3.3.4). Epiphanius relates the same story but replaces Cerinthus with Ebion (Panarion 30.24.1). In "seeking the seeds" of Montanism, Trevett looks to the interest in "prophecy" and in the judaizing forms advocated by the opponents of Ignatius and the writer of Revelation (1989: 314).

308

Appendices

5.24.8), that Ephesus had a peculiar stance on this and other issues, and that it took its lode stars to be not Paul or Peter (who were claimed by Rome) but Philip (and one of his daughters who was buried in Ephesus) and John. John is described as "a sacrificing priest wearing the mitre" (πέταλον). The petalon was worn only by the Jewish highpriest (Bruce 1978: 343; Frend 1983: 54), so Polycrates describes John approvingly as still using the symbols of the Jewish world. John "clearly considered himself the leader of the Jewish community there" (Frend 1985: 34). Priesthood seems important to Polycrates and presumably to Ephesus, and indicates the Jewish nature of the community's structure (Frend 1985: 35). Schwartz, writing of Qumranic views of priesthood, says a logical conclusion is that Qumran believed "that access to the sacred is predicated upon descent" (1990: 167). Was that how Polycrates also thought? He claims that he descends from a family of bishops that precedes him by seven generations and he himself has "spent sixty-five years in the Lord's service" which dates his baptism (presumably) in about the year 130 CE. It is possible that his family could claim connections with the very first Christian communities in Ephesus;310 or, that he was of Jewish descent and the seven generations even predate Christianity. Polycrates' point is that he and his family have been "putting away the leaven" on a particular day in preparation for Passover for generations and he was not about to change the practice. 311 All this sounds strange if Polycrates was of gentile extraction and/or the Ephesian church was thoroughly gentile in its roots and tradition. Shephard is correct that there is enough evidence to show that the Church [in Asia Minor] was more strongly influenced by Judaism and more closely intimate with Palestinian Christians for a longer time than was the case in other provinces (1960: 37).

As noted earlier, Ephesus in the second and later centuries looked east rather than west for its guidance and mutual relations.312 The Pascha controversy illustrates that; as does the spurious letter of Fabian (bishop of Rome in the third century) where Jerusalem and Ephesus are linked over and against Rome (ANCL 9: 256). When Peregrinus associates with Christians while in Palestine, he is supported there by Christians from Asia (Lucían The Passing 310

311 312

The reliability of oral tradition or such family traditions should not be downplayed. Even three generations can cover a long period of time. A seventy year old, living in the year 170 CE, can quite conceivably have had a grandparent who lived as a young person in the time of Paul. He quotes the Petrine clause of Acts 5:29, so strongly does he feel about it. So did Clement of Alexandria very early in the third century. He exhorts his readers that they "believe no teacher, unless he brings from Jerusalem the testimonial of James, the lord's brother, or of whomsoever may come after him" (Recog. 4.34).

Appendix 2

309

of Peregrinus 11-13). In addition, that the Letter of Abgar to Jesus has been found on a door lintel in Ephesus (I.Eph. Ia.46) points similarly to Ephesus' eastern links. In many of the traditions, there is movement by John and Mary the mother of Jesus between Jerusalem and Ephesus (for example, in PseudoMelito {Apocrypha [ed. M. R. James] 1924: 211; The Book of John (ANCL 16 [1873] 507; The Ethiopie Synaxarium 1976: 524). In the sixth century CE it is the Syrian church of Edessa that sends James to Ephesus "to spread orthodoxy and swell the priesthood". James preserved the faith of James the first bishop of Jerusalem, and when orthodox and heretic met, the James followers would say: "We for our part are of the faith of James, the first of the apostles" (John of Ephesus [ed. E. W. Brooks] 1974: 256). One of those ordained by James the Syrian in Ephesus was John the Syrian who then coverted thousands of pagans in Ephesus and wider, according to the Syrian account. Of interest is an inscription found in the Church of St. John in Ephesus part of which reads —-1 άκαβο? α' παπά, the last line of which is believed to be read as πρωτοπαπά(ς-). The inscription is given in LEph. IV. 1290 but is not dated. Horsley briefly discusses it under the heading "James the first Pope" and finds it intriguing that it should turn up in Ephesus (New Docs 4 [1987] 266). It may well date from the sixth century and refer to James the Syrian so indicating links between Ephesus and the east. Finally, the Jewish lamps "curiously enough" found in the tomb of the Seven Sleepers (Foss 1979: 45) is yet another piece in the pattern which indicates the ongoing Jewish forms of Christian practice and belief in Ephesus. Now, it is true that the use of Jewish practices and artefacts need not automatically indicate that the practitioners or owners were Jews or of Jewish extraction (Kraabel 1985: 241). But on the other hand, why not? It is just as understandable (if not more so) that some Christian Jews thought that the continuation of such practices in no way compromised the gospel as it is to believe that gentile Christians adopted such practices and persevered with them at times quite forcefully and against stiff opposition. Ephesus is one example of the reliability of Blank's claim that one cannot talk easily of a pure pagan Christian church until at least the middle of the second century because Christian Jews cannot so easily be ignored (1984: 182).

Bibliography ABBOTT, T. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles to the Ephesians and to the Colossians. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1897 (reprint, 1956). AKURGAL, E.

Ancient Civilizations and Ruins of Turkey from Historic Times until the

End of the Roman Empire. Translated by J. Whybrow and M. Emre. Istanbul: Haset Kitabevi, 1973. ALAND, K. A History of Christianity. Volume 1: From the beginnings to the threshold of the Reformation. Translated by J. Schaaf. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985. ALPEROWITZ, M.

Das Wirken und Walten der Götter im griechischen Roman.

Heidelberg: Carl Winter, Universitätsverlag, 1992. ALZINGER, W. and KNIBBE, D. "Ephesos vom Beginn der römischen Herrschaft in Kleinasien bis zum Ende der Principatszeit". In: ANRW 11.7.2.(1980)748-830. AMIR, Y.

"The Term 'Ιουδαϊσμό? (IOUDAISMOS), a study in Jewish Hellenistic Self-

identification". In: Immanuel 14 (1982) 34-41. " θ ε ο κ ρ α τ ί α as a Concept of Political Philosophy: Josephus' Presentation of Moses' Politeia ". In: SCI 8-9 (1985-88) 83-105. APPELBAUM, S. Jews and Greeks in Ancient Cyrene. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1979. "The Status of Jaffa in the First Century of the Common Era". In: SCI 8-9 (198588) 138-144. ARNOLD, C. Ephesians: Power and Magic. The concept of power in Ephesians in the light of its historical setting. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. ARNOLD, I.

"Festivals of Ephesus". In: AJA 76 (1972) 17-22.

ATTRIDGE, H. First Century Cynicism in the Epistles of Heraclitus. Harvard Theological Studies 29. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1976.

312

Bibliography

AUGUET, R. Cruelty and Civilization: The Roman games. London: Allen and Unwin, 1972. AUNE, D. "The Social Matrix of the Apocalypse of John". In: BR 26 (1981) 16-32. "The Apocalypse of John and Graeco-Roman Revelatory Magic". In: NTS 33 (1987) 481-501. BABCOCK, W. (ed.) Paul and the Legacies of Paul. University Press, 1990.

Dallas: Southern Methodist

BAGNALL, R. and WARDEN, P. "The Forty Thousand Citizens of Ephesus". In: CP 83 (1988) 220-223. BALCH, D. and STAMBAUGH, J.

The New Testament in its Social

Environment.

Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1986. BALSDON, J. Romans and Aliens. London: Duckworth Press, 1979. BAMMER, A.

"Forschungen im Artemision von Ephesos von 1976 bis 1981". In: AS 32

(1982) 61-87. "Spuren der Phöniker im Artemision von Ephesos". In: AS 35 (1985) 103-108. and BREIN, F. and WOLFF, P. "Das Tieropfer am Artemisaltar von Ephesos". In: Studien zur Religion und Kultur Kleinasiens. Volume 1. Edited by S. Sahin, E. Schwertheim, J. Wagner. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1978) 107-157. BANKS, R. Paul's Idea of Community: The early house-churches in their historical setting. Surrey Hills: Anzea Books, 1979. BARNES, A. Notes on the New Testament: Explanatory and practical - Acts. Edited by R. Frew. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1949. BARNES, T.D. "Trajan and the Jews". In: JJS 40 (1989) 145-162. BARON, S.

A Social and Religious History of the Jews. Volume 2: The Christian Era:

The first five centuries. 2nd edition (1937). New York: Columbia University Press, 1952. BARRETT, C.K.

A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians. London: A. and

C. Black, 1971.

313

Bibliography

"Pauline Controversies in the Post-Pauline Period". In: NTS 20 (1974) 229-245. —

"Light on the Holy Spirit from Simon Magus". In: Kremer (ed.), Les Actes (1975) 281-295. "Paul's Address to the Ephesian Elders". In: J. Jervell and W. Meeks (eds), God's Christ

and

His People:

studies

in honor

of Nils Alstrup

Dahl.

Oslo:

Universitetsforlaget (1977) 107-121. BARTH, M. Ephesians. 2volumes. AB 34, 35. NewYork Doubleday and Co., 1974. "Traditions in Ephesians". In: NTS 30 (1984) 3-25. BARTON, S.C. and HORSLEY, G.H.R.

"A Hellenistic Cult Group and the New

Testament Churches". In: J AC 24 (1981) 7-41. BAUCKHAM, R.

"Papias and Polycrates on the Origin of the Fourth Gospel". In: JTS 44

(1993)24-69. BAUER, W. Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity. Translation edited by R. Kraft and G. Krodel. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1971. BAUGH, S.

Paul and Ephesus: The apostle among his contemporaries.

Unpublished

doctoral dissertation, University Of California, Irvine, 1990. "Phraseology and The Reliability of Acts". In: NTS 36 (1990b) 290-294. BAUMAN, R. Impietas in Principem: A study of treason against the Roman emperor with special reference to the first century AD. Münchener Beiträge zur Papyrusforschung und antiken Rechtsgeschichte, 67. Munich: C.H. Beck, 1974. BAUMGARTEN, M. The Acts of the Apostles, or The History of the Church in the Apostolic Age. 2 volumes. Translated by A.J.W. Morrison. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1854. BAUR, F.C. Paul the Apostle of Jesus Christ, his life and work, his epistles and his doctrine: A contribution to a critical history of primitive Christianity. Volume 1. Translated by E. Zeller. London: Williams and Norgate, 1876. BAUS, Κ. History of the Church. Volume 1: From the Apostolic Commmunity to Constantine. Translation edited by H. Jedin and J. Dolan. New York: Seabury Press, 1980.

314

Bibliography

BEAN, G.E. Aegean Turkey: An archaeological guide. London: Ernest Benn Ltd., 1966. BEARE, F.W.

"The Epistle to the Colossians". In: IB 11(1955)133-241.

B E A S L E Y - M U R R A Y , G.

Baptism in the New Testament. London: Macmillan and Co.,

1962. BECKER, J.

"Paulus und seine Gemeinden". In: Die Anfänge des Christentums: Alte Welt

und neue Hoffnung. Stuttgart/Berlin/Köln/ Mainz: W . Kohlhammer (1987) 102159. B E C K W I T H , I.T.

The Apocalypse of John: Studies in Revelation with a critical

and

exegetical commentary. London: Macmillan and Co., 1922. BELL, H.I.

Jews and Christians in Egypt: The Jewish troubles in Alexandria and the

Athanasian controversy. Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1924. 2nd reprint 1976. BENKO, S. Pagan Rome and the Early Christians. London: B.T. Batsford, 1984. B E N N E T T , F.M.

Religious Cults Associated with the Amazons. New York: A M S Press,

1967. BENOIT, P.

"Qumran and New Testament". In: Paul and Qumran: Studies in New

Testament exegesis. Edited by J. Murphy-O'Connor. London: G. Chapman (1968) 1-30. BERGER, Κ.

"Geist/Heiliger Geist/Geistesgaben. III: Neues Testament". In: TRE 12

(1984) 178-196. BERNARD, J.H. B E R T R A M , G. BEST, E.

"Apollos". In: DB 1 (1898) 124-125. "θεοσεβή? - θεοσέβεια". In: TDNT 3 (1965) 123-128.

"Recipients and Title of the Letter to the Ephesians: Why and when the

designation 'Ephesians·". In: AA7WII.25.4 (1987) 3247-3279. Second Corinthians. Interpretation: A bible commentary for teaching and preaching. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1987. "Ephesians 2:11-22: A Christian View of Judaism". In: Text as Pretext. Essays in honor of Robert Davidson. Edited by R.P. Carroll. JSOT Supplement Series 138. Sheffield: JSOT Press (1992) 47-60.

Bibliography

315

BICKERMAN, E. "Consecrado". In: W. den Boer (ed.), Le Culte (1972) 1-38. The Jews in the Greek Age. Cambridge, MassaVLondon: Harvard University Press, 1988. BLACKMAN, E.C. Marcion and His Influence. London: SPCK, 1948. BLANK, J. "Die Irrlehrer des ersten Johannsesbriefes". In: Kairos 26 (1984) 166-193. BLUM, G.G.

Rabbuia von Edessa: Der Christ, der Bischof, der Theologe. CSCO 300.

Subsidia Tomus 34. Louvain, 1969. BLASS, F.

A Grammar of New Testament Greek. Translated by H. St.J. Thackeray.

London: Macmillan and Co., 1905. BÖCHER, O. "Johannes der Täufer. II: Neues Testament". In: TRE 17 (1988) 173-181. BOKSER, B. Philo's Description of Jewish Practices. The Centre for Hermeneutical Studies in Hellenistic and Modern Culture, Colloquy 30 (1977) 1-11. "Recent Developments in the Study of Judaism 70-200 CE". In: SecCent 3 (1983) 1-68. BONNER, C. Studies in Magical Amulets chiefly Graeco-Egyptian. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press/London: Geoffrey Cumberlege, Cambridge University Press, 1950. BORGEN, P. "The Early Church and the Hellenistic Synagogue". In: ST 37 (1983) 55-78. BÖRKER, Chr. "Eine pantheistische Weihung in Ephesos". In: ZPE 41 (1981) 181-188. BORNKAMM, G.

"πρεσβύ?" In: TDNT 6 (1964-72) 651-679.

Paul. Translated by D.M.G. Stalker. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1971. BOTHA, P.J.J. "God, emperor worship and society: Contemporary experiences and the Book of Revelation". In: Neot 22 (1988) 87-102. BOUSSET, W. Kyrios Christos: A history of the belief in Christ from the beginnings of Christianity to Irenaeus. Translated by J. Steely. Nashville: Abingdon Press. BOUWMANN, G.

"έπίσταμαι". In: EDNT 2 (1991) 36-37.

316

Bibliography

BOWERS, W .

"Jewish Communities in Spain in the time of Paul the Apostle". In: JTS

26 (1975) 395-402. BRANDIS, C.G.

"Asiarches". In: PW 2 (1896) 1564-1578.

B R A N D O N , S.G.F.

The Fall of Jerusalem and the Christian Church: A study of the effects

of the Jewish overthrow of AD 70 on Christianity. London: SPCK, 1951. BREMMER, J. "Greek Maenadism Reconsidered". In: ZPE 55 (1984) 267-286. BROOTEN, B.

Women Leaders in the Ancient Synagogue. Inscriptional

Evidence and

Background Issues. Brown Judaic Studies, 36. Chico, California: Scholars Press, 1982. BROUGHTON, T.R.S.

"Roman Land-holdings in Asia Minor". In: TAPA 65 (1934) 207-

239. "Roman Asia". In: An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome, Volume 4. Edited by T. Frank. Reprinted from 1938 original. New York: Octagon Books (1975) 498-918. B R O W N , R.

"The Qumran Scrolls and the Johannine Gospel and Epistles". In: The Scrolls

and the New Testament. Edited by K. Stendahl. London: SCM Press (1958) 183207. '"Other Sheep Not of this Fold': The Johannine perspective on Christian diversity in the late first century". In: JBL 97 (1978) 5-22. The Epistles of John. A B 30. New York: Doubleday and Co (1982). and MEIER, J. Antioch and Rome: New Testament cradles of catholic New York: Paulist Press, 1983.

Christianity.

The Churches the Apostles Left Behind. New York: Paulist Press, 1984. B R O W N L E E , W.H.

"John the Baptist in the New Light of Ancient Scrolls". In: The

Scrolls and the New Testament. Edited by K. Stendahl. London: SCM Press (1958) 33-53. BRUCE, F.F.

The Acts of the Apostles. London: Tyndale Press, 1951. Revised Edition,

Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1988.

Bibliography

317

The Spreading Flame: The rise and progress of Christianity from its first beginnings to the conversion of the English. London: Paternoster Press, 1958. "St. John at Ephesus." In: BJRL 60 (1978) 339-361. —

"The Acts of the Apostles Today". In: BJRL 65 (1982-3) 36-56.

BUCKLER, W.H. "Labour Disputes in the Province of Asia". In: Anatolian Studies Presented to Sir William Mitchell Ramsay. Edited by W. H. Buckler and W. M. Calder. Manchester: Manchester University Press (1923) 27-50. BULTMANN, R.

The Second Letter to the Corinthians. Translated by R. A. Harrisville.

Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1985. BÜRCHNER, E. BURFORD, A.

" "Εφεσος". In: PW 5 (1905) 2773-2822. Craftsmen in Greek and Roman Society. New York: Cornell University

Press, 1972. "Crafts and Craftsmen". In: Civilization of the Ancient Mediterranean: Greece and Rome. Edited by M. Grant and R. Kitzinger. 3 volumes. New York: Charles Scribner and Sons, (1988) 2.367-388. BURKE, G. "Walter Bauer and Celsus". In: SecCent 4 (1984) 1-7. BURKERT, W. Greek Religion: Archaic and Classical. Translated by J. Raffan. Oxford: Blackwell, 1985. CADBURY, H. "The Titles of Jesus in Acts". In: F. Foakes-Jackson and K. Lake (eds). Beginnings 5 (1933). Note XXIX, 354-375. CAIRD, G. A Commentary on the Revelation of St. John the Divine. London: A. and C. Black, 1966. Paul's Letters from Prison (Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Philemon) in the Revised Standard Version: Introduction and commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976. CALDER, W.M. "The Epigraphy of the Anatolian Heresies". In: Anatolian Studies Presented to Sir William Mitchell Ramsay. Edited by W.H. Buckler and W.M. Calder. Manchester: Manchester University Press (1923) 59-91.

318

Bibliography

CARR, W.

Angels and Principalities:

The background, meaning and development of the

Pauline phrase hai archai kai hai exousiai. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 42. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. C A R R E Z , M.

"Note sur les événements d'Éphèse et l'appel de Paul à sa citoyenneté

romaine". In: A cause de l'Évangile.

Études sur les Synoptiques et les Actes.

Offertes au P. Jacques Dupont, O.S.B, à l'occasion de son 70 anniversaire. Lectio Divina 123 [Paris] Cerf (1985) 769-777. C A R R I N G T O N , P.

The Early Christian Church. 2 volumes. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1957. C A R R O L L , Κ.

"The Fourth Gospel and the Exclusion of Christians from the Synagogue".

In: BJRL 40 (1958) 19-32. CARTLEDGE, P.

"The Greek Religious Festivals". In: Greek Religion and Society. Edited

by P. Easterling and J. Muir. Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press (1985) 98-127. C A S S I D Y , R.

Society and Politics

in the Acts of the Apostles. Maryknoll, New York:

Orbis Books, 1987. C H A D W I C K , H.

"Authority in the Early Church". In: History and Thought of the Early

Church. London: Variorum Reprints (1982) 3-17. C H A N D L E R , R.

Travels in Asia Minor

1764-1765. Edited and abridged by E. Clay.

London: The Trustees of the British Museum, 1971. CHAPOT, V .

La Province romaine proconsulaire D'Asie. Depuis ses origines jusqu'à la fin

du Haut-empire.

Studia Histórica 35. Rome: "L'Erma" di Bretschneider, 1967

(Originai 1902). CHASE, F.H.

"The Lord's Prayer in the Early Church". In: Texts and

Studies:

Contributions to biblical and patristic literature. Volume 1. Edited by J. Armitage Robinson.

Cambridge:

Cambridge

University

Press,

1891.

Reprint:

Nendeln/Liechtenstein: Kraus Reprint Ltd (1967) 1-179. C H A R L E S W O R T H , J.H.

The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha and the New Testament:

Prolegomena for the study of Christian origins. Cambridge/Melbourne/New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985.

Bibliography CHESTER, A.

319

"Jewish Messianic Expectations and Mediatorial Figures and Pauline

Christology". In: Paulus und das antike Judentum. Edited by M. Hengel and U. Heckel. Tübingen-Durham Symposium im Gedenken an den 50. Todestag Adolf Schlatter (+19. Mai 1938). Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) (1991) 17-89. CLARK, K.W. "The Israel of God." In: Studies in New Testament and Early Christian Literature: Essays in honor of Allen P. Wikgren. Edited by D. Aune. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1972) 161-169. CLARKE, A.

The Holy Bible containing Old and New Testaments: The text carefully

printed from the most correct copies of the present Authorized Translation, including the marginal readings and parallel texts, with a commentary and critical notes; designed as a help to a better understanding of the sacred writings. 2 volumes. London: Thomas Tegg and Son, 1836. CLEMEN, C. "The Sojourn of the Apostle John at Ephesus". In: AJT 9 (1905) 643-676. COBERN, C.

The New Archaeological

Discoveries and their bearing upon the New

Testament and upon the life and times of the primitive church. 2nd edition revised. New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1917. COHEN, K.I. "I. Paul the Benjaminite: Mystery, Motives and Midrash; Π. The Pseudoepistle of Benjaminite Paul". In: Paul the Jew: Jewish/Christian Dialogue. Center for Hermeneutical Studies 60. Twentieth Anniversary Symposium. Berkeley, California (1990) 21-28 COHEN, S.J.D.

"Was Timothy Jewish (Acts 16:1-3)? Patristic Exegesis, Rabbinic law,

and Matrilineal Descent". In: JBL 105 (1986) 251-268. From the Maccabees to the Mishnah. Library of Early Christianity, Volume 7. Edited by W. Meeks. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1987. COLE, D.P. "Corinth and Ephesus: Why did Paul spend half his journeys in these cities?" In: BibRev 4 (1988) 20-30. COLLINS, J.J. Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora. New York: Crossroad, 1983. "A Symbol of Otherness: Circumcision and salvation in the first century". In: J. Neusner and E. Frerichs (eds): T o See Ourselves" (1985) 163-186.

320

Bibliography

COLLINS, R.F. "Glimpses Into Some Local Churches of New Testament Times". In: LTP 42(1986)291-316. COLWELL, E.C. "Popular Reactions Against Christianity in the Roman Empire". In: Environmental Factors in Christian History. Edited by J.T. McNeil, M. Spinka, H.R. Willoughby. New York/London: Kennikat Press (1970) 53-71. Original, 1939. CONYBEARE, W.J. and HOWSON, J.S. Longmans, Green and Co., 1875.

The Life and Epistles of St. Paul. London:

CONZELMANN, H. The History of Primitive Christianity. Translated by J. Steely. London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1973. First Corinthians: A commentary on the first epistle to the Corinthians. Translated by J. W. Leitch. Hermeneia Series. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975. "Die Schule des Paulus". In: Theologia Crucis - Signum Crucis. Festschrift für Erich Dinkier zum 70. Geburtstag. Edited by C. Andresen and G. Klein. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) (1979) 85-96. The Acts of the Apostles. Translated by J. Limberg, A.Kraabel, D. Juel. Edited by E. Epp and C. Matthews. Hermeneia Series. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987. and DIBELIUS, M. The Pastoral Epistles. Edited by H. Koester. Translated by P. Buttolph and A.Yarbro. Hermeneia Series. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1972. COOK, A.B. "The Bee in Greek Mythology". In: JHS 15 (1895) 1-24. —

Zeus: A study in ancient religion. 3 volumes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1914-1940.

COOK, M.J. "The Mission to the Jews in Acts: unraveling Luke's myth of the 'myriads'". In: J.B. Tyson (ed.) Luke-Acts (1988) 102-123. COUNTRYMAN, L. "Welfare in the Churches of Asia Minor under the Early Roman Empire". In: SBL Seminar Papers 16 (1979) 131-146. CRAMER, F. Astrology in Roman Law and Politics. Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society, 1990. Original, 1954.

321

Bibliography CRAMER, J. A.

A Geographical and Historical Description of Asia Minor, Volume 1.

Reprint of Oxford edition, 1832. Amsterdam: A. Hakkert, 1971. CROSS, F.M.

The Ancient Library of Qumran and Modern Biblical Studies. The Haskell

Lectures 1956/57. London: G. Duckworth and Co., 1958. CRUTCHFIELD, L.

"The Apostle John and Asia Minor as a Source of Premillennialism

in the Early Church Fathers". In: JETS 31 (1988) 411-427. CULLMANN, O. The Johannine Circle: Its place in Judaism, among the disciples of Jesus, and in early Christianity. A study in the origin of the Gospel of John. Translated by J. Bowden. London: SCM Press, 1976. CUMONT, F.

The Oriental Religions

in Roman Paganism.

Chicago: Open Court

Publishing Company, 1911. Astrology

and Religion

among the Greeks and Romans. New York: Dover

Publications, 1960. DAHL, N.A.

"Gentiles, Christians, and Israelites in the Epistle to the Ephesians". In: HTR

79(1986)31-39. DANIELOU, J.

The Development of Christian Doctrine Before the Council of Nicaea.

Volume 1 : The Theology

of Jewish

Christianity.

Translated and editedby

J.Baker.London: Longman and Todd, 1964. DASSMANN, E. Der Stachel im Fleisch: Paulus in der frühchristlichen Irenäus. Münster: Aschendorff, 1979.

Literatur bis

DAUBE, D. Ancient Jewish Law: Three inaugural lectures. Lecture 1: "Conversion to Judaism and Early Christianity". Leiden: E.J. Brill (1981) 1-32. DAVIES, S. The Revolt of the Widows: The social world of the Apocryphal Acts. Illinois: Southern Illinois University Press, 1980. DAVIES, W.D. The Gospel and the Land: Early Christianity and Jewish territorial doctrine. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974. "Paul and Jewish Christianity according to Cardinal Danielou: A suggestion". In: Jewish and Pauline Studies. London: SPCK(1984) 164-171.

322

Bibliography

de BOER, M.C.

"Images of Paul in the Post-Apostolic Period". In: CBQ 2 (1980)

359-380. DeBORD, P. Aspects sociaux et économiques de la vie religieuse dans l'Anatolie grécoromaine. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1982. DEISSMANN, A.

Paul: A study in social and religious history. Translated by W.E.

Wilson. New York (1925): Haiper and Row, 1957. "The Excavations at Ephesus". In: BibRev 15 (1930) 332-346. DeLANGE, N. "Jewish Attitudes to the Roman Empire". In: Imperialism in the Ancient World. The Cambridge University Research Seminar in Ancient History. Edited by P. Garnsey and C. Whittaker. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1978) 255281.

DELEBECQUE, E.

"La révolte des orfèvres à Ephèse et ses deux versions". In: RevThom

83 (1983) 419-429. den BOER, W. (ed.) Le Culte des Souverains dans L'Empire Romain. Sept exposés suivis de discussions. Geneva: Vandouvres, 1972. DeSILVA, D.

"The 'Image of the Beast' and the Christians in Asia Minor: Escalation of

sectarian tension in Revelation 13". In: TrinJ 12 (1991) 185-208. DETIENNE, M.

Dionysos Slain. Translated by M. and L. Muellner. Baltimore/London:

Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979. Dionysos at Large. Translated by A. Goldhammer. Massachusetts/London: Harvard University Press, 1989. DILL, S.

Cambridge,

Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius. London: Macmillan and Co., 1911.

DIX, G. Jew and Greek: A study in the primitive church. Westminster: Dacre Press, 1953. DÖRNER, F.K.

"Kleinasien: Herkunftsland orientalischer Gottheiten". In:

Die

orientalischen Religionen im Römerreich. Edited by M. Vermaseren. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1981) 73-95. DONAHUE, P.J.

"Jewish Christianity in the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch". In: VC 32

(1978)81-93.

Bibliography

323

DONELSON, L. "Cult Histories and the Sources of Acts". In: Bib 68 (1987) 1-21. DONFRIED, K. 1974.

The Setting of Second Clement in Early Christianity. Leiden: E J . Brill,

"A Short Note on Romans 16". In: JBL 89 (1970) 441-449. DOWDEN, K. Death and the Maiden: Girls' initiation rites in Greek mythology. London/New York: Routledge, 1989. DUNCAN, G. St Paul's Ephesian Ministry: A reconstruction with special reference to the Ephesian origin of the imprisonment epistles. New York: C. Scribner and Sons, 1930. "Were Paul's Imprisonment Epistles written from Ephesus?" ExT 67 (1955/56) 163166. DUNN, J.G.D. Baptism in the Holy Spirit: A re-examination of the New Testament teaching on the gift of the Spirit in relation to Pentecostalism today. London: SCM Press, 1970. Unity and Diversity in the New Testament: An inquiry into the character of earliest Christianity. London: SCM Press, 1977. "The New Perspective on Paul". In: BJRL 65 (1983) 95-122. "Echoes of Intra-Jewish Polemic in Paul's Letter to the Galatians". In: JBL 112 (1993)459-477. DUNST, G. "Zur samischen Artemis". In: Chiron 2 (1972) 191-200. EHRHARDT, A. "The Acts of the Apostles: Ten lectures. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1969. EHRENBERG, V. and JONES, A.H.M. Documents Illustrating the Reigns of Augustus and Tiberius. Second edition. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1955. EISENMAN, R. Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran: A new hypothesis of Qumran origins. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1983. ELDERKIN, G. "The Bee of Artemis". In: AIP 60 (1939) 203-213.

324

Bibliography

ELLIGER, W.

Ephesos:

Geschichte

einer antiken

Weltstadt.

Stuttgart et al.: W.

Kohlhammer Verlag, 1985. ELLIS, E. "Paul and His Opponents: Trends in the research". In: Christianity, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Cults, Part 1. Edited by J. Neusner. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1975) 264-298. ELLMAN, Y.

"Intermarriage in the United States: A comparative study of Jews and other

ethnic and religious groups". In: JSS 49 (1987) 1-26. EMLYN-JONES, C. The Ionians and Hellenism: A study of the cultural achievement of the early Greek inhabitants of Asia Minor. London/Boston/Henley: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1980. ENGELMANN, H. "Der Berg Pion auf ephesischen Münzen". In: ZPE 67 (1987) 149-150. "Zum Kaiserkult in Ephesos". In: ZPE 97 (1993) 279-289. ERNST, J.

Die Briefe an die Philipper, an Philemon, an die Kolosser, an die Epheser.

Regensburg: F. Pustet, 1974. Johannes der Täufer: Interpretation - Geschichte - Wirkungsgeschichte. Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1989. ESLER, P.

BZNW 53.

Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts: The social and political motivations of

Lucan theology. SNTS Monograph Series 57. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. FALK, Z.W. Introduction to Jewish Law of the Second Commonwealth, Part I. Arbeiten zur Geschichte des Antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums XI. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1972. FARNELL, L.R.

The Cults of the Greek States, Volume 2. Oxford: Clarendon Press,

1896. "Sociological Hypotheses Concerning the Position of Women in Ancient Religion". In: ARW 1904. Volume and pages unknown. FARRAR, F.

The Life and Work of St. Paul. Volume 2. London/Paris/New York: Cassell,

Petter, Galpin and Co. n.d.

Bibliography

325

FAUST, E. Pax Christi et Pax Caesaris: Religionsgeschichtliche, traditionsgeschichtliche und sozialgeschichtliche Studien zum Epheserbrief. NTOA 24. Freiburg (Schweiz) / Göttingen: Universitätsverlag/Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1993. FEARS, J.R. "Rome: The ideology of imperial power". In: Thought 55 (1980) 98-109. FEE, G. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmanns, 1987. 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus. NIBC. MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1988. FELDMAN, L. "Asinius Pollio and His Jewish Interests". In: TAPA 84 (1953) 73-80. "The Omnipresence of the God-fearers". In: BAR 12 (1986) 58-69. FELLMANN, R. "Der Sabazios-Kult". In: Die orientalischen Religionen im Römerreich. Edited by M. Vermaseren. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1981) 316-340. FERGUSON, J. "Philippians, John and the Traditions of Ephesus". In: ExpTim 83 (1971/2) 85-87. FIGUERAS, P. "Epigraphic Evidence for Proselytism in Ancient Judaism". In: Immanuel 25 (1990) 194-206. FILSON, F. A New Testament History. London: SCM Press, 1965. FINEGAN, J. The Archaeology of the New Testament: The Mediterranean world of the early Christian apostles. Boulder, Colarado/London: Westview Press/Croom Helm, 1981. HlZMYER, J. "Jewish Christianity in Acts in Light of the Qumran Scrolls". In: Studies in Luke-Acts, edited by L. Keck and J. Martyn. London: S.P.C.K. (1966) 233-257. The Gospel According to Luke (I-IX). Introduction, translation and notes. Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Co., 1981. "Ά certain Sceva, a Jew, a chief priest' (Acts 19:14)". In: Der Treue Gottes trauen: Beiträge zum Werk des Lukas fir Gerhard Schneider. Edited by C. Bussmann and W, Radi. Herder: Freiburg/Basel/Wien (1992) 299-305. Romans: A new translation with introduction and commentary. AB 33. Doubleday: New York/London et al., 1992.

326

Bibliography

FLEISCHER, R. Artemis von Ephesos und verwandte Kultstatuen aus Anatolien und Syrien. EPRO 35. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1973. "Artemis Ephesia und Aphrodite von Aphrodisias". In: Die

orientalischen

Religionen im Römerreich. Edited by M. Vermaseren. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1981) 298-315. FLUSSER, D. "The Jewish-Christian Schism: Part I". In: Immanuel 16 (1983) 32-49. Part Π, Immanuel 17 (1983) 30-39. FOAKES-JACKSON, F. The Acts of the Apostles. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1931. and LAKE, K. The Beginnings of Christianity, Part I: The Acts of the Apostles. Volume 5: Additional notes to the commentary. Edited by K. Lake and H. Cadbury. London: Macmillan and Co., 1933. FOERSTER, W.

"δαίμων, δαιμόνιοι/'. In: TDNT 2 (1964) 1-20.

FORBES-IRVING, P. Metamorphosis in Greek Myth. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990. FORNBERG, T. The Early Church in a Pluralistic Society. A study of 2 Peter. Coniectanea Biblica 9. Translated by J. Gray. Lund: C.W.K. Gleerup, 1977. FOSS, C. Ephesus after Antiquity: A late antique, Byzantine and Turkish city. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. FREDRIKSEN, P. "Judaism, the Circumcision of the Gentiles, and Apocalyptic Hope: Another look at Galatians 1 and 2". In: JTS 42 (1991) 532-564. FREND, W.H.C. "Early Christianity and Society: A Jewish legacy in the pre-Constantine era". In: HTR 76 (1983) 53-71. Saints and Sinners in the Early Church: Differing and conflicting traditions in the first six centuries. London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1985. FRERICHS, E. and NEUSNER, J. (eds) "To See Ourselves As Others See Us": Christians, Jews, "Others" in late antiquity. California: Scholars Press, 1985. FRIEDLÄNDER, L. Roman Life and Manners Under the Early Empire. Volume 2 translated by J.H. Freese and L.A. Magnus. Volume 4 translated by A.B. Gough. Reprint of London/ New York: Routledge/E.P. Dutton, 1928/1936. New York: Arno Press, 1979.

327

Bibliography FRIESEN, S.

Twice

Neokoros.

Ephesus,

Asia and the Cult of the

Flavian

Imperial Family. Leiden/New York/Köln: E. J. Brill, 1993. FURNEAUX, W.M.

The Acts of the Apostles: A commentary for English readers. Oxford:

Clarendon Press, 1912. FURNISH, V.P.

Second

Corinthians.

Translation

with introduction,

notes

and

commentary. New York: Doubleday and Co., 1984. GAGER, J.

"Religion and Social Class in the Early Roman Empire". In: The

Roman

Empire as the Setting of Primitive Christianity. Edited by S. Benko, J. O'Rourke. London: Oliphants (1971) 99-120. Kingdom and Community: The social world of early Christianity.

New Jersey:

Prentice Hall, 1975. "Jews, Gentiles and Synagogues in the Book of Acts". In: HTR 79 (1986) 91-99. GARRETT, S.

The Demise of the Devil: Magic and the demonic in Luke's

writings.

Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989. GASQUE, W.

A History of the Criticism of the Acts of the Apostles. Beiträge zur

Geschichte der biblischen Exegese, 17. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1975. GASTON, L. "Judaism of the Uncircumcised in Ignatius and Related Writers". In: AntiJudaism in Early Christianity, Volume 2: Separation and polemic. Edited by S.G. Wilson. Canadian Corporation for Studies in Religion. Toronto: W. Laurier University Press (1986) 33-44. Also: "Retrospect" 163-174. GEALY, F.D.

"The First and Second Epistles to Timothy and the Epistle to Titus". In: IB

11 (1955) 343-551. GEERTZ, C. "Religion as a Cultural System". In: Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion. Edited by M. Banton. London: Tavistock Publications (1968) 146. GEORGI, D. The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1987. GERNET, L. The Anthropology of Ancient Greece. Translated by J. Hamilton and B. Nagy. Baltimore/London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1981.

328

Bibliography

GESSEL, W.

"Die Johannestradition auf dem Ayasoluk im Lichte der apokryphen

Johannesakten". In: Lingua Restituía Orientalis: Festgabe für Julius Assfalg. Edited by R. Schulz and M. Görg. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz (1990) 108-113. GILL, D.W.J. "Acts and Roman Religion". In: The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting. Volume 2: The Book of Acts in Its Graeco-Roman Setting. Edited by D.W.J. Gill and C. Gempf. Series Editor, B. Winter. Grand Rapids/Carlisle: Eerdmans/The Paternoster Press (1994) 79-103. GOGUEL, M.

The Birth of Christianity. Translated by H. Snape. London: G. Allen and

Unwin, 1953. GOLDIN, J.

"The Magic of Magic and Superstition". In: Aspects of Religious

Propoganda

in Judaism and Early Christianity. Edited by E. Schüssler Fiorenza. Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press (1976) 115-147. GOLDSTEIN, J. "Jewish Acceptance and Rejection of Hellenism". In: Jewish and Christian Self-definition, Volume 2: Aspects of Judaism in the Greco-Roman period. Edited by E.P. Sanders, A. Baumgarten, A. Mendelson. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981. GOODENOUGH, E.R. "The Menorah among Jews of the Roman World". In: HUCA 23 (1950/51)449-492. Jewish Symbols

in the Greco-Roman

period, Volume 2: The

archaeological

evidence from the Diaspora. Bollingen series 37. New York: Pantheon Books, 1953. and KRAABEL, A.T.

"Paul and the Hellenization of Christianity". In: Religions in

Antiquity: Essays in memory of E.R. Goodenough. Edited by J. Neusner. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1970) 23-68. GOULD, J. "On Making Sense of Greek Religion". In: Greek Religion and Society. Edited by P. Easterling and J. Muir. Cambridge et al: Cambridge University Press (1985) 1-33. GOULDER, M. Luke: A new paradigm. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1989. GRAF, F.

2 volumes. JSNT Supplement Series 20.

"An Oracle against Pestilence from a Western Anatolian Town" In: ZPE 92

(1992) 267-279. GRANT, M. From imperium to autoritas: a historical study of aes coinage in the Roman empire 49 BC - AD 14. Cambridge University Press, 1946 (reprinted 1969).

Bibliography

329

GRANT, R.M. Gods and The One God. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1986. GRÄSSER, E.

"Ta peri tés Basileias (Apg 1,6; 19,8)". In: À cause de l'Évangile.

Études

sur les Synoptiques et les Actes. Offertes au P. Jacques Dupont, O.S.B, à l'occasion de son 70 anniversaire. Lectio Divina 123 [Paris] Cerf (1985) 709-725. GREEN, M. Evangelism in the Early Church. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1970. GREENE, J. Balaam and His Interpreters: A hermeneutical history of the Balaam traditions. Brown Judaic Studies 244. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992. GRITZ, Hodgin S. Paul, Women Teachers, and the Mother Goddess at Ephesus: A study of 1 Timothy 2:9-15 in the Light of the Religious and Cultural Milieu of the First Century. Lanham/NewYork/London: University Press of America, 1991a. —

"The Role of Women in the Church". In: The People of God: Essays on the believers' church. Nashville: Broadman Press (1991b) 299-314.

GRUNDMANN, W.

"Paulus in Ephesus". In: Helikon 4 (1964) 46-82.

GUNTHER, J.J. St Paul's Opponents and Their Background: A study of Apocalyptic and Jewish sectarian teachings. Supplement to Novum Testamentum, 35. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1973. GWYN GRIFFITHS, J. "Xenophon of Ephesus on Isis and Alexandria". In: Hommages à Maarten J Vermaseren, Volume 1. Leiden: E J . Brill (1978) 409-437. HABICHT, C. Gottmenschentum und griechische Städte. Monographien zur klassischen Altertumswissenschaft, 14. München: C.H. Beck Verlag, 1970. "Die augusteische Zeit und das erste Jahrhundert nach Christi Geburt". In: W. den Boer (ed.), Le Culte (1972) 41-99. HADAS, M. Three Greek Romances. Indianapolis: Bobs-Merrill,1953 HADZISTELIOU-PRICE, T. Kourotrophos: Cults and representations of the Greek nursing deities. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1978. HAENCHEN, E. "Judentum und Christentum in der Apostelgeschichte". In: ZNW 54 (1963) 155-187.

330

Bibliography The Acts of the Apostles. Translated by G. Noble, G. Shinn, R. McL Wilson. Oxford: Blackwell, 1971.

HALLIDA Y, W. The Pagan Background of Early Christianity. University Press of Liverpool/Hodder and Stoughton, 1925. HAMMOND-BAMMEL, C.P.

Liverpool/ London:

"Ignatian Problems". In: JTS 33 (1982), 62-97.

HANFMANN, G. From Croesus to Constantine: The cities of western Asia Minor and their arts in Greek and Roman times. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1975. HANN, R. "Judaism and Jewish Christianity in Antioch: Charisma and conflict in the first century". In: JRH 14 (1987) 341-360. HANSON, A.T. The Pastoral Letters. Cambridge Biblical Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1966. HARDING, M.

"On the Historicity of Acts: Comparing Acts 9.23-25 with 2 Corinthians

11.32-33". In: NTS 39 (1993) 518-538. "Acts and the Synagogues". Unpublished paper. Macquarie University, 1994. HARNACK, A. History of Dogma. Volume 1. Translated by N. Buchanan. London: Williams and Norgate, 1905. The Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries. 2 volumes. Translated and edited by J. Moffatt. London: Williams and Norgate, 1904/5. HARRIS, B. "Domitian, the Emperor Cult and Revelation". In: Prudentia 11 (1979) 15-25. HARRIS, H. The Tübingen School. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975. HARRIS, H.A.

Greek Athletics and the Jews. Edited by I.M. Barton and A.J. Brothers.

Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1976. HARRISON, J.E. Epilegomena to the Study of Greek Religion; and Themis: A study of the social origins of Greek religion. New Hyde Park/New York: University Books, 1962. Mythology. New York: Cooper Square Publishers, 1963.

331

Bibliography HARRISON, P.N.

"The Pastoral Epistles and Duncan's Ephesian Theory". In: NTS 2

(1956)250-261. HARVEY, A.E.

"Forty Strokes Save One: Social aspects of Judaizing and apostasy". In:

Alternative Approaches to New Testament Study. Edited by A.E. Harvey. London: SPCK (1985) 79-96. HATCH, E. The Organisation of the Early Christian Churches. London: Rivingtons Press, 1882. HAYMAN, P.

"Monotheism a misused word in Jewish studies?" In: JJS 42 (1991) 1-15.

HEAD, B.V.

"Coinage of Ephesus". In: Νum Chron 1 (1881) 13-23.

Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Ionia. Edited by R.S. Poole. Bologna: Amoldo Forni, 1964. HEDRICK, C. and HODGSON, R. (eds.)

Nag Hammadi,

Gnosticism,

and

Early

Christianity. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1986. HEFELE, C.J. A History of the Christian Councils, from the original documents, to the close of the council ofNiceae AD 325. Translated by W.R. Clark. Edinburgh: T.and T. Clark, 1894. HEILIGENTHAL, R. "Wer waren die 'Nicolaiten'? Ein Beitrag zur Theologiegeschichte des frühen Christentums". In: Z/VW 82 (1991) 13-137. HEJOB, S.K. The Cult of Isis Among Women in the Greco-Roman World. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1975. HEMER, C.J.

The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia in Their Local Setting. JSNT

Supplement Series 11. Sheffield: University of Sheffield, 1986. The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History. Edited by C. Gempf. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1989. HENGEL, M. "Proseuche und Synagoge. Jüdische Gemeinde, Gotteshaus und Gottesdienst in der Diaspora und in Palestina". In: Tradition und Glaube. Das frühe Christentum in seiner Umwelt. Festgabe für Karl Georg Kuhn zum 65. Geburtstag. Edited by G. Jeremias, H. Kuhn, H. Stegemann. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht (1971) 157-184.

332

Bibliography Jews, Greeks and Barbarians: Aspects of the Hellenization of Judaism in the preChristian period. Translated by J. Bowden. London: SCM Press, 1980. Between Jesus and Paul: Studies in the earliest history of Christianity. Translated by J. Bowden. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983. The Johannine Question. Translated by J. Bowden. London: SCM Press, 1989.

HERFORD, R.T. Christianity in Talmud and Midrash. New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1975. Reprinted from London: Williams and Norgate, 1903. HÉRING, J. The First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. Translated by A.W. Heathcote and R.T. Allcock. London: Epworth Press, 1962. HICKLING, C.J.A. "Baptism in the First-Century Churches: A case for caution". In: The Bible in Three Dimensions: Essays in celebration of forty years of Biblical Studies in the University of Sheffield. Edited by D.J.A. Clines, S.E. Fowl and S.E. Porter. JSOT Supplement Series 87. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press (1990) 249-267. HICKS, E.L. "On Some Political Terms Employed in the New Testament". In: CR 1 (1887)4-8,42-46. "Demetrius the Silversmith: An Ephesian study". In: Expositor (4th series) 1 (1890) 401-422. HILGENFELD, A. Die Ketzergeschichte des Urchristentums. Reproduction of 1884 original. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1966. Judentum und Judenchristentum: Eine Nachlese zu der Ketzergeschichte des Urchristentums. Reproduction of 1886 original. Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1966. HOCK, R. "The Workshop as a Social Setting for Paul's Missionary Preaching". In: CBQ 41 (1979) 438-450. The Social Context of Paul's Ministry: Tentmaking and apostleship. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980. HODGSON, R. and HEDRICK, C. (eds.) Nag Hammadi, Gnosticism, and Early Christianity. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1986. HOGARTH, D.G. Excavations at Ephesus: The Archaic Artemisia of Ephesus. Printed by the British Museum. London: Longmans/Oxford University Press, 1908.

333

Bibliography

HÖLBL, G. Zeugnisse ägyptischer Religionsvorstellungen für Ephesus. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1978. HOLL, K.

Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Kirchengeschichte

11: Der Osten. Tübingen: J.C.B.

Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1928. HOLLENBACH, P.

"Social Aspects of John the Baptizer's Preaching Mission in the

Context of Palestinian Judaism". In: ΛΜ?ΗΊΙ.19.1 (1979) 850-875. HOOKER, M.

Continuity and Discontinuity:

Early Christianity in its Jewish

Setting.

London: Epworth Press, 1986. HORBURY, W. "The Jewish Dimension". In: Early Christianity: Origins and evolution to 600 AD. In honor of W.H.C. Frend. Edited by I. Hazlitt. London: SPCK (1991) 4051. HORSLEY, G.H.R.

"The Inscriptions of Ephesos and the New Testament". In: NovT 34

(1992a) 105-168. "The Mysteries of Artemis Ephesia in Pisidia: A new inscribed relief'. In: AS 42 (1992b) 119-150. and BARTON, S.C. "A Hellenistic Cult Group and the New Testament Churches". In: JAC 24 (1981) 7-41. HOWE, E.M. "Interpretations of Paul in the Acts of Paul and Thecla". In: Pauline Studies: Essays presented to F.F. Bruce on his 70th birthday. Edited by D. Hagner and M. Harris. Exeter: Paternoster Press/Eerdmans (1980) 33-49. HOWSON, J.S. and CONYBEARE, W.J. Longmans, Green and Co., 1875.

The Life and Epistles of St. Paul. London:

HUGHES, P.E. Paul's Second Epistle to the Corinthians: The English text with introduction, exposition and notes. Grand Rapids, Minn.: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962. The Book of Revelation: A commentary. Leicester/Grand Rapids: IVP Press/W. Eerdmans, 1990. HUMPHREYS, S.C. "Kinship in Greek Society". In: Anthropology and the Greeks. Edited by S.C. Humphreys. London/Henley/Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul (1978) 193-208.

334

Bibliography

HUNTER, A.M. Gospel and Apostle. London: SCM Press, 1975. HURST, L. "Apollos, Hebrews, and Corinth: Bishop Montefiore's theory examined". In: SJT3S (1985) 505-513. "Apollos". In: ABD 1 (1992) 301. JEFFERSON LOANE, H. Industry and Commerce of the City of Rome 50 BC - 200 AD. New York: Arno Press, 1979 (1938). JERVELL, J. Luke and the People of God: A new look at Luke-Acts. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1972. "Paul in the Acts of the Apostles. Tradition, History, Theology". In: J. Kremer (ed.) Les Actes (1979) 297-306. The Unknown Paul: Essays on Luke-Acts and early Christian history. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1984. "The Church of Jews and God-fearers". In: J.B. Tyson (ed.) Luke-Acts (1988) 11-20. "God's Faithfulness to the Faithless People: Trends in interpretation of Luke-Acts". In: WW 12 (1992) 29-36. JESSEN, ?

"Ephesia". In: PW 2 (1905) 2753-2771.

JEWETT, R. "Paul, Phoebe, and the Spanish Mission". In: The Social World of Formative Christianity and Judaism: Essays in tribute to Howard Clark Kee. Edited by J. Neusner, E. Frerichs, P. Borgen, R. Horsley. Philadelphia: Fortress Press (1988) 142-161. JOHNSON, L.T. "The New Testament's Anti-Jewish Slander and the Conventions of Ancient Polemic". In: JBL 108 (1989) 419-441. The Acts of the Apostles. Sacra Pagina series 5. Collegeville, Minn.: A Michael Glazier Book, Liturgical Press, 1992. JOHNSON, S.E. "Unsolved Questions About Early Christianity in Anatolia". In: Studies in New Testament and Early Christian Literature : Essays in honor of Allen P. Wikgren. Edited by D. Aune. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1972) 181-193.

335

Bibliography "Asia Minor and Early Christianity". In: Christianity, Judaism and

Greco-Roman

Cults, Part 2. Edited by J. Neusner. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1975) 77-145. "The Apostle Paul and the Riot in Ephesus". In: LTQ 14 (1979) 79-88. —

"Parallels between the Letters of Ignatius and the Johannine Epistles". In: Perspectives

on Language and Text: Essays and poems in honor of Francis I.

Andersen's 60th birthday, July 28 1985. Edited by E. Conrad and E. Newing. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns (1987) 327-338. JONES, A .

Essenes: The Elect of Israel and the Priests of Artemis. Lanham: University

Press of America, 1985. JONES, D.L.

"Christianity and the Roman Imperial Cult". In: ANRW

II.23.2 (1980)

1023-1054. JUDGE, E.

"The Teacher as Moral Exampler in Paul and in the Inscriptions of Ephesus".

In: In the Fullness of Time: Biblical Robinson.

studies in honor of Archbishop

Donald

Edited by D. Peterson and J. Pryor. Lancer Books. Homebush West:

Anzea Publishers (1992) 185-201. —

"Judaism and the rise of Christianity: A Roman perspective". In: AJJS 7 (1993) 8298.

KAISER, C.

"The 'Rebaptism' of the Ephesian Twelve: Exegetical study on Acts 19:1-7".

In: RR 31 (1977) 57-61. K A M P E N , J.

" A Reconsideration of the Name 'Essene' in Greco-Jewish Literature in

Light of Recent Perceptions of the Qumran Sect". In: HLJCA 57 (1986) 61-81. K A N T , L.

"Jewish Inscriptions in Greek and Latin". In: ANRW Π.20.2 (1987) 671-713.

KARRIS, J. "The Background and Significance of the Polemic of the Pastoral Epistles". In: JBL 92 (1973) 549-564. KARWIESE, S. K Ä S E M A N N , E.

"Ephesos". In: PW Supplementband 12 (1970) 297-363. "The Disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus". In: Essays on New

Testament Themes. Translated by W.J. Montague. Philadelphia: Fortress Press (1982) 136-148.

336

Bibliography

KASHER, A .

The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt: The struggle for equal rights.

Hebrew original 1978. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) 1985. K A T Z , S.T.

"Issues in the Separation of Judaism and Christianity after 70 CE: A

reconsideration". In: JBL 103 (1984) 43-76. K E A R S L E Y , R.

"Women in Public Life in the Roman East: Iunia Theodora, Claudia

Metrodora and Phoibe, Benefactress of Paul". In: AncSoc 15 (1985) 124-137. "The Mysteries of Artemis at Ephesus". In: New Documents Illustrating Christianity.

Early

Volume 6. Edited by S. Llewelyn with the collaboration of R.

Kearsley. Macquarie University: The Ancient History Documentary Research Centre (1992) 196-202. "Ephesus: Neokoros Christianity.

of Artemis". In: New

Documents

Illustrating

Early

Volume 6. Edited by S. Llewelyn with the collaboration of R.

Kearsley. Macquarie University: The Ancient History Documentary Research Centre (1992) 203-206. "Acts 14:13: The Temple Just Outside the City". In: New Documents

Illustrating

Early Christianity. Volume 6. Edited by S. Llewelyn with the collaboration of R. Kearsley. Macquarie University: The Ancient History Documentary Research Centre (1992) 209-210. KEE, H.C.

"The Jews in Acts". In: J. Overman and R. McLennan, (eds) Diaspora Jews and

Judaism (1992) 183-195. KEIL, J.

"Zum Martyrium des heiligen Timotheus in Ephesus". In: ÖJh 29 (1935) 82-92.

K E L L Y , J.N.D.

A Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles: I Timothy, II Timothy, Titus.

London: A . and C. Black, 1963. KERN, O. Die Religionen

der Griechen.

3 volumes. Berlin: Weidmannsche Verlags-

buchhandlung, 1938/1963. KIDD, B.J.

A History of the Church to AD 461. Volume 1: To AD 313. Oxford:

Clarendon Press, 1922. K I L P A T R I C K , G. "Apollos - Apelles". In: JBL 89 (1970) 77.

337

Bibliography KIMELMAN, R.

"Birkat ha Minim and the Lack of Evidence for an Anti-Christian Jewish

Prayer in Late Antiquity". In: Jewish and Christian Self-definition, Aspects of Judaism

in the Greco-Roman

Volume 2:

period. Edited by E.P. Sanders, A.

Baumgarten, A. Mendelson. Philadelphia: Fortress Press (1981) 226-244. KING, H.

"Bound to Bleed: Artemis and Greek women". In: Images of Women in

Antiquity. Edited by A. Cameron and A. Kuhrt. London: Croom Helm (1983) 109127. KISTEMAKER, S.

New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Acts of the Apostles.

Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1990. KITTEL, G. "Die γενεαλογία der Pastoralbriefe". In: ZNW 20 (1922) 49-69. KLIJN, A.F.J. "Jewish Christianity in Egypt". In: The Roots of Egyptian

Christianity.

Edited by B. Pearson and J. Goehring. Philadelphia: Fortress Press (1986) 161-175. and REININK, G.J. Patristic Evidence for Jewish-Christian Novum Testamentum 36. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1973.

Sects. Supplement to

KNIBBE, D. " "Εφεσος". In: PW Supplement 12 (1970) 248-297. "Ephesos - nicht nur die Stadt der Artemis". In: Studien zur Religion und Kultur Kleinasiens, Volume 2. Festschrift für F.K. Dörner zum 65. Geburtstag am 28. Februar 1976. Edited by S. Sahin, E. Schwertheim, J. Wagner. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1978)489-503. "Der Staatsmarkt. Die Inschriften des Prytaneions. Die Kureteninschriften und sonstige religiöse Texte". In: FiE IX/1/1. Wien: Östereichisches Archäologisches Institut, 1981. and ALZINGER, W. "Ephesos vom Beginn der römischen Herrschaft in Kleinasien bis zum Ende der Principatszeit". In: ANRW Π.7.2 (1980) 748-830. KNOWLING, R.

"The Acts of the Apostles". In: The Expositor's

Greek

Testament,

Volume 2. Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmanns. Reprinted 1974. KNOX, J. Chapters in a Life of Paul. Revised and edited by D.R.A. Hare. London: SCM Press, 1987. KNOX, R. The Acts of the Apostles; St Paul's Letters to the Churches. A New Testament Commentary for English Readers, Volume 2. London: Burns, Oates and Washbourne, 1954.

338

Bibliography

KNOX, W. St Paul and the Church of the Gentiles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1961. KOESTER, Η. "ΓΝΩΜΑΙ ΔΙ ΑΦΟΡΟΙ : The origin and nature of diversification in the history of early Christianity". In: HTR 58 (1965) 279-318. "New Testament Introduction: A critique of a discipline". In: Christianity, Judaism, and other Greco-Roman Cults, Part 1. Edited by J. Neusner. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1975) 1-20. Introduction to the New Testament. Volume 2: History and Literature of Early Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, (1980) 1982. "Gnostic Sayings and Controversy Traditions in John 8:12-59". In: Nag Hammadi, Gnosticism, and Early Christianity. Edited by C. Hedrick and R. Hodgson Jr. (1986) 97-110. KOHN, R. "Secular Jewish Identity and Hebrew Christianity". In: Menorah (1988) 22-36. KOONCE, Κ. "ΑΓΑΛΜΑ and EI ΚΩΝ". In: AJPh 109 (1988) 108-110. KOSMALA, H. Hebräer - Essener - Christen: Studien zur Vorgeschichte der frühchristlichen Verkündigung. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1959. KRAABEL, A.T.

""Υψιστος- and the Synagogue at Sardis". In: GRBS 10 (1969) 81-93.

"The Diaspora Synagogue: Archaeological and epigraphic evidence since Sukenik". In: ANRW Π.19.1 (1979) 477-510. "The Disappearance of the God-fearers". In: Numen 28 (1981) 113-126. "The Roman Diaspora: Six questionable assumptions". In: JJS 33 (1982) 445-464. "Impact of the Discovery of the Sardis Synagogue". In: Sardis from Prehistoric to Roman Times: Results of the archaeological exploration of Sardis 1958-1975. Edited by G.M.A. Hanfmann. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (1983) 178-190, 284-285. "Synagoga caeca: Systematic Distortion in Gentile Interpretations of Evidence for Judaism in the Early Christian Period". In: J. Neusner and E. Frerichs (eds) To See Ourselves, (1985) 219-246.

339

Bibliography

"Unity and Diversity among Diaspora Synagogues". In: The Synagogue in Late Antiquity.

Edited by L.I. Levine. Philadelphia: American Schools of Oriental

Research (1987) 49-60. "The God-fearers Meet the Beloved Disciple". In: The Future of Early Christianity: Essays in honor of Helmut Koester. Edited by B. Pearson, G. Nickelsburg and N. Peterson. Minnepolis: Fortress Press (1991) 276-284. and GOODENOUGH, E.R. Religions

in Antiquity:

"Paul and the Hellenization of Christianity." In:

essays in memory of E.R. Goodenough.

Edited by J.

Neusner. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1970) 23-68. and MYERS, E. "Archaeology, Iconography, and Non-literary Remains". In: Early Judaism and Its Modern Interpreters. Edited by R. Kraft and G. Nickelsburg. Society of Biblical Literature Centenary Publications. Atlanta: Scholars Press (1986) 175210. KRAEMER, R.

"Ecstasy and Possession: The attraction of women to the cult of

Dionysus". In: HTR 72 (1979) 55-80. "Hellenistic Jewish Women: The epigraphical evidence". In: SBL 1986 Seminar Papers. Edited by K.H. Richards. Atlanta: Scholars Press (1986) 183-200. Maenads, Martyrs, Matrons, Monastics: A sourcebook on women's religions in the Greco-Roman world. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988. "On the Meaning of the Term 'Jew' in Greco-Roman Inscriptions". In: HTR 82 (1989) 35-53. KRAFT, R. "The Development of the Concept of 'Orthodoxy' in Early Christianity". In: Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation. Edited by G. Hawthorne. Grand Rapids: W. Eerdmanns (1975) 47-59. "The Multiform Jewish Heritage of Early Christianity". In: Christianity,

Judaism

and Other Greco-Roman Cults: Studies for M. Smith at sixty, Part 3: Judaism before 70 Edited by J. Neusner. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1975) 175-199. KRAUSS, S. "Ephesus". In: The Jewish Encyclopedia 5 (1903) 185. KREMER, J. (ed.) Les Actes des Apôtres: Traditions, rédaction, théologie. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 48. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1979.

340

Bibliography

KROEGER, C. "1 Timothy 2:12 - a classicist's view". In: Women, Authority and the Bible. Edited by A. Mickelsen. Illinois:InterVarsity Press (1984) 225-244. and KROEGER, R.C. / Suffer Not A Woman: Rethinking 1 Timothy 2:11-15 in light of ancient evidence. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1992. KÜMMEL, W.G. Introduction to the New Testament. Translated by A.J. Mattili jr. London: SCM Press, 1966. KUENZL, H. "Das Judentum". In: Die orientalischen Religionen im Römereich. Edited by M. Vermaseren. Leiden: EJ. Brill (1981) 459-484. KUHNERT,?

"Έφέσια γράμματα". In: PW 5 (1905) 2771-2773.

LÄHNEMANN, J. "Die Sieben Sendschriften der Johannes-Apokalypse". In: Studien zur Religion und Kultur Kleinasiens, Volume 2. Edited by S. Sahin, E. Schwertheim, J. Wagner. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1978) 516-539. LAKE, K. Landmarks in the History of Early Christianity. London: Macmillan and Co., 1920. "The Twelve and the Apostles". In: F. Foakes-Jackson and K. Lake (eds) Beginnings 5 (1933) Note VI, 37-59. "Proselytes and God-fearers". In: F. Foakes-Jackson and K. Lake (eds) Beginnings 5 (1933) Note VIH, 74-96. "The Apostolic Council of Jerusalem". In: F. Foakes-Jackson and K. Lake (eds) Beginnings 5 (1933) Note XVI, 195-212. LAKE, K. and CADBURY, H. The Acts of the Apostles. Translation and Commentary. Volume 4, Part I in Foakes-Jackson and Lake, Beginnings. London: Macmillan and Co., 1933. LAMBRECHT, J. "Paul's Farewell Address at Miletus (Acts 20,17-38)". In: J. Kremer (ed.), Les Actes {1979)307-337. LAMPE, G.W.H. "The Holy Spirit in the Writings of St. Luke". In: Studies in the Gospels: Essays in memory ofR.H. Lightfoot. Oxford: Blackwell (1957) 159-200.

Bibliography

341

'"Grievous Wolves'(Acts 20:29)". In: Christ and Spirit in the New Testament. In honor of C.D.F. Moule. Edited by B. Lindars and S. Smalley. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1973) 253-268. LAMPE, P. Die stadtrömischen Christen in den ersten beiden Jahrhunderten: Untersuchungen zur Sozialgeschichte. WUNT, 2. Reihe, 18. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1989. "Acta 19 im Spiegel der ephesischen Inschriften". In: BZ 36 (1992) 59-76. LANE FOX, R. Pagans and Christians: In the Mediterranean world from the second century AD to the conversion of Constantine. London: Penguin, 1986. LANGMANN, G.

"Ein Zauberamulett aus Ephesos". In: Antike Welt 9 (1978) 60-61.

LARSSON, E. "Die Hellenisten und die Urgemeinde". In: NTS 33 (1987) 205-225. LATOURETTE, K. A History of the Expansion of Christianity. Volume 1: The First Five Centuries. London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1938. LAYTON, B. "The Riddle of the Thunder [NHC VI,2]: The function of paradox in a Gnostic text from Nag Hammadi". In: Nag Hammadi, C. Hedrick and R. Hodgson (eds), (1984) 37-54. LECHLER, G.

The Acts of the Apostles: An exegetical and doctrinal commentary

with

homiletical additions by C. Gerok. Translated by C. Schaeffer. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1872. LEE, J.Y. "Interpreting the Demonic Powers in Pauline Thought". In: NovT 12 (1970) 5469. LEFKOWITZ, M. Women in Greek Myth. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986. LEGGE, F. Forerunners and Rivals of Christianity: Being studies in religious history from 330 BC to 330 AD. 2 volumes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1915. LEMCIO, E. "Ephesus and the New Testament Canon". In: BJRL 69 (1986) 210-234. LEON, H. The Jews of Ancient Rome. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1960.

342

Bibliography

LETHARB Y, W. "The Sculptures of the Later Temple of Artemis at Ephesus". In: JHS 33 (1913) 87-96. "Further Notes on the Sculptures of the Later Temple of Artemis at Ephesus". In: JHS 34 (1914) 76-88. "Another Note on the Sculptures of the Later Temple of Artemis at Ephesus". In: JHS 36 (1916) 25-35. "The Earlier Temple of Artemis at Ephesus". In: JHS 37 (1917) 1-16. LEVI-STRAUSS, C. Myth and Meaning. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1978. LEVICK, B. "Domitian and the Provinces". In: Latomus 41 (1982) 50-73. LEVIN, S. "St. Paul's Ideology for the Urbanised Roman Empire". In: CTM 39 (1968) 607-611. LEWIS, N. Greek Historical Documents: The Roman Principóte 27 BC - 285 AD. Toronto: A.M. Hakkert, 1974. LICHT, H. Sexual Life in Ancient Greece. Translated by J. Freese; edited by L. Dawson. Reprint of 1953 edition published by Barnes and Noble, New York. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1975. LICHTENBERGER, H. "Täufergemeinden und frühchristliche Täuferpolemik im letzten Drittel des 1. Jahrhunderts". In: ZThK 84 (1987) 36-57. LiDONNICI, L.R. "The Images of Artemis Ephesia and Greco-Roman Worship: A reconsideration". In: HTR 85 (1992) 389-416. LIECHTENHAN, R. "Paulus als Judenmissionar". In: Judaica 2 (1946) 56-70. LIETZMANN, H. The Beginnings of the Christian Church. Translated by B.L. Woolf. London: Lutterworth Press, 1953. A History of the Early Church. 2 volumes. Translated by B.L. Woolf. London: Lutterworth Press, 1963. LIGHTFOOT, J.B. St Paul's Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon. Revised text. London: Macmillan and Co., 1904 (original 1879). Reprinted. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1959.

343

Bibliography LIGHTSTONE, J.

The Commerce of the Sacred: Mediation of the Divine among Jews in

the Greco-Roman

Diaspora. Brown Judaic Studies 59. Chico, C A : Scholars Press,

1984. "Magicians, Holy Men and Rabbis: Patterns of the sacred in Late Antiquity Judaism". In: Approaches to Ancient Judaism. Volume 5: Studies in Judaism and its Context. Edited by W.S. Green. Atlanta: Scholars Press (1985) 133-

Greco-Roman 148. —

"Christian anti-Judaism in its Judaic Mirror: The Judaic context of early Christianity revised". In: Studies in Christianity and Judaism No 2: Anti-Judaism in early Christianity. Volume 2: Separation and Polemic. Edited by S.G. Wilson. Toronto: W . Laurier University Press (1986) 103-132.

LINDEMANN, Α.

Paulus im ältesten Christentum:

Das Bild des Apostels und die

Rezeption der paulinischen Theologie in der frühchristlichen Literatur bis Marcion. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1979. "Paul in the Writings of the Apostolic Fathers". In: Babcock (ed.) Legacies (1990) 25-45. LOCK, W.

A Critical

and Exegetical

Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles (I and ¡I

Timothy and Titus). The International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: Τ and Τ Clark, 1924. L U E D E M A N N , G.

Paul: Apostle to the Gentiles: Studies in chronology. Translated by F.

Stanley Jones. London: SCM Press, 1984. "Acts of the Apostles as an Historical Source". In: The Social World of Formative Christianity and Judaism: Essays in tribute to Howard Clark Kee. Edited by J. Neusner, P. Borgen, E. Frerichs, and R. Horsley. Philadelphia: Fortress Press (1988) 109-125. —

Opposition

to Paul in Jewish Christianity. Translated by M. Eugene Boring.

Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989. M A C D O N A L D , D.R.

" A Conjectural Emendation of 1 Corinthians 15:31-32 or the case of

the misplaced lion fight". In: HTR 73 (1980) 265-376. The Legend and the Apostle: The battle for Paul in story and canon. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1983.

344

Bibliography

MACDONALD, M.

The Pauline Churches: A sociohistorical

in the Pauline

and deutero-pauline

writings.

study of

institutionalization

SNTS Monograph Series 60.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. "Early Christian women married to unbelievers". In: Studies in Religieuses

MACGREGOR, G.H.C. MACLAREN, A.

Religion/Sciences

19 (1990) 221-234. "The Acts of the Apostles". In: IB 9 (1954) 3-352.

St. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians.

London: Hodder and Stoughton,

1909. MACLENNAN, R. Early Christian texts on Jews and Judaism. Brown Judaic Studies 194. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990. MACMULLEN, R. Paganism in the Roman Empire. New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 1981. Christianizing

the Roman Empire (AD 100-400). New Haven: Yale University

Press, 1984. MACRO, A.

"The Cities of Asia Minor Under the Roman Imperium". In: ANRW

Π.7.2

(1980) 658-697. MAGIE, D.

Roman Rule in Asia Minor. 2 volumes. Princeton: Princeton University

Press, 1950. MALHERBE, A.

Social Aspects of Early Christianity.

Baton Rouge/ London: Louisiana

State University Press, 1977. Paul and the Popular Philosophers. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989. MALINA, Β. "Jewish Christianity or Christian Judaism: Towards a hypothetical definition". In: JSJ 7 (1976) 46-57. The New Testament

World: Insights from cultural anthropology.

London: SCM

Press/Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1981. "'Religion' in the World of Paul". In: BTB 16 (1986) 92-101. MARCUS, J. 67-81.

"The Circumcision and the Uncircumcision in Rome". In: NTS 35 (1989)

345

Bibliography MARKUS, R.A.

"The Problem of Self-Definition: From sect to church". In: Jewish and

Christian Self-Definition. Volume 1: The Shaping of Christianity in the Second and Third Century. Edited by E.P. Sanders. Philadelphia: Fortress Press (1980) 1-15. MARMORSTEIN, A.

"Judaism and Christianity in the Middle of the Third Century". In:

HUCA 10 (1935) 223-263. MARSHALL, I.H.

The Acts of the Apostles: An introduction and commentary. Leicester:

InterVarsity Press, 1980. MARTIN, L.

"The Pagan Religious Background". In: Early Christianity:

Origins and

evolution to AD 600. In honor of W.H.C. Frend. London: SPCK (1991) 52-64. MARTYN, J.L.

"Glimpses into the History of the Johannine Community". In: L'Évangile

de Jean: sources, rédaction, théologie. Edited by M. de Jonge. Leuven: Leuven University Press (1977) 149-176. The Gospel of John in Christian History: Essays for interpreters. New York: Paulist Press, 1978. History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel. Second edition, revised and enlarged. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1979. "Listening to John and Paul on the Subject of Gospel and Scripture". In: WW 12 (1992)68-81. MASSYNGBERD-FORD, J.

"Was Montanism a Jewish-Christian Heresy?" In: JEH 17

(1966) 145-158. Revelation:

Introduction,

translation

and commentary.

AB 38. New York:

Doubleday and Co, 1975. MASTIN, B.A. "Scaeva The High Priest". In: JTS 27 (1976) 405-412. McCASLAND, S.V.

"The Way". In: JBL 77 (1958) 222-230.

McCOWN, C. "The Ephesia Grammata in Popular Belief'. In: TAPA 54 (1923) 128-140. McCREADY, W. O. "Johannine Self-understanding and the synagogue episode of John 9". In: Self-definition and Self-discovery in Early Christianity. Edited by D. Hawkin and T. Robinson. Lewiston: Edward Mellen Press (1990) 147-166.

346

Bibliography

McELENEY, N.J.

"Orthodoxy in Judaism of the First Christian Century". In: JSJ 4 (1975)

19-42. MCGIFFERT, A.C.

A History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age. Edinburgh: Τ and T.

Clark. Reprint 1951. MEEKS, W.

"In One Body: The unity of humankind in Colossians and Ephesians". In: J.

Jervell and W. Meeks (eds), God's Christ and His People.Studies in honor of Nils Alstrup Dahl. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget (1977) 209-221. The First Urban Christians: The social world of the Apostle Paul. New York: Yale University Press, 1983. and W I L K I N , R.

Jews and Christians in Antioch: In the first four centuries of the

Common Era. Montana: Scholars Press, 1978. "Breaking Away: Three New Testament pictures of Christianity's separation from the Jewish communities". In: J. Neusner and E.S. Frerichs (eds) "To See Ourselves" (1985) 93-115. M E L L I N K , M.

"Archaeology in Asia Minor". In: AJA 86 (1982) 557-576.

M E L L O R , R.

ΘΕΑ

ΡΩΜΑ:

The worship of the goddess Roma in the Greek world.

Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1975. "The Local Character of Roman Imperial Religion". In: Athenaeum 80 (1992) 385400. MENZIES, R.P.

The Development of Early Christian Pneumatology with special reference

to Luke-Acts. JSONT Supplement Series 54. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991. M E R K E L B A C H , R.

"The Girl in the Rosebush: A Turkish tale and its roots in ancient

ritual". In: HSCP 82 (1978) 1-16. "Die Siklianoi bei Ephesos". In: ZPE 32 (1978) 286. "Die ephesischen Dionysosmysten vor der Stadt". In: ZPE 36 (1979) 151-156. —

Die Hirten des Dionysos: Die Dionysos-Mysterien der römischen Kaiserzeit und der bukolische Roman des Longus. Stuttgart: B. G. Teubner, 1988.

347

Bibliography

MEYER, H.A.W. Kritisch-exegetisches Handbuch über die Apostel-geschichte. 2nd edition. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1854. MICHAELIS, W.

"κοσμοκράτωρ". In: TDNT 3 (1965) 913-914.

"ή δδό?". In: TDNT 5 (1967) 42-96. MICHEL, H.-J.

Die Abschiedsrede

des Paulus

an die Kirche,

Apg

20,17-38:

Motivgeschichte und theologische Bedeutung. München: Kösel Verlag, 1973. MILLAR, F.

"The Imperial Cult and the Persecutions". In: W. den Boer (ed.) Le Culte

(1972) 145-175. -—

The Emperor in the Roman World (31 BC - AD 337). London: Duckworth Press, 1977.

MILLIGAN, G. and MOULTON, J.H. The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament: Illustrated from the papyri and other non-literary sources.

London: Hodder and Stoughton,

1952. MILLS, H. "Greek Clothing Regulations: Sacred and profane?" In: ZPE 55 (1984) 255265. MILTNER, F. Ephesos: Stadt der Artemis und des Johannes. Vienna: F. Deuticke Verlag, 1958. MITSOPOLOU-LEON, V. "Ephesos". In: The Princeton Encyclopedia of Classical Sites. Edited by R. Stillwell. Princeton: Princeton University Press (1976) 306-310. MITTON, C.L.

The Epistle to the Ephesians: Its authorship, origin and purpose. Oxford:

Clarendon Press, 1951. MOFFATT, J. The Revelation of St. John the Divine. The Expositor's Greek Testament, Volume 5. Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmanns. Reprint 1974. MOLTHAGEN, J. "Die erste Konflikte der Christen in der griechisch-römischen Welt". In: Historia 40 (1991) 42-76. MOMIGLIANO, A. "How Roman Emperors Became Gods". In: AmSchol 55 (1986) 181193.

348

Bibliography

MOORE, G.F. Judaism in the First centuries of the Christian Era: The age of the Tannaim. 2 volumes. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1927. MOULTON, J.H. and MILLIGAN, G. The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament: Illustrated from the papyri and other non-literary sources. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1952. MUIR, J. "Religion and the New Education: The challenge of the Sophists". In: Greek Religion and Society. Edited by P. Easterling and J. Muir. Cambridge et al : Cambridge University Press (1985) 191-218. MÜLLER, U.B. Zur frühchristlichen Theologiegeschichte: Judenchristentum und Paulinismus in Kleinasien an der Wende vom ersten zum zweiten Jahrhundert n.Chr. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus G.Mohn, 1976. MUNCK, J. Paul and the Salvation of Mankind. Translated by F. Clarke. Richmond: John Knox Press, 1959. "Primitive Jewish Christianity and Later Jewish Christianity: Continuation or rupture?" In: Aspects du Judeo-Christianisme. Colloque de Strasbourg 23-25 avril 1964. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France (1965) 77-93. The Acts of the Apostles. Revised by W. Albright and C.S. Mann. AB 31. New York: Doubleday and Co., 1967. MURPHY O'CONNOR, J. "Truth: Paul and Qumran". In: Paul and Qumran: Studies in New Testament Exegesis. Edited by J. Murphy-O'Connor. London/Chicago: G. Chapman (1968) 179-230. St. Paul's Corinth: Texts and archaeology. Wilmington, Delaware: Michael Glazier, 1983. "Pauline Studies". In: RB 95 (1988) 458-465. —

The Theology of the Second Letter to the Corinthians. Cambridge/New York et al. Cambridge University Press, 1991.

MURRAY, O. "Cities of Reason". In: The Greek City: From Homer to Alexander. Edited by O. Murray and S. Price. Oxford: Clarendon Press (1990) 1-25. MURRAY, R.

"Jews, Hebrews and Christians: Some needed distinctions". In: NovT 24

(1982) 194-208.

349

Bibliography MUSSIES, G.

"Pagans, Jews, and Christians at Ephesus". In: Studies in the Hellenistic

Background of the New Testament. Edited by P.W. van der Horst and G. Mussies. Utrecht (1990) 177-194. MUSSNER, F.

"Epheserbrief. In TRE 9 (1982) 743-753.

NEANDER, A.

General History of the Christian Religion and Church. Volume 2.

Translated by J. Torrey. 2nd revised edition. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1851. NEUSNER, J.

"The Fellowship ( m i n ) in the Second Jewish Commonwealth". In: HTR

53 (1960) 125-142. "Sander's Paul and the Jewish People". In: JQR 74 ( 1983/4) 416-423. and FRERICHS, E. (eds) "To See Ourselves As Others See Us": Christians, Jews, "Others" in late antiquity. Chico, C A : Scholars Press, 1985. N E W , S.

"The Name, Baptism, and the Laying on of Hands". In: F. Foakes-Jackson and K.

Lake (eds) Beginnings 5 (1933) Note IX, 121-140. NICKELSBURG, G.

"Revealed Wisdom as a Criterion for Inclusion and Exclusion: From

Jewish sectarianism to Early Christianity". In: J. Neusner and E. Frerichs (eds) "To See Ourselves" (1985) 73-91. N I L S S O N , M.P.

Cults, Myths, Oracles,

and Politics

in Ancient

Greece:

With two

appendices: The Ionian phylae, the phratries. Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1951. Greek Folk Religion. Gloucester/Massachusetts: Peter Smith, 1971. A History of Greek Religion. Translated by F. Fielden. Connecticut: Greenwood Press Publishers, Reprint of 1949 2nd edition (Original 1925), 1980. N O C K , A.D.

"Studies in the Greco-Roman Beliefs of the Empire". In: Essays on Religion

and the Ancient World Edited by Z. Stewart. Oxford: Clarendon Press (1972) 33-48. [Originally in: JHS 45 (1925) 84-101], "Early Gentile Christianity and its Hellenistic Background". In: Essays on Religion and the Ancient World. Edited by Z. Stewart. Oxford: Clarendon Press (1972) 49133. [Originally in: Essays on the Trinity and the Incarnation (1928) 51-186. Edited by A.I.J. Rawlinson.]

350 —

Bibliography "Religious Developments from the Close of the Republic to the Death of Nero". In: CAH 10(1952) 465-511.

NOLLAND, J. "Uncircumcised Proselytes?" In: JSJ 12 (1981) 173-194. NORRIS, F.W. "Asia Minor before Ignatius: Walter Bauer reconsidered". In: Studia Evangelica, Volume 7. Papers presented to the 5th International Congress on Biblical Studies. Oxford, 1973. Edited by E.A. Livingstone. Berlin: AkademieVerlag (1982) 365-378. '"Christians only, but not the only Christians'(Acts 19:1-7)". In: ResQ 28 (1985/6) 97-105. OEPKE, Α.

"βάπτω, βαπτίζω". In: TDNT 1 (1964) 529-545.

O'FLAHERTY, W.

"Dionysus and Siva: Parallel patterns in two pairs of myths". In: HR

20(1980)81-111. OLSHAUSEN, H. Biblical Commentary on St. Paul's First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians. Translated by J. Cox. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1851. OKURE, T. The Johannine Approach to Mission: A contextual study of John WUNT 2.31. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1988.

4:1-42.

OLIVER, J. The Sacred Gerusia. Reprint of Hesperia Supplement VI (1941). Amsterdam: Swets and Zeitlinger, 1975. OLLROG, W.-H. Paulus und seine Mitarbeiter: Untersuchungen zur Theorie und Praxis der paulinischen Mission. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1979. OLSSON, B. and HARTMAN, L. Aspects on the Johannine Literature: Papers presented at a conference of Scandinavian New Testament exegetes at Uppsala, June 16-19, 1986. Coniectanea Biblica, New Testament Series 18. Almqvist and Wiksell International, 1987. OLSSON, B.

"The History of the Johannine Movement". In: Olsson and Hartmann (eds)

Aspects (1987) 27-43. ORLOFF, A.

Carnival, Myth and Cult. Worgl, Austria: Perlinger, 1981.

OSBORNE, R. "Paul and the Wild Beasts". In: JBL 85 (1966) 225-230.

351

Bibliography OSTER, R.

"The Ephesian Artemis as an Opponent of Early Christianity". In: JAC 19

(1976) 24-44. —

"Numismatic Windows into the Social World of Early Christianity:

A

methodological inquiry". In: JBL 101 (1982a) 195-223. Christianity and Emperor Veneration in Ephesus: Iconography of a conflict". In: ResQ (1982b) 143-149. "Acts 19: 23-41 and an Ephesian Inscription". In: HTR 77 (1984) 233-237. A

Bibliography

of

Ancient

Ephesus.

ATLA

Bibliography

Series

19.

Metuchen/London: The American Theological Library Association/The Scarecrow Press, 1987. "Holy Days in Honor of Artemis". In: New Documents

Illustrating

Early

Christianity: A review of the Greek inscriptions and papyri published in 1979. Edited by G. Horsley. Sydney: The Ancient History Documentary Research Centre, Macquarie University (1987) 74-82. —

"Ephesus as a Religious Center under the Principate, I. Paganism before Constantine". In: ANRW

II.18.3 (1990) 1661-1728.

"Ephesus". In: ABD 2 (1992) 542-549. —

"Use, Misuse and Neglect of Archaeological Evidence in Some Modern Works on 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 7,1-5; 8,10; 11,2-16; 12,14-26)". In: ZNW 83 (1992) 52-73. "Supposed Anachronism in Luke-Acts' Use of Σ Υ Ν Α Γ Ω Γ Η : A rejoinder to H.C. Kee. In: NTS 39 (1993) 178-208.

O'TOOLE, R.F.

"Reflections on Luke's Treatment of Jews in Luke-Acts". In: Bib 74

(1993) 529-555. O V E R M A N , J. and M c L E N N A N , R. (eds)

Diaspora Jews and Judaism: Essays in honor

of, and in dialogue with, A.T. Kraabel. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992. PADGETT, A.

"Wealthy Women at Ephesus: 1 Timothy 2:8-15 in social context". In: Int

41 (1987) 19-31. P A L M E R , R.

Roman Religion and Roman Empire: Five essays. Philadelphia: University

of Pennsylvania Press, 1974.

352

Bibliography

PARKES, J. The Foundations of Judaism and Christianity. London: Valentine Mitchell, 1960. PARRAT, J.

"The Rebaptism of the Ephesian Disciples". In: ExpTim 79 (1968) 182-183.

PARSONS, E.W. "The Significance of John the Baptist for the Beginnings of Christianity". In: Environmental Factors in Christian History. Edited by J.T. McNeil, M. Spinka, H.R. Willoughby. New York/ London: Kennikat Press (1970) 1-17. (Original 1939). PATHRAPANKAL, J.

"Christianity as a 'way' according to the Acts of the Apostles". In:

Kremer (ed.) Us Actes (1979) 533-539. PAULSEN, Η.

"έι/εργέω". In: EDNT 1 (1990) 453-454.

PAYNE, P. "Libertarian Women in Ephesus: A response to Douglas J. Moo's article, Ί Timothy 2:11-15: meaning and significance'". In: TrinJ 2 (1981) 169-197. PEARSON, B. "Hellenistic-Jewish Wisdom Speculation and Paul". In: Aspects of Wisdom in Judaism and Early Christianity. Edited by R. Wilken. Notre Dame/London: Notre Dame University Press (1975) 43-46. "Earliest Christianity in Egypt: Some observations". In: The Roots of Egyptian Christianity. Edited by B. Pearson and J. Goehring. Philadelphia: Fortress Press (1986) 132-159. PÉKARY, T. "Statuen in kleinasiatischen Inschriften". In: Studien zur Religion und Kultur Kleinasiens. Festschrift für Friedrich Karl Dörner zum 65. Geburtstag am 28. Februar 1976. Volume 2. Edited by S. Sahlin, E. Schwertheim, J. Wagner. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1978) 727-744. PEREIRA, F. Ephesus: Climax of Universalism in Luke-Acts. A redaction-critical study of Paul's Ephesian Ministry (Acts 18:23-20:1). Anand, India: Gujarat Sahitya Prakash, 1983. PERRY, A.M.

"Translating the Greek Article". In: JBL 68 (1949) 329-334.

PESCH, R. Die Apostelgeschichte. EKKNT 5. Zürich/Einsiedeln/Köln: Benziger Verlag; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1986. PIERART, M.

"Modèles de répartition des citoyens dans les cités Ioniennes". In: REA 87

(1985) 169-190.

Bibliography

353

PLUMMER, A. and ROBERTSON, A. Commentary on First Corinthians. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1929. POKORNY, P. Der Brief des Paulus an die Epheser. THZNT 10/Π. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1992. POWELL, M. "Salvation in Luke-Acts". In: WW 12 (1992) 5-10. PREISKER, H. "Apollos und die Johannisjünger in Act 18:24 - 19:6". In: ZNW 30 (1931) 301-304. PREUSCHEN, E. Die Apostelgeschichte. Siebeck), 1912.

HZNT 4:1. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul

PRICE, M. and TRELL, Β. Coins and their Cities: Architecture on the ancient coins of Greece, Rome, and Palestine. London/Detroit: Vecchi/Wayne State University Press, 1977. PRICE, S.R.F. Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984a. "Gods and Emperors: The Greek language of the imperial cult". In: JHS 104 (1984b) 79-95. RACKHAM, R.B. The Acts of the Apostles. Westminster Commentaries. London: Methuen and Co., 1957 (1901 original). RADIN, M. The Jews Among the Greeks and Romans. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1915. RADL, W. "έτοιμάίω". In: EDNT 2 (1991) 67. RAJAK, T. "Jewish Rights in the Greek Cities under Roman Rule: A new approach". In: Approaches to Ancient Judaism, Volume 5: Studies in Judaism and its Greco-Roman Context. Edited by W. S. Green. Atlanta: Scholars Press (1985a) 1935. "Jews and Christians as Groups in a Pagan World". In: J. Neusner and E. Frerichs (eds) "To See Ourselves" (1985b) 247-262. RAMSAY, W.M. A Manual of Roman Antiquities. Revised by R. Lanciani. London: Charles Griffith and Co. Undated (original 1851).

354

Bibliography "Artemis at Ephesus". In: CRT (1893) 78-79. "Ephesus". In: DB 1 (1898) 720-725. The Church in the Roman Empire Before AD 170. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1900. The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia and their place in the plan of the Apocalypse. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1904. Pauline and Other Studies. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1906. The First Christian Century: Notes on Dr Moffat's Introduction to the Literature of the New Testament. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1911. The Historical Geography of Asia Minor. Amsterdam: A. Hakkert, 1962. [Reprint of original published by The Royal Geographical Society, Supplementary Papers Volume 4. London: John Murray, 1890]. The Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia: Being an essay of the local history of Phrygia from the earliest times to the Turkish conquest. Volume 1, 2 parts. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1895/1897. Asianic

Elements

in

Greek

Civilisation.

London:

John

Murray,

1927. St Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1935. REFOULÉ, F. " A contre-courant Romains 16,3-16". In: RHPR 70 (1990) 409-420. REICKE, B. The New Testament Era: The world of the Bible from 500 BC to AD 100. Translated by D.E. Green. London: A. and C. Black, 1969. RENAN, E. The History of the Origins of Christianity. Books 2-7. London: Mathieson and Co., n/d. RENDEL HARRIS, J. 184. RENGSTORF, Κ.

"The Origin of the Cult of Artemis". In: BJRL 3 (1916/17) 147-

"μαθητή?". In: TDNT 4 (1967) 415-461.

355

Bibliography RIEGEL, S.

"Jewish Christianity: definitions and terminology". In: NTS 24 (1978) 410-

415. R I S T O W , G.

"Zum Kosmokrator im Zodiacus, ein Bild vergleich". In: Hommmages à

Maarten J. Vermaseren. Volume 3. Edited by M. de Boer and T. Edridge. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1978) 985-987. ROBERT, L.

"Épitaphes Juives d' Éphèse et de Nicomédie". In: Hellenica:

Recueil

d'épigraphie de numismatique et d'antiquités grecques 11-12 (1960) 381-413. —

"Sur des inscriptiones d'Éphèse: Fêtes, athlètes, empereurs, épigrammes". In: Opera Minora Selecta 5 (1989) 347-437. Amsterdam: A.M. Hakkert.

ROBERTS, J.E. "Apollos". In: Dictionary of the Apostolic Church. Edited by J. Hastings. Volume 1. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark (1915) 81-82. ROBINSON, J.A.T. ROBINSON, T.A.

Twelve New Testament Studies. London: SCM Press, 1962. Orthodoxy and Heresy in Western Asia Minor in the First Christian

Century: A dialogical

response to Walter Bauer. PhD dissertation. McMaster

University, Hamilton, Ontario, 1985. The Bauer Thesis Examined: The geography of heresy in the early Christian Church. Lewiston/Queenston: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1988. ROEBUCK, C.

Ionian Trade and Colonization. Reprint of original (1959). Chicago: Ares

Publishers, 1984. R O E T Z E L , C.

"Jewish Christian and Gentile Christian Relations: A discussion of

Ephesians 2.15a". In: ZNW 74 (1983) 81-89. ROGERS, G.M.

The Sacred Identity of Ephesos: Foundation myths of a Roman city.

London/New York: Routledge, 1991. "The Constructions of Women at Ephesus". In: ZPE 90 (1992) 215-223. R O M A N I U K , K. ROPES, J.H.

"Die 'Gottesfiirchtigen' im Neuen Testament". In: Aeg 44 (1964) 66-91.

"Introductory essay: The text of Acts". In: F. Foakes-Jackson and K. Lake

(eds) Beginnings 3 (1926) xvii-cci.

356

Bibliography

ROWLAND, C. Christian Origins: From messianic movement to Christian religion. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1985. RUDOLPH, K. Antike Baptisten: Zu den Überlieferungen über früh-jüdische -christliche Taufsekten. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1981.

und

SAFFREY, H.D. "The Piety and Prayers of Ordinary Men and Women in Late Antiquity". In: World Spirituality: An encyclopedic history of the religious quest. Volume 15: Classical Mediterranean Spirituality: Egyptian, Greek, Roman. Edited by A.H. Armstrong. London: SCM Press (1986) 195-213. SAFRAI, S. (ed.) The Literature of the Sages: First part: Oral Tora, Halakha, Mishna, Tosefta, Talmud, External Tractates. Executive editor: P. Tomson. Assen/Maastricht: Van Gorcum. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987. and STERN, M. (eds) The Jewish People in the First Century: Historical, geographical, political history, social, cultural and religious life and institutions. CRINT. 2 volumes. Edited in cooperation with D. Flusser and W.C. Unnik Philadelphia: Fortress Press (1974/76). S ALDITT-TRAPPMANN, R. Tempel der ägyptischen Götter in Griechenland und an der Westküste Kleinasiens. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1970. SALMON, M. "Insider or Outsider? Luke's relationship with Judaism". In: J.B. Tyson (ed.) Luke-Acts (1988) 76-82. SANDELIN, K-G. "The Johannine Writings within the Setting of Their Cultural History". In: Olsson and Hartmann (eds) Aspects (1987) 9-26. SANDERS, E.P. Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A comparison of patterns of religion. Philadelphia/London: Fortress Press/SCM Press, 1977. (ed.) Jewish and Christian Self-definition, Volume 2 : Aspects of Judaism in the Greco-Roman period. Edited with A. Baumgarten, A. Mendelson. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981. Paul, the Law and the Jewish People. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983. SANDERS, J.T. The Jews in Luke-Acts. London: SCM Press, 1987. "The Jewish People in Luke-Acts". In: J.B. Tyson (ed.) Luke-Acts (1988) 51-75.

357

Bibliography —

"Who is a Jew and who is a Gentile in the Book of Acts?" In: NTS 37 (1991) 434455. Schismatics,

Sectarians,

Dissidents,

Deviants:

The first 100 years of Jewish-

Christian relations. London: SCM Press, 1993. SANDFORD LA SOR, W.

The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament. Grand Rapids:

W. Eerdmanns, 1972. SANDMEL, S. Judaism and Christian Beginnings. New York: Oxford University Press, 1978. SANTORO, M.

Epitheta Deorum in Asia Graeca Cultorum ex Auetoribus Graecis et

Latinis. Milan: La Goliardica, 1974. SCHÄFER, K.Th.

Grundriss der Einleitung in das Neue Testament. Bonn: P. Hanstein,

1952. SCHÀFERDIEK, K.

"Christian Mission and Expansion". In: Early Christianity:

Origins

and evolution to AD 600. In honor of W.H.C. Frend. Edited by I. Hazlett. London: SPCK (1991) 65-77. SCHERER, S. "Signs and Wonders in the Imperial Cult: A new look at a Roman religious institution in the light of Revelation 13:13-15". In: JBL 103 (1984) 599-610. SCHIFFMANN, L.H. "At the Crossroads: Tannaitic perspectives on the Jewish-Christian schism". In: E.P. Sanders, A. Baumgarten, A. Mendelson (eds) Self Definition, Volume 2 (1981) 115-156. Who Was A Jew?: Rabbinic and halakhic perspectives on the Jewish

Christian

schism. New Jersey: KTAV Publishing House, 1985. SCHILLE, G. Die urchristliche Kollegialmission. Verlag, 1967.

ATANT 48. Zürich/ Stuttgart: Zwingli

Die Apostelgeschichte des Lukas. Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1983. SCHLATTER, A. The Church in the New Testament Period. Translated by P. Levertoff. London : SPCK, 1961. SCHLIER, Η. Der Brief an die Epheser: ein Kommentar. Düsseldorf: Patmos Verlag, 1957.

358

Bibliography

SCHMIDT, C.

Gespräche Jesu mit seinen Jüngern nach der Auferstehung:

apostolisches SCHMIDT, K.L.

Sendschreiben

des 2. Jahrhunderts.

" Ιβνος in the New Testament". In: TDNT2

S C H N A C K E N B U R G , R.

Der Brief an die Epheser.

Ein

katholisch-

Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs, 1919. (1964) 364-372.

Zürich/Einsiedeln/ Köln: Benziger

Verlag; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1982. "Ephesus: Entwicklung einer Gemeinde von Paulus zu Johannes". In: BZ 35 (1991) 41-64. SCHNEIDER, G.

Die Apostelgeschichte.

HTKNT. 2 volumes. Freiburg/ Basil/Wien:

Herder, 1982. SCHNELLE, U.

"Paulus und Johannes". In: EvT47

SCHOEDEL, W.

A Commentary

(1987) 212-228.

on the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch. Hermeneia series.

Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985. SCHOEPS, H.J. Aspects

"Das Judenchristentum in den Parteikämpfen der alten Kirche". In: du Judéo-Christianisme.

Colloque de Strasbourg 23-25 avril 1964. Paris:

Presses Universitaires de France (1965) 53-75. SCHOLER, D.

"1 Timothy 2:9-15 and the Place of Women in the Church's Ministry". In:

Women, Authority

and the Bible. Edited by A. Mickelsen. Illinois: InterVarsity

Press (1984) 193-219. SCHRÄGE, W.

Der erste Brief an die Korinther (I Kor 1,1-6,11). EKKNT 7.1. Zürich,

Braunschweig/ Neukirchen-Vluyn: Benziger Verlag/ Neu- kirchener Verlag, 1991. SCHÜRER, E.

The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 BC - AD

135). Volume 3:1. Revised and edited by G. Vermes, F. Millar, M. Goodman. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1986. SCHÜSSLER FIORENZA, E.

"Apocalypse and Gnosis in the Book of Revelation and

Paul". In: JBL 92 (1973) 565-581. "Miracles, Mission and Apologetics: An introduction". In: Aspects Propoganda

in Judaism and Early Christianity.

of

Religious

Edited by E. Schüssler Fiorenza.

Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press (1976) 1-25.

359

Bibliography In Memory of Her: A feminist

theological reconstruction

of Christian

origins.

London: SCM Press, 1983. SCHWABL, H.

"Ephesiaka zu Artemidor 1.8 und IV 4". In: Religio

Graeco-Romana.

Festschrift für Walter Pötscher. Edited by J. Dalfen, G. Petersmann, F.F. Schwarz. GrB.S. 5. Graz/Horn: Universität Graz Institut für Klassische Philologie/F. Berger u. Söhne Gesellschaft/ (1993) 131-143. SCHWARTZ, D.

"'According to the Pattern (TBNYT) ...': Exodus 25,40 in the New

Testament and early Jewish thought". In: Revue de Qumran 13 (1988) 639-646. "The End of the Line: Paul in the canonical Book of Acts". In: Babcock (ed.), Legacies (1990) 3-24. "On Two Aspects of a Priestly View of Descent at Qumran". In Archaeology

and

History in the Dead Sea Scrolls: The New York University Conference in memory of Yigael Yadin.. Published in cooperation with the Hagop Kevorkian Center for Near Eastern Studies at New York University. Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha, Supplement series 8. JSOT/ASOR, Monograph 2. Sheffield (1990) 157-179. SCHWEIZER, E.

"Die Bekehrung des Apollos, Apg 18,24-26". In: EvT 15 (1955) 247-

254. "Christianity of the Circumcised and Judaism of Colossians". In: Jews, Greeks and Christians: Religious cultures in antiquity. Essays in honor of W.D. Davies. Edited by R. Hamerton-Kelly. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1976) 245-260. SCOBIE, C.H. John the Baptist. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1964. SCOTT, E.F. The Epistles of Paul to the Colossians, to Philemon and to the Ephesians. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1930. "The Epistle to the Philippians". In: IB 11 (1955) 3-129. The Pastoral Epistles. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1936. SCOTT, J.M. "Luke's Geographical Horizon". In: The Book of Acts in Its Graeco-Roman Setting. Edited by D.W.J. Gill and C. Gempf. Volume 2 in The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting. Series editor, B. W. Winter (1994) 483-544.

360

Bibliography

SCOTT, Κ. "The Significance of Statues in Precious Metals in Emperor Worship". In: TAPA 62 (1931) 101-123. "The Elder Pliny and Younger Pliny on Emperor Worship". In: TAPA 63 (1932) 156-165. SCRAMUZZA, V.M. "The Policy of the Early Roman Emperors Towards Judaism". In: F.Foakes-Jackson and K. Lake (eds) Beginnings 5 (1933) Note XXV, 277-296. SCROGGS, R. "The Earliest Christian Communities as Sectarian Movement". In: Christianity, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Cults. Part 2. Edited by J. Neusner. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1975) 1-23. SCULLY, V. The Earth, the Temple and the Gods: Greek sacred architecture. New Haven/London: Yale University Press. Revised edition, 1979. SEGAL, A. Two Powers in Heaven: Early rabbinic reports about Christianity and Gnosticism. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1977. Paul the Convert: The apostatate and apostasy of Saul the Pharisee. New Haven/ London: Yale University Press, 1990. SELTMAN, C. The Twelve Olympians: Gods and Goddesses of Greece. A modern view of ancient myths. London: Pan Books, 1952a. "The Wardrobe of Artemis". In: Num Chron 12 (series 6, 1952b) 33-44. SHEPHERD, M.H. The Paschal Liturgy and The Apocalypse. Ecumenical Studies in Worship 6. London: Lutterworth Press, 1960. SHEPPARD, A.A.R. "Homonoia in the Greek Cities of the Roman Empire". In: AncSoc 15-17 (1984-86) 229-252. SHERWIN-WHITE, A. Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament. The Samm Lectures, 1960-61. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1963. SHERWIN-WHITE, S. "'Median' Artemis in an Early Hellenistic Funerary Inscription". In: ZPE 49(1982) 30. SIMON, M. St. Stephen and the Hellenists in the Primitive Church. The Haskell Lectures, 1956. London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1958.

Bibliography

361

"From Greek Haeresis to Christian Heresy". In: Early Christian Literature and the Classical Intellectual Tradition. In honorem Robert M. Grant. Théologie historique 54. Paris: Beauchesne (1979) 101-116. SLATER, P. The Glory of Hera: Greek mythology and the Greek family. Boston: Beacon Press, 1968. SLINGERLAND, D. 305-321.

"'The Jews' in the Pauline Portions of Acts". In: JAAR 54 (1986)

SLOYAN, G. "Outreach to Gentiles and Jews: New Testament reflections". In: JES 22 (1985) 764-769. SMALLEY, S. "John's Revelation and John's Community". In: BJRL 69 (1986) 549-571. SMALLWOOD, E. Documents Illustrating the Principales of Gaius, Claudius and Nero. Bristol: Bristol Classical Press, 1984. SNAPE, H.C. "The Fourth Gospel, Ephesus and Alexandria". In: HTR 47 (1954) 1-14. SOKOLOWSKI, F. "A New Testimony on the Cult of Artemis at Ephesus". In: HTR 58 (1965)427-431. SOURVINOU-INWOOD, C. "A Series of Erotic Pursuits: Images and meanings". In: JHS 107(1987) 131-153. "What is Polis Religion?" In: The Greek City: From Homer to Alexander. Edited by O. Murray and S. Price. Oxford: Clarendon Press (1990) 295-322. 'Reading' Greek Culture: Texts and images, rituals and myths. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991. SPENCER, A.D.B. "Eve at Ephesus.(Should women be ordained as pastors according to the First letter to Timothy 2:11-15)". In: JETS 17 (1974) 215-222. SPIRO, S.J. "Who Was the Haberl: A new approach to an ancient institution". In: JSJ 11 (1980) 186-216. STÄHLIN, G. "πνεΟμα του ΊησοΟ (Apg 16:7)". In: Christ and Spirit in the New Testament. In honor of C.F.D. Moule. Edited by B. Lindars and S. Smalley. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1973) 229-252.

362 —

Bibliography Die Apostelgeschichte. NTD 5. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1975.

STAMBAUGH, J. The Ancient Roman City. Baltimore/London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1988. and BALCH, D.

The New Testament in its Social Environment.

Philadelphia:

Westminster Press, 1986. STEGEMANN, E. 'Kindlein, hütet euch vor den Göttbildern". In: TZ 41 (1985) 284-294. Zwischen Synagoge und Obrigkeit: Zur historischen Situation der lukanischen Christen. FRLANT 152. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1991. STENDAHL, K. 1977.

Paul Among Jews and Gentiles and other essays. London: SCM Press,

STERN, M. Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism. Volume 2 From Tacitus to Simplicius. Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1980. and SAFRAI, S. (eds)

The Jewish People in the First Century:

Historical,

geographical, political history, social, cultural and religious life and institutions. CRINT. 2 volumes. Edited in cooperation with D. Flusser and W.C. Unnik. Philadelphia: Fortress Press (1974/76). St JOHN PARRY, R.

The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians:

With

introduction and notes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1957. STOKES, G.T.

The Acts of the Apostles. 2 volumes. The Expositor's Bible. London:

Hodderand Stoughton, 1892. STOOPS jr, R.

"Riot and Assembly: the social context of Acts 19:23-41". In: JBL 108

(1989) 73-91. STRANGE, W.

"The Sons of Sceva and the Text of Acts 19:14". In: JTS 38 (1987)

97-106. STREETER, B.H.

The Primitive Church: Studied with special reference to the origins of

the Christian ministry. The Hewett Lectures 1928. London: Macmillan and Co., 1929. STRECKER, G. "Die Anfänge der johannischen Schule". In: NTS 32 (1986) 31-47.

363

Bibliography S T R E L A N , J.G.

Search For Salvation: studies in the history and theology of cargo cults.

Adelaide: Lutheran Publishing House, 1977. SUGGITT, J.N. "1 John 5:21: ΤεκνΙα, φυλάξετε

έαυτά άπό τ ω ν ειδώλων". In: JTS

36 (1985) 386-390. S U T H E R L A N D , C.H.V.

Coinage in Roman Imperial Policy: 31 BC - AD 68. New York:

Sandford J. Durst, Numismatic Publications, 1978. SWEET, J.P.M.

Revelation.

Westminster

Pelican Commentaries.

Philadelphia:

Westminster Press, 1979. SWETE, H.B.

The Holy Spirit in the New Testament: A study of primitive

Christian

teaching. London: Macmillan and Co., 1909. The Apocalypse of St John: The Greek text with introduction, notes, and indices. 3rd edition. London: Macmillan and Co., 1922. TAJRA, H.W.

The Trial of St Paul: A judicial exegesis of the second half of The Acts of

the Apostles. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1989. T A N N E H I L L , R.C.

"Rejection by Jews and Turning to Gentiles: the pattern of Paul's

mission in Acts". In: J.B. Tyson (ed.) Luke-Acts (1988) 83-101. T A Y L O R , Joan

"The Phenomenon of Early Jewish Christianity: reality or scholarly

invention?" In: VC 44 (1990) 313-334. T A Y L O R , Justin

"Why were the disciples first called 'Christians' at Antioch? (Acts

11,26)". In: RB 101 (1994) 75-94. T A Y L O R , L.

"Artemis of Ephesus". In: F. Foakes-Jackson and K. Lake (eds) Beginnings 5

Note X X I (1933a) 251-256. "The Asiarchs". In: F. Foakes-Jackson and K. Lake, Beginnings 5 (1933b) 256-262. TEEPLE, H.

"The Historical Beginnings of the Resurrection Faith". In: Studies in New

Testament and Early Christian Literature: Essays in honor of Allan P. Wikgren. Edited by D. Aune. Leiden: E.J. Brill (1972) 107-120. THEISSEN, G.

The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity: Essays on Corinth. Edited and

translated by J.H. Schütz. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982.

364

Bibliography

THOMPSON, L. The Book of Revelation: Apocalypse and empire. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990. THOMPSON, M.S. "The Asiatic or Winged Artemis". In: JHS 29 (1909) 286-307. THORNTON, T. "The Destruction of Idols: Sinful or meritorious?" In: JTS 37 (1986) 121129. TIERNEY, M. "Ephesus, Pagan and Christian". In: IQR 18 (1929) 449-463. TOMLINSON, R. Greek Sanctuaries. London: Paul Elek, 1976. TOMSON, P.J. Paul and the Jewish Law: Halakha in the letters of the apostle to the gentiles. Assen/Maastricht: Van Gorcum; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990. TRAGAN, P-R. "Les 'Destinataires' du discours de Milet: Une approche du cadre communautaire d'Ac 20, 18-35". In: À cause de l'Évangile. Études sur les Synoptiques et les Actes. Offertes au P. Jacques Dupont, O.S.B, à l'occasion de son 70 anniversaire. Lectio Divina 123 [Paris] Cerf (1985) 779-798. TREBILCO, P. Jewish Communities in Asia Minor. SNTS Monograph Series 69. Cambridge et al: Cambridge University Press, 1991. —

"Asia". In: The Book of Acts in Its Graeco-Roman Setting, edited by D.W.J. Gill and C. Gempf. Volume 2 in The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting. Series editor, B. W. Winter (1994) 291-362.

TRELL, B. and PRICE, M. Coins and Their Cities: Architecture on the ancient coins of Greece, Rome, and Palestine. London/Detroit: Vecchi/Wayne State University Press, 1977. TREVETT, C. "The Other letters to the Churches of Asia: Apocalypse and Ignatius of Antioch". In: JSNT 37 (1989) 117-135. "Apocalypse, Ignatius, Montanism: Seeking the seeds". In: VC 43 (1989) 313-338. TROMBLEY, F. "Paganism in the Greek World at the End of Antiquity: The case of rural Anatolia and Greece". In: HTR 78 (1985) 327-352. TRUDINGER, P. "The Ephesian Milieu". In: The Downside Review 106 (1988) 286-296.

365

Bibliography TURNER, Ν.

"Syntax". In: A Grammar of New Testament Greek, Volume 3. Edited by

J.H. Moulton. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1963. TYSON, J.B.

The New Testament

and Early Christianity.

New York: Macmillan

Publishing Co./London: Collier Macmillan Publishers, 1984. (ed.) Luke-Acts and the Jewish People: Eight critical perspectives. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1988. URMAN, D.

"The House of Assembly and The House of Study: Are they one and the

same?" In: JJS 44 (1993) 236-257. USAMI, Κ. Somatic Comprehension of Unity: The church in Ephesians. Analecta Biblica 101. Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1983. van BREMEN, R.

"Women and Wealth". In: Images of Women in Antiquity. Edited by A.

Cameron and A. Kuhrt. London: Croom Helm (1983) 223-242. van der HORST, P. "Jews and Christians in Aphrodisias in the Light of Their Relations in other cities of Asia Minor". In: Essays on the Jewish World of Early Christianity. Freiburg (Schweiz): Universitätsverlag (1990) 166-181. van ROON, A.

The Authenticity of Ephesians. Supplement to Novum Testamentum 39.

Translated by S. Prescod-Jokel. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1974. van UNNIK, W.C. "Die Apostelgeschichte und die Häresien". In: ZNW 58 (1967) 240-246. VERMASEREN, M.

Corpus Cultus Cybelae Attidisque:

1. Asia Minor. Leiden/New

York/K0benhavn/Köln: E.J. Brill, 1987. VERMES, G. Post-Biblical Jewish Studies. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1975. VERMEULE, C. Roman Imperial Art in Greece and Asia Minor. MA: Harvard University Press, 1968. VERNANT, J.-P. Myth and Society in Ancient Greece. Translated by J. Lloyd. Sussex: Harvester Press; New Jersey: Humanities Press, 1980. VERNER, D. The Household of God: The social world of the Pastoral Dissertation Series 71. California: Scholars Press, 1983.

Epistles. SBL

366

Bibliography

VERSNEL, H.

"The Festivals for Bona Dea and the Thesmophoria". In: Greece and Rome

39(1992)31-55. VEYNE, P. Bread and Circuses: Historical society and political pluralism. Translated by B. Pearce. Abridged. London: Penguin Books, 1992. VISCUSI, P. Studies on Domitian. PhD Dissertation, University of Delaware 1973. VÖGTLE, A.

"Mythos und Botschaft in Apokalypse 12". In: Tradition und Glaube. Das

frühe Christentum Geburtstag.

in seiner Umwelt. Festgabe für Karl Georg Kuhn zum 65.

Edited by G. Jeremias, H.W. Kuhn and H. Stegemann. Göttingen:

Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht (1971) 395-415. VÖLKEL, Μ.

"όδό?". In: EDNT 2 (1991) 491-493.

von WILAMOWITZ-MOELLENDORFF, U. Der Glaube der Hellenen. 2 volumes. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Reprint 1959/1973. WALTHER, J. and ORR, W.

First Corinthians: A new translation. Introduction with a

study of the life of Paul, Notes, and Commentary.

AB 32. New York: Doubleday

and Co., 1976. WARDE-FOWLER, W. The Roman Festivals of the Period of the Republic: An introduction to the study of the religion of the Romans. London: Macmillan and Co., 1933. WARDMAN, A. Religion and Statecraft among the Romans. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1982. WATSON, F. Paul, Judaism, and the Gentiles. SNTS Monograph Series 56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. WATSON. N. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. London: Epworth Press, 1993. WEBB, R. John the Baptizer and Prophet. A social historical study. JSNT Supplement Series 62. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991. WEINSTOCK, S. Divus Julius. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971. WEISS, J. Earliest Christianity: A history of the period AD 30-150. Volume 2. Completed by R. Knopf. Translated and edited by F.C. Grant and S.E. Johnson. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1937.

Bibliography

367

Der erste Korintherbrìef. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1970. WEIZSÄCKER, C. Das apostolische Zeitalter der christlichen Kirche. Leipzig/Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1902. WENDLAND, H. -D.

Die Briefe an die Korinther. NTD 7. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and

Ruprecht, 1972. WERNICKE, H. "Artemis". In: PW 2 (1895) 1336-1440. WESTCOTT, B.F.

The Epistles of St. John: The Greek text with notes and essays.

London: Macmillan and Co., 1905. WHITE, L.M.

"The Delos Synagogue Revisited: Recent fieldwork in the Greco-Roman

Diaspora". In: HTR 80 (1987) 133-160. WICKERT, U. "Kleinasien". In: TRE 19 (1990) 244-265. WILES, D. The Masks ofMenander: Sign and meaning in Greek and Roman performance. Cambridge et al". Cambridge University Press, 1991. WILKEN, R. and MEEKS, W. Jews and Christians in Antioch: In the first four centuries of the Common Era. Montana: Scholars Press, 1978. WILKEN, R. "The Christians as the Romans (and Greeks) Saw Them". In: Jewish and Christian Self-Definition. Volume 1: The shaping of Christianity in the second and third century. Edited by E.P. Sanders. Philadelphia: Fortress Press (1980) 100-125. "Diversity and· Unity in Early Christianity." In: SecCent 1 (1981) 101-110. WILLETTS, R. Cretan Cults and Festivals. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1962. WILLIAMS, C.S.C. Black, 1964.

A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. London: A. and C.

WILLIAMS, D.J. Acts. New International Biblical Commentary. MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1985/90. WILLIAMS, R. "Does it make sense to speak of pre-Nicene orthodoxy?" In: The Making of Orthodoxy: Essays in honor of Henry Chadwick. Edited by R.Williams. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1989) 1-23.

368

Bibliography

WILLS, L.

"The Form of the Sermon in Hellenistic Judaism and Early Christianity". In:

HTR 77 (1984) 277-299. WILSON, T. St. Paul and Paganism. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1927. WINDISCH, Η.

""Ελλην κτλ." In: TDNT 2 (1964-72) 504-516.

WINTER, B.W. (ed.) The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting. 2 volumes. Grand Rapids, Mich./Carlisle: Eerdmans/The Paternoster Press, 1994. and Gill, D.W.J.

"Acts and Roman Religion". In: The Book of Acts in Its Graeco-

Roman Setting. Edited by D.W.J. Gill and C.Gempf. Volume 2 of The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting. Series editor, B.W. Winter (1994) 79-103. WISCHNITZER, M. 245-263. WITHERINGTON, B.

"Notes to a History of the Jewish Guilds". In: HUCA 23 (1950/51)

Women in the earliest Churches. SNTS Monograph Series 59.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. WITT, R. Isis in the Graeco-Roman World. London: Thames and Hudson, 1971. WOLFF, C. Die erste Brief des Paulus an der Korinther: zweiter Teil: Auslegung Kapitel 8-16. THZNT 7:2. Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1982.

der

WOLTER, M. "Apollos und die ephesischen Johannesjünger". In: ZNW 78 (1987) 49-73. WOOD, J.T. Discoveries at Ephesus including the Site and Remains of the Great Temple of Diana. London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1877. Reprinted Hildesheim/New York: G. Olms, 1975. "On the Antiquities of Ephesus Having relation to Christianity ande". In: TSBA 6 (1879) 327-333. WÖRRLE, M. "Ägyptisches Getreide für Ephesos". In: Chiron 1 (1971) 325-340. WRIGHT, J.

"A Votive Tablet to Artemis Anaïtis and Mên Tiamu in the Boston Museum

of Fine Arts. Plate II". In: HSCP 6 (1895) 55-74. WYNNE, G.R. Apollos. Or: Studies in the life of a great layman of the first century. London: SPCK, 1912.

Bibliography YARBRO COLLINS, A.

369

"Myth and History in the Book of Revelation: The problem of its

date". In: Traditions in Transformation: Turning points in biblical faith. Edited by B. Halpem and J. Levenson. Indiana: Eisenbrauns (1981) 377-403. "Persecution and Vengeance in the Book of Revelation". In: Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East. Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Apocalypticism, Uppsala August 12-17, 1979. Edited by D. Hellholm. Tübingen: J. C. B. Möhr (Paul Siebeck) (1983) 729-749. Crisis and Catharsis: The power of The Apocalypse. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1984. "Insiders and Outsiders in the Book of Revelation and its Social Context". In: J. Neusner and E. Frerichs (eds): "To See Ourselves" (1985) 187-218. —

"Vilification and Self-Definition in the Book of Revelation". In: HTR 79 (1986) 308-320.

ZEITLIN, F. "Cultic Models of the Female: Rites of Dionysus and Demeter". In: Arethusa 15 (1982) 129-155. ZEITLIN, S. "Proselytes and Proselytism during the Second Commonwealth and early Tannaitic Period" [originally published 1965]. In: Studies in the early history of Judaism. New York: KTAV Publishing House (1974) 407-417. "The Jews: race, nation or religion - which?" In: Studies in the early history of Judaism.

Volume 2. [Originally published 1936] New York: KTAV Publishing

House (1974) 425-469. ZUCKERMANN, C.

"Hellenistic πολιτεύματα and the Jews: A reconsideration". In: SCI

8/9 (1985-88) 171-185.

REFERENCE

WORKS

A Complete Concordance to Flavius Josephus. 4 volumes. Edited by Κ. H. Rengstorf et al. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1973-1983. Anchor Bible Dictionary. 6 volumes. Edited by D.N. Freedman et α/.Doubleday: New York/London et al., 1992.

370

Bibliography

Computer-Konkordanz zum Novum Testamentum Graece. Nestle-Aland 26. Auflage und zum Greek New Testament, 3rd edition. Edited by the Institut für neutestamentliche Textforschung and by the Rechenzentrum der Universität Münster. Berlin/New York: W. de Gruyter, 1980. Corpus

Inscriptionum Graecarum (CIG). 4 volumes. Edited by A. Boeckh et al. Hildesheim/New York: Georg Olms Verlag, 1977.

A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature. Compiled by M. Jastrow. Volume 1 : 3 - « . London/New York: Luzac and Co./G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1903. Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines; d'après les textes et les monuments. Edited by Ch. Daremberg and E. Saglio. Five volumes. Paris: Librairie Hachette, 1877. Dictionary of the Bible: Dealing with its language, literature, and contents including the biblical theology. 5 volumes, edited by J. Hastings. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1898-1904. The Encyclopedia Judaica. 16 volumes. Jerusalem, 1971. Etymologicon Magnum - Lexicon: saepissime vocabulorum origines indagans ex pluribus lexicis scholiastis et grammaticis. Anonymi cuisdam opera concinnatum. Edited by T. Gainsford. Amsterdam: A.M. Hakkert, 1967. Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament (EDNT). Edited by H. Balz and G. Schneider. 3 volumes. Translated by J.W. Thompson and J.W. Medenkorp. Grand Rapids, Michigan: W. Eerdmans, 1990-1993. Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker (FGH). Teil Ι-ΙΠ mit Kommentarbänden. Edited by F. Jacoby. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1923 -. A Greek-English Lexicon (LSJ). Edited by H.G. Liddell and R. Scott. Revised and augmented by H.S. Jones and R. Mackenzie. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Ninth edition 1940. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (BAG). A translation and adaptation of Walter Bauer's Griechisch-Deutsches Wörterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der übrigen urchristlichen Literatur. Fourth revised and augmented edition. Edited by W. Arndt and F. Gingrich. Chicago/Cambridge: University of Chicago Press/Cambridge University Press, 1952.

Bibliography

371

The Greek Magical Papryi in Translation: including the demotic spells. Edited by H. Dieter Betz. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press, 1986. Harper's Dictionary of Classical Literature and Antiquities. Edited by H. Peck. New York: Cooper Square Pub. Inc., 1965. Hesychii Alexandrini Lexicon. Volume II: Ε-K. Edited by M. Schmidt. Amsterdam: A.M. Hakkert, 1965. Inschriften von Ephesos. Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien (I.Eph.). Volumes 1117. Edited by H. Wankel. Bonn: Habicht, 1979-1984. Die Inschriften von Magnesia am Meander (I.Mag.) Edited by O. Kern. Berlin: W. Spemann, 1900. Inschriften von Priene (I.Priene). Edited by F.F. Hiller von Gaertringen. Königliche Museen zu Berlin. Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1906. Inscriptiones graecae ad res romanas pertinentes (ÎGRR). 4 volumes. Edited by R. Cagnat with J. Toutain, P. Jouquet and G. Lafaye. Chicago: Ares, 1975. The Jewish Encyclopedia.

London: Funk and Wagnalls, 1903.

L'Année Philologique: Bibliographie critique et analytique de l'antiquité Gréco-Latine. Edited by J. Ernst et al. Paris: Société d'édition "Les Belles Lettres". 1928--. Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche (LTK). Second edition. Edited by J. Höfer and Κ. Rahner. Freiburg: Herder, 1959-1967. Lexicon

Iconographicum Mythologicae Classicae, Volume 2: Aphrodisias Zürich/Munich: Artemis Verlag, 1984.

- Athena.

Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae (OGIS). 2 volumes. Edited by W. Dittenberger. Leipzig: S. Hirzel, 1903. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri. Various editors. Published for the British Academy by the Egypt Exploration Society. 1898 Papyri Graecae Magicae: die griechischen Zauberpapyri (PGM). Edited and translated by K. Preisendanz. 2nd edition edited by A. Henrichs. Stuttgart: B. Teubner, 1973 -.

372

Bibliography

Stephanus

Byzantinus.

Cum annotationibus L. Holsteni, A. Berkelii, et Th. de Pinedo.

Volume I. Lipsis: Kuehn, 1825. The Suidae Lexicon. Edited by A. Adler. 4 volumes. Reprint. Stuttgart: B. Teubner, 1971. Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum (SEG). Various editors and publishers, 1923 -. Sylloge

Inscriptionum Graecarum ( S I G ) . 4 volumes. Edited by W. Dittenberger. Hildesheim/Ziirich/New York: G. Olms, (3rd edition), 1982.

The Theological Dictionary

of the New Testament. (TDNT) Edited by G. Kittel and G.

Friedrich. 10 volumes. Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans 1964-1976. Theologische Realenzyklopädie (TRE). Edited by G. Krause and G. Müller. Tübingen: W. de Gruyter, 1976 --.

J E W I S H AND C H R I S T I A N P R I M A R Y

SOURCES

Acta Johannis. 2 volumes. Edited by E. Junod and Jean-Daniel Kaestli. CChr Series apocryphorum. Brepols: Turnhout, 1983. Acta Sanctorum Augusti: ex Latinis et Graecis, aliarumque gentium Monumentis, servatâ primigeniâ veterum Scriptorum phrasi, Collecta Digesta, commentariisque and observationibus. Volume 4. Antwerp: Bernardus Albertus van der Plassche, 1739. The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English, with introductions and critical and explanatory notes to the several books. 2 volumes. Edited by R.H. Charles et al. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913/1969. Apocryphal

Gospels,

Acts and Revelations.

ANCL 16. Edited by A. Roberts and J.

Donaldson. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1873. The Apocryphal New Testament: Being the Apocryphal Gospels, Acts, Epistles and Apocalypses, with other narratives and fragments. Translated by M.R. James. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924. Apocryphorum I and II. Turnhout: Brepol, 1983. The Apostolic Fathers. Edited and translated by E.J. Goodenough. London: Independent Press, 1950.

Bibliography

373

The Apostolic Fathers: A new translation and Commentary. Volume 5: Polycarp; The Martyrdom of Polycarp; Fragments of Papias. Edited by W. Schoedel. New York: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1967. Athenagoras.

Embassy for the Christians. Translated J.H. Crehan. ACW 23. London:

Longmans, Green and Co., 1956. The Book of the Saints of the Ethiopian Church. Edited by E.A. Willis Budge. 4 volumes. Hildesheim/New York: G. Olms, 1976. The Chronicle of John Malalas. Translated by E. Jefferys, M. Jefferys, R. Scott et al. Melbourne: Australian Association for Byzantine Studies, 1986. Chronicon Anonymum

AD 819. Translated by I.-B. Chabot. Scriptores Syri 14. CSCO.

1937. Chronica Minora, Part Π: Chronicon Maroniticum. Edited by E.W. Brooks. Translated by I.B.Chabot. John Chrysostom: Discourses against Judaizing Christians. Translated by P. Harkins. The Fathers of the Church: Volume 68. Washington: Catholic University of America Press, 1979. Clement of Alexandria. Exhortation to the Greeks. Translated by G.W. Butterworth. LCL, 1960. Corpus

Papyrorum

Judaicarum.

Volume 2. Edited by V. Tcherikover and A. Fuks.

Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1960. The Writings of Cyprian, Volume 1. Translated by R. Wallis. ANCL 8, 13. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1882. The Dead Sea Scrolls in English. Translated and edited by G. Vermes. Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1962. The Dead Sea Scrolls of St Mark's Monastery. Vol II. Fase. 2: Plates and Transcription of The Manual of Discipline. Edited by M. Burrows, J. Trever, W. Brownlee. New Haven: American School of Oriental Research, 1951. The Didascalia Apostolorum Waveisbaan, 1979.

in Syriac. 2 volumes. Edited by A. Vööbus. Louvain:

374

Bibliography

The Works of Dionysius. ANCL 20. Edited by A. Roberts and J. Donaldson. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1882. The Disputation of Sergius the Stylite against a Jew. Translated by A.P. Hayman. CSCO 339. Scriptores Syri 153. Louvain: Waversebaan, 1973. Epiphanius: The Panarion ofEpiphanius of Salamis. Book I, Sections 1-46. Translated by F. Williams. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1987. Epiphanius II: Panarion haer. 34-64. Edited by K. Holl; 2nd edition by J. Dummer. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1980. Eusebius. The History of the Church from Christ to Constantine. Translated by G.A. Williamson. London: Penguin Books, 1965. The Greek New Testament. Edited by K. Aland et al. Third edition. United Bible Societies, 1983. Hippolytus. The Refutation of All Heresies. ANCL 6, Volume 1. Edited by A. Roberts and J. Donaldson. Edinburgh: T.and T. Clark, 1877. The History of the Patriarchs of the Coptic Church of Alexandria. I: Saint Mark to Theonas (300). Arabic text translated and edited by B. Evetts. Patrologia Orientalis I. Fase. 2. Paris: Permis D'Imprimer, 1948. Incerti Auctoris: Chronicon Pseudo-Dionysianum

Vulgo Dictum. Translated by I.-B.Chabot.

Scriptores Syri CSCO 121. Louvain, 1949. The Writings of Irenaeus. 2 volumes. Translated by A. Roberts and W. Rambaut. ANCL 5, 9. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1880, 1883. Jerome and Gennadius. Lives of Illustrious Men. Translated by E.C. Richardson. NPNF (2nd series) 3. Johannes Ephesini. Historiae Ecclesiasticae, Pars tertia. Scriptores Syri, series tertia, Tomus ΙΠ. CSCO. Edited by E.W. Brooks. Paris, 1935. John of Ephesus: Lives of the Eastern saints. Edited and translated by E.W. Brooks. PO 19, Fase. 2, 92. Brepols: Turnhout, 1974. Josephus. Translated by H. St. J. Thackeray and R. Marcus. 9 volumes. LCL.

375

Bibliography The Works of Josephus.

Translated by W. Whiston. Peabody, Massa.: Hendrickson

Publishers, 1987. Justin. The Writings of Justin and Athenagoras. Pratten. AN CL 2, 1879.

Translated by M. Dods, G. Reith, Β.

Melito of Sardis. On Pascha. And Fragments. Edited by S.G. Hall. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979. Migne, J.-P. Patrologiae cursus completus. Omnium SS. patrum, doctorum ecclesiasticorum,

scriptorumque

sive Latininorum, sive Graecorum. Reprint. 161 volumes Greek

(PG) Turnhout: Brepols, 1959 - ; 221 volumes Latin (PL) Paris: Migne, 18441905. The Mishna. Translated by J. Neusner. New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 1988. New Testament Apocrypha. Volume 2: Writings relating to the apostles, apocalypses and related subjects. Revised edition of the Collection initiated by Edgar Hennecke, edited by W. Schneemelcher. Translation edited by R. McL. Wilson. Cambridge/Louisville, Kentucky: James Clark and Co/Westminster/John Knox Press, 1989. The Octavius of Marcus Minucius Felix. ACW 39. Translated by G.W. Clarke. New York: Newman Press, 1974. Origen. Contra Celsum. Translated by H. Chadwick. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1953. Passio Sancii Timothei. Festgabe zu Kaisers Geburtstag. Edited by H. Usener. Bonn: F.J. Dölger Institut. Date unknown. Paulus Orosius.

The Seven Books of History Against the Romans. Translated by R.

Deferrari. Washington DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1964. The Poems of St. Paulinus of Nola. ACW 40. Translated by P. Walsh. New York: Newman Press, 1975. Philo. Translated by F.H. Colson and G. Whittaker et al. 12 volumes. LCL, 1929-. Rufinus. "De adulteratione librorum Origenis". In: Tyranni Rufini Opera. Edited by M. Simonetti. Turnholt: Brepols, 1961.

376

Bibliography

Second and Third Centuries Acts of the Apostles. Edited by W. Schneemelcher and K. Schäferdiek. Septuaginta. Id est Vetus Testamentum graece iuxta LXX interpretes. Edited by Alfred Rahlfs. 2 volumes. Stuttgart: Wiirettemburgische Bibelanstalt, 1935/1962. St. John Damascene. Barlaam and losaph. Translated by G. Woodward and H. Mattingly. LCL. 1967. Die Texte aus Qumran. Hebräisch und Deutsch. Mit masoretischer Punktation, Übersetzung, Einführung und Anmerkungen. Edited by E. Lohse. Miinich: Kösel Verlag, 1986 (fourth edition). Tatian. "Address to the Greeks". Translated by B.P. Pratten. ANCL 3 (1883) 5-48. Theodoret. "The Ecclesiastical History". In: NPNF 3 Series 2. Edited by P. Schaff and H. Wace. Grand Rapids: Eerdmanns Publishing Co., 1969.

GREEK AND ROMAN PRIMARY SOURCES Achilles Tatius. Edited and translated by S. Gaselee. LCL, 1917. Aelian Claudius. On the Characteristics of Animals. Translated by A. Scholfield. 3 volumes. LCL, 1959. Varia Historia, Epistolae, Fragmenta. Edited by R. Hercher. Leipzig: B.G. Teubner, 1866. Aelius Aristides and the Sacred Tales. Edited and translated by C.A. Behr. Amsterdam: A.M. Hakkert, 1968. P. Aelius Aristides: The Complete Works. 2 volumes. Translated by C.A. Behr. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1981. Aristides. 4 volumes. Translated by C. Behr. LCL, 1973-. Aelianus Claudius. Edited by R. Hercheri. 2 volumes. Lipsius: B.G. Teubner, 1866. Apollonius of Tyre: Historia Apollonii Regii Tyri. Translated by P. Turner. Golden Cockerel Press, 1956.

Bibliography Appian. Roman History. Book 12: The Mithridatic

377

Wars. Translated by H. White. LCL,

1912. Aristophanes. The Clouds. Translated by W. Starkie. LCL, 1911. Aristotle. Politics. Translated by H. Rackham. LCL, 1932. Arrian. The Anabasis of Alexander. Books 1-4. Translated by E. Iliff Robson. LCL, 1946. Artemidorus. The Interpretation of Dreams: Oneirocritica. Translation and commentary by R.J. White. New Jersey: Noyes Press, 1975. Athenaeus. The Deipnosophists (The Banquet of the Learned). Translated by C.D. Yonge. London: H.G. Bohn, 1854. Caesar: The Civil Wars. Translated by A.G. Peskett. LCL, 1966. Callimachus: Hymns and Epigrams. Translated by A.W. and G.R. Mair. LCL, 1969. Cato, Marcus Porcius. On Agriculture. Translated by W. D. Hooper; revised by H. Boyd Ash. LCL, 1967. Cicero. The Nature of the Gods. Translated by H.C.P. MacGregor. London: Penguin Books, 1972. Pro Fiacco. Translated by C. Macdonald. LCL, 1989. Three Books of Offices, or: Moral Duties. Translated by C.R. Edmonds. London: George Bell and Sons, 1884. The Verrine Orations. Translated by L.H.G. Greenwood. 2 volumes. LCL. The Letters to His Friends. 4 volumes. Translated by W. Glynn Williams. LCL, 1965-. Letters to Atticus. Translated by E.O. Winstedt. 3 volumes. LCL, 1912Columella. On Agriculture. 3 volumes. Translated by E.S. Forsyth and E.H. Heffner. LCL, 1954-. Dio Cassius. Roman History. Translated by E. Cary. 9 volumes. LCL, 1914. Dio Chrysostom. Translated by J.W. Cohoon and H.L. Crosby. LCL, 1940.

378

Bibliography

Diodorus Siculus. Translated by C.H. Oldfather et al. 11 volumes. LCL, 1933Diogenes Laertius. Vitae Philosophorum. Clarendon Press, 1964.

Edited by H.S. Long. 2 volumes. Oxford:

Dionysius Halicarnassus Roman Antiquities. Edited by E. Cary. 7 volumes. LCL, 1937-. Epictetus. Translated by W. Oldfather. 2 volumes. LCL, 1926-. Euripides. Translated by A.S. Way. 4 volumes. LCL, 1912-. The Greek Anthology. Translated by W. Paton. 5 volumes. LCL, 1960- 1966. Greek Lyric. Volume 5: The New School of Poetry and Anonymous Songs and Hymns. Translated by D.A. Campbell. LCL, 1993. Heraclitus.

Fragments. A text and translation with a commentary by T. M.

Robinson.

Toronto/Buffalo/London: University of Toronto Press, 1987. Herodotus. Translated by A.D. Godley. 4 volumes. LCL, 1966. Hippocrates. Translated by W.H.S. Jones. 4 volumes. LCL, 1923-. Juvenal. Juvenal and Persius. Translated by G.G. Ramsay. LCL, 1969. Libanius. Selected Works [Volumes 1-3]. Translated by A.F. Norman. LCL, 1977. Lucían. Edited by A.M. Harmon et al. 8 volumes. LCL, 1913-. Lucretius. On the Nature of the Universe. Translated by R. Latham. Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1951. Lyra Graeca: being the remains of all the Greek Lyric poets from Eumelius to Timotheus excepting Pindar. Translated by J. M. Edmonds. 3 volumes. LCL, 1967. Marcus Aurelius Antonius. The Communings with himself of Marcus Aurelius Antonius, emperor of Rome; together with speeches and sayings. Translated by C.R. Harris. LCL, 1970. Menander. The Principal Fragments. Translated by F. Allinson. LCL, 1930.

Bibliography

379

Ovid. Heroides and Amores. Translated by G. Showerman. Revised 2nd edition by G.P. Goold. LCL, 1977. Pausanius. Guide to Greece. 2 volumes. Translated by P. Levi. Middlesex/Baltimore/ Ringwood: Penguin Books, 1971. Petronius. Satyricon. Translated by M. Heseltine; revised by E. Warmington. LCL, 1969. Philostratus. Lives of the Sophists (Vit. Soph.). Translated by W.C. Wright. LCL, 1952. Life of Apollonius ofTyana (Vit. Apoll.); Letters of Apollonius ofTyana; of Eusebius. Translated by F.C. Conybeare. 2 volumes. LCL, 1912.

Treatise

Pindar. The Odes of Pindar including the principal Fragments. Translated by J. Sandys. LCL, 1946. Plautus. Translated by P. Nixon. 5 volumes. LCL, 1916-. Baccides. Edited and translated by J. Barsby. Illinois/Wiltshire (England): BolchazyCarducci/Aris and Phillips, 1986. Pliny the Elder: Natural History. Translated by W. Jones; H. Rackham. 10 volumes. LCL, 1938-. Pliny the Younger. Letters and Panegyricus. Translated by B. Radice. Volume 2. LCL, 1969. Plutarch. Lives. Translated by B. Perrin. 11 volumes. LCL, 1914Moralia. Translated by F.C. Babbitt et al. 15 volumes. LCL, 1927Polybius. The Histories. Translated by W.R. Paton. 6 volumes. LCL, 1922-. Prudentius. A reply to Address of Symmachus. Edited by H. Thomson. LCL, 1961. Seneca. Moral Essays. 3 volumes. Translated by J. W. Basore. LCL, 1964-. Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales. Translated by R. Gummere. 3 volumes. LCL, 1967-71. Soranus. Gynecology. Translated by O.Temkin, N. Eastman, L. Edelstein, A. Guttmacher. Baltimore/ London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1956/1991.

380

Bibliography

Statius. Edited by J.H. Mozley. 2 volumes. LCL, 1928-. Strabo. The Geography. Edited by H.L. Jones. 8 volumes. LCL, 1917-. Tacitus. Historical Works. Volume 1: The Annals. Translated by A. Murphy. London: J.M. Dent, 1907. Thucydides. History of the Peloponnesian War. Volume 1. Edited by T. Arnold. London/ Oxford: J.H. Parker, Whittaker and Co., 1847. Timotheus. Persae. Translation and commentary by T. Janssen. Amsterdam: A.M. Hakkert, 1989. Xenophon. Hellenica ("Books 6-7) and Anabasis (Books 1-3). Translated by C. Brownson. LCL, 1950. Anabasis

IV-VIl; Symposium; Apology. Translated by C.L. Brownson and O.J.

Todd. LCL, 1947. Scripta Minora. 7 volumes. Translated by E.C. Marchant. LCL, 1971-. Xenophon of Ephesus. Les Éphésiaques. ou le Roman d'Habrocomes et d'Anthia. Edited and translated by G. Dalmeyde. Paris: Boulevard Raspail, 1962. English translation by M. Hades in: Three Greek Romances. Indianapolis/New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Company Inc., 1953.

w DE

G

Walter de Gruyter Berlin · New York

Journal for the History of Modern Theology (JHMTh) Zeitschrift für Neuere Theologiegeschichte (ZNThG) Edited by RichardE.Crouter,

Friedrich Wilhelm Graf, Günter

Meckenstock

The Zeitschrift für Neuere Theologiegeschichte /Journal for the History of Modern Theology is an academic journal directed toward theologians, historians, philosophers, and scholars of comparative religion, as well as representatives of other disciplines related to cultural studies. The journal contains articles that deal with the history of theology since the Enlightenment. "History of theology" is meant here in a broad sense and involves, first of all, the critical analysis of traditional dogmatic as well as ethical teachings of specific confessions as it has been practiced in the universities and in the centers of learning of various religious communities. In addition, the journal will examine diverse expressions of religious consciousness, such as the theological ideas (both implicit and explicit) of spiritual movements, denominational groups and organizations, etc. The Journal for the History of Modern Theology / Zeitschrift für Neuere Theologiegeschichte will be published twice a year in journal form, with a total of approximately 320 pages. Contributions will be in German or English; a summary (abstract) in the other language will make it possible to get a quick overview of the contents of each article.

Volume 3,1997 The price of one complete volume is at present DM 168,ISSN 0943-7592

Price is subject to change

Walter de Gruyter & Co « Berlin · New York · Genthiner Straße 13 D-10785 Berlin · Phone; (030) 2 60 05-0 · Fax: (030) 2 60 05-2 22 Please visit us in the World Wide Web at http://www.deGruyter.de

w DE

G

Walter de Gruyter Berlin · New York

Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook 1996 Edited on behalf of the S0ren Kierkegaard Research Centre by Niels J0rgen Cappel0m and Hermann Deuser in cooperation with C. Stephan Evans, Alastair Hannay, and Bruce Kirmmse 1996. 23,0 χ 15,5 cm. VIII, 575 pages. Cloth DM 178,ISBN 3-11-015188-X An international documentation of contributions to research, seminars and new editions from the Kierkegaard Research Centre in Copenhagen. From the contents:

Harbsmeier: Das Erbauliche als Kunst des Gesprächs. -

Cappelöm: Die ursprüngliche Unterbrechung - McKinnon: The Relative Importance of God and Christ in Kierkegaard's Writings - Kondrup: Tekstkritiske retningDeuser and Cappelöm: Perspectives in slinier for S0ren Kierkegaards Skrifter Kierkegaard Research. Hannay: Basic Despair in The Sickness unto (S KS) / Textkritische Richtlinien für Spren Kierkegaards Skrifler (SKS) - Garff: RegDeath - Gr0n: Der Begriff Verzweiflung ulativ for udarbejdelse af realkommentarer Theunissen: Für einen rationaleren Kierketil S0ren Kierkegaards Skrifter I Regulativ gaard - Gron: Kierkegaards Phänomenofür Ausarbeitung von Realkommentaren zu logie? - Deusen Grundsätzliches zur InterS0ren Kierkegaards Skrifter - Mortensen: pretation der Krankheit zum Tode - CapOn the Contents, Structure and Function of pelfirn: Am Anfang steht die Verzweiflung Spren Kierkegaards Skrifter - Kynde: Apdes Spießbürgers - Hannay: Paradigmatic pearance, Rendering, and the Abstract InDespair and the Quest for a Kierkegaardian tention of the Text. Anthropology - Schulz: To Believe is to Be - Garff: Johannes de silentio: Rhetorician News from the Soren Kierkegaard Reof Silence - Pepper: Abraham: Who Could search Centre. Possibly Understand Him? - Glöckner: Niels J0rgen Cappelprn is director of the »Die glückliche Liebe« - Soren KierkeKierkegaard-Research Centre in Copengaards spezifisches Verständnis der hagen, established in 1994. Wiederholung als Zugang zu seinem Hermann Deuser is chairman of the ReVersöhnungsdenken - Söltoft: The Unsearch Committee of the same institution. happy Lover of Subjectivity - González: On Kierkegaard's Concept of »Madness« -

Pnce is aibjcci (ochante

Walter de Gruyter & Co · Berlin · New York · Genthiner Straße 13 · D-10785 Berlin Phone: (030) 2 60 05-0 · Telefax: (030) 2 60 05-2 22 Please visit us in the World Wide Web at http:/www.deGruyter.de